Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #61

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trying to rack my brains they were asking for anyone
Apprehended Violence Orders (AVO) - NSW Police Public Site

Do you need evidence for a restraining order?

Evidence to show you need a Restraining Order can be ▪ Details of your own story, ▪ Information about criminal charges ▪ Hospital or doctor's records showing injuries or violence, ▪ Any harassing or threatening text messages ▪ Statements from witnesses who have seen the abuse.

When can someone apply for a DVO?

Any person who is or has been the victim of physical assault, threats of physical harm, stalking, intimidation or harassment and has a reasonable fear to believe that this behaviour will continue.

Who can apply?

A person over the age of 16 or a Police Officer can apply for an AVO. A person can speak to the Court Register at their local court. If the behaviour amounts to a criminal offence, you should report the matter to police, whether or not you have a relationship with the perpetrator. Police will assess your situation, obtain a statement if required and if they belief and suspect that an ADVO is necessary to ensure your safety and protection, they have an obligation to make the application on your behalf.

Conditions

1. The defendant must not do any of the following to <protected people>, or anyone <she/he/they> <has/have> a domestic relationship with:

A) assault or threaten <her/him/them>,

B) stalk, harass or intimidate <her/him/them>, and

C) deliberately or recklessly destroy or damage anything that belongs to <protected people>.

Additional orders can be sought depending on the circumstances, for example:

Restrictions put in place against the Defendant:
  • No longer allowed to reside at the family home
  • Not allowed to contact the protected person except through the use of a lawyer,
  • Not allowed within a certain distance from the protected person/s residence, work or school.
  • Not allowed to be in the company of protected person for at least 12 hours after taking alcohol or drugs.
  • Not allowed to possess any firearms or prohibited weapons.
  • Not allowed to try and locate the Protected Person.
Domestic Violence Liaison Officer (DVLO)
What is their Role?

The DVLO is a specialist police officer, trained in the dynamics of domestic and family violence, child protection procedures, victim support and court AVO processes required for the protection of victims of family violence.

The role of the DVLO is:
  • To provide advice to police and victims.
  • Assist in referral to appropriate support agencies.
  • Maintain close working relationships with all support agencies.
  • Review and oversight all domestic and family violence reports and cases.
  • Assist victims through the court process for Apprehended Violence Orders (AVOs).
  • Monitor repeat victims and perpetrators.
awesome! Thanks for this.
 
Relationship dynamics certainly don’t mean one party is guilty of a crime, but gosh I’m startled when I hear how dominating the FFC is when both she and the MFC are being interviewed. She appears to regularly speak over him, interject, etc. IMO

She does interject, speak over him on a regular basis and generally seems a bit aggressive. However, my overall impression of him so far is that he has a more retiring personality. It's not unusual for one person to be more dominant in a relationship and she may be the one who wears the pants.

I'd like to know if they were unable to have a child of their own and that's the reason they fostered in the first place. How old was she when she started fostering the two children?
 
I would assume she is going to an expensive private school that im assuming the FF are paying for, if she is not in their care im sure they will cut all finances, why would the department pay for private school/ horse riding / expensive after school activities, what will happen when children are placed with millionaires living the highest quality of life and they are pulled from this family, maby they can continue the school term if the foster family can't get that money refunded, I doubt a child under the department can stay with a friend, I would think the foster family will fight to get her back or completely cut her off financially

In NSW, we have excellent public primary schools on the north shore of Sydney where I live. Most parents only send their children to private schools for high school. However, there are also excellent public high schools there also. I am not sure where the BM lives but even if there is a hint of potential abuse in the future and while FFC is still a person of interest, I really hope that FD can live somewhere else. I am starting to wonder if the FD suspects FFC and she could have said something to that effect and FD suffered for it.
 
She does interject, speak over him on a regular basis and generally seems a bit aggressive. However, my overall impression of him so far is that he has a more retiring personality. It's not unusual for one person to be more dominant in a relationship and she may be the one who wears the pants.

I'd like to know if they were unable to have a child of their own and that's the reason they fostered in the first place. How old was she when she started fostering the two children?
If she’s 56 now and the oldest child is 11 or 12, then she had to have been at least 44 when they came into her care.
 
William Tyrrell search Kendall: The major developments in missing boy case | Daily Mail Online

Shows a really good photo I’ve not seen before of the piece of light blue cloth they found at the Batar Creek Road site.

Not sure of the relevance of this colour of fabric...

Possible was originally a darker blue and had faded?

My guess is that WT may not have been wearing his Spider Man suit that morning and this blue fabric found could have been from his blue shirt and the photo was taken on a previous visit (maybe she lied that she had not seen FGM for seven months?) or FFC changed him after the photos were taken. IMO
 
Between 2011 and 2012: DOCS learns William’s biological mother and father are back together and get a court order to have him removed. FACS tells the foster couple William is going to be surrendered from his birth family and come into their care.

William Tyrrell’s doomed life

TIMELINE TO TRAGEDY

2010-2011: William Tyrrell’s biological parents reunite after a period of estrangement and remain together during the mother’s pregnancy with William.

26.6.2011: William Tyrrell is born.

During 2011: The couple destined to be his foster parents are approved by the Department of Family and Community Services (formerly DOCS) as carers.

Couple is willing to do crisis care and take “a sibling group” for long term placement.

Between 2011 and 2012: DOCS learns William’s biological mother and father are back together and get a court order to have him removed. FACS tells the foster couple William is going to be surrendered from his birth family and come into their care.

February, 2012: FACS gains court orders to remove William from his birth mother.

8.2.2012: William’s birth parents take off with William, and police in concert with FACS issue a warrant for the birth mother’s arrest.

16.2.2012: FACS approves foster parents as William’s carers.

15.03.2012: William is found at Sydney’s Upper North Shore with biological parents and removed from them.

16.03.2012: Nine-month-old William is placed with the foster parents, supervised by Wesley Mission’s Dalmar Out of Home Care.


-During 2011 FF apply to be foster carer wanting siblings group long term
-between 2011 and 2012 FF are told a baby boy will be surrendered into their care
-16th February 2012 FF are approved for WT
-16th March 2012 FF get WT

Wonder where the sister comes into things, were FF given sister before WT came into the eye of foster system? FF wanted siblings long term and were approved some time in 2011, assuming the sisters was in short term foster care and transferred to the the current FF at some point when the department wanted to removed WT from his mother, assuming once the department wanted WT, the FF was given the sister and told we are going to get the brother for you (you would think WT would be short term care as he wasn't even removed from his mother as when the FF were promised him and why say its a surrender when the mother get him back) it's like it was already decided this will be permanent a done deal
No wonder why the FF were trying for adoption and upset about BM visits they wanted long term and were told its a surrender and obviously consulted lawyers who would of said this is a situation you can adopt and after 2 years adoption didn't happen and the child is still visiting BM and the FF can't even visit FGM without notification to the department, its still a situation that the sister is not adopted yet i can see after all the years things are getting to boiling point with this family
 
So I'm to assume FP already had LT before William? Because it doesn't make sense that BP would abscond with only William.

Generally, Children's Services (whatever they are called in various states and ministries) try to place siblings together.

Correct. They had LT first, and then orders were made to remove William, that’s when bio parents fled for six weeks before they could take him. There’s an interview with BM from a few years ago on Sunday Night, but I think it says her name so I can’t link it.
 
My guess is that WT may not have been wearing his Spider Man suit that morning and this blue fabric found could have been from his blue shirt and the photo was taken on a previous visit (maybe she lied that she had not seen FGM for seven months?) or FFC changed him after the photos were taken. IMO
I thought the batman outfit was pajamas.
 
My guess is that WT may not have been wearing his Spider Man suit that morning and this blue fabric found could have been from his blue shirt and the photo was taken on a previous visit (maybe she lied that she had not seen FGM for seven months?) or FFC changed him after the photos were taken. IMO
If she took the kids to FGM without first informing the department then she would of had to lie as she needs to inform the department if taking the children away, you can see how she may be getting mad that the adoption hasn't happened yet with all the restrictions she has with foster children
 
I would assume she is going to an expensive private school that im assuming the FF are paying for, if she is not in their care im sure they will cut all finances, why would the department pay for private school/ horse riding / expensive after school activities, what will happen when children are placed with millionaires living the highest quality of life and they are pulled from this family, maby they can continue the school term if the foster family can't get that money refunded, I doubt a child under the department can stay with a friend, I would think the foster family will fight to get her back or completely cut her off financially

You are totally right she is under the department and may not be able to stay with a friend. She is not at a private school just the local well regarded primary school and there is a fantastic State High School in that area with an outstanding reputation which was in their catchment area (house just sold) and the after school activities are just like any other child. The FP's are without a doubt well off but they don't have money bouncing off the walls unlike other residents on the North Shore, it's all relative. As I said previously I used to live in the area many moons ago and yes I still have connections there, all IMO of course and yeah. Lots of people who live there are not wealthy, it's just that they purchased real estate decades ago which has now gone up in value that's all, perceived as wealthy when in fact it's just the house and not the family income.
 
I don’t know where the best place for this little girl will be going forward, but I need to point out that these main caregivers are the ones who literally lost William while unsupervised in their care (and possibly worse, according to the police) and he still hasn’t been found. These same carers are also now facing court next week on charges of assault.

But they’re rich and well-to-do so they get given all the benefit of the doubt and all the “it’s alleged” and “nothing has been proven yet” and and and … that’s all valid, BUT ..

.. the low socioeconomic biological family who were probably dealt a really crap set of cards in life and never caused any actual physical harm to those children - well they get none. None at all.

It’s irritating. Regardless of what one thinks of the biological family, and no I’m sure they’re not perfect, but they did love William. He is their child. They lost a child. And not only did they lose a child, they weren’t even allowed to talk about it for years because of suppression orders. Can you even imagine the heartache? It’s heartbreaking.
Having worked in the area for many years, I can tell you it is not money that makes the best parents. Far from it! And it was biodad who took WT and as he said It was just me and William. Bio mother still has 2 other sons.
 
TIMELINE TO TRAGEDY

2010-2011: William Tyrrell’s biological parents reunite after a period of estrangement and remain together during the mother’s pregnancy with William.

26.6.2011: William Tyrrell is born.

During 2011: The couple destined to be his foster parents are approved by the Department of Family and Community Services (formerly DOCS) as carers.

Couple is willing to do crisis care and take “a sibling group” for long term placement.

Between 2011 and 2012: DOCS learns William’s biological mother and father are back together and get a court order to have him removed. FACS tells the foster couple William is going to be surrendered from his birth family and come into their care.

February, 2012: FACS gains court orders to remove William from his birth mother.

8.2.2012: William’s birth parents take off with William, and police in concert with FACS issue a warrant for the birth mother’s arrest.

16.2.2012: FACS approves foster parents as William’s carers.

15.03.2012: William is found at Sydney’s Upper North Shore with biological parents and removed from them.

16.03.2012: Nine-month-old William is placed with the foster parents, supervised by Wesley Mission’s Dalmar Out of Home Care.


-During 2011 FF apply to be foster carer wanting siblings group long term
-between 2011 and 2012 FF are told a baby boy will be surrendered into their care
-16th February 2012 FF are approved for WT
-16th March 2012 FF get WT

Wonder where the sister comes into things, were FF given sister before WT came into the eye of foster system? FF wanted siblings long term and were approved some time in 2011, assuming the sisters was in short term foster care and transferred to the the current FF at some point when the department wanted to removed WT from his mother, assuming once the department wanted WT, the FF was given the sister and told we are going to get the brother for you (you would think WT would be short term care as he wasn't even removed from his mother as when the FF were promised him and why say its a surrender when the mother get him back) it's like it was already decided this will be permanent a done deal
No wonder why the FF were trying for adoption and upset about BM visits they wanted long term and were told its a surrender and obviously consulted lawyers who would of said this is a situation you can adopt and after 2 years adoption didn't happen and the child is still visiting BM and the FF can't even visit FGM without notification to the department, its still a situation that the sister is not adopted yet i can see after all the years things are getting to boiling point with this family

It appears to me that FACS let both families down - making promises to FPs without consideration for the BPs.
 
I don't think we can take any part of a photo time as correct a camra can be set to any time I don't think the photo should be used as a time frame i know its great the FF hav this as their evidence but just to many inconsistencys in their storys, I think we need to look at the mcdonalds as the proof of life then anything could of happened after that
 
I am hoping WT's sister is back living with her BM as she would be a great support for her mother with the younger children.

The whole situation for this child is a shambles. I’m not sure what will happen for her and couldn’t even speculate as we don’t have any useful or even factual information. I certainly wouldn’t be basing plans for future security and wellbeing on her usefulness as a babysitter for younger siblings though. IMO.

Between 2011 and 2012: DOCS learns William’s biological mother and father are back together and get a court order to have him removed. FACS tells the foster couple William is going to be surrendered from his birth family and come into their care.

William Tyrrell’s doomed life

Cheers. I think the article is worded awkwardly, surrendered when they mean removed IMO. Any plans RE a child being received into care will obviously be discussed with potential carers prior, a court order had been secured after all.
That article actually contradicts some of what is said by WT’s paternal Gran in another article up thread. MOO.


With regards to CS’s case, IMO WAPOL may have been successful there due to harsh lessons learned from the early days of WT’s case. CS’s case was considered a statistical anomaly, but it can’t be completely out of the question that WT was snatched by an opportunist and stolen away without anyone noticing either IMO.

I’m torn between these new searches being:
A) a tick box exercise to tie up the coroner’s inquest and reframe public and family perceptions of a botched investigation
Or
B) a strategic response to some solid new evidence.

-The accidental fall from the balcony scenario may be an ‘out’, a strategy to force a confession to a ‘less serious’ offence in the first instance. An expensive and bold move right enough, to do this so publicly.
- If the FC’s have known for some time that FFC was a POI, I imagine the tension has been overwhelming in the household. I hate to think of WT’s sister living in these circumstances, the emotional stress IMO could have actually contributed to an assault.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
183
Guests online
2,204
Total visitors
2,387

Forum statistics

Threads
589,946
Messages
17,928,032
Members
228,010
Latest member
idrainuk
Back
Top