Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - # 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, it was from one of the articles upstream. The birthmom of one of the grandchildren in BS's care lost custody because of a DV incident. She has left her Christmas Tree up since the boy was taken from her, 3 yrs ago.

'The mother said her child was *removed from her home by FACs *because of a domestic situation. She has turned her house into a shrine to the lost child.

The child’s room is untouched and she has not taken the Christmas tree down since the child was removed early in 2011.'

http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news...l-speddings-care/story-fnpn118l-1227198878302

Another confusingly worded newspaper article!
 
'The mother said her child was *removed from her home by FACs *because of a domestic situation. She has turned her house into a shrine to the lost child.

The child’s room is untouched and she has not taken the Christmas tree down since the child was removed early in 2011.'

http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news...l-speddings-care/story-fnpn118l-1227198878302

Another confusingly worded newspaper article!

Is it just me or does that sound like someone who is definitely not stable? The type of person that would make a false accusation?
 
Is it just me or does that sound like someone who is definitely not stable? The type of person that would make a false accusation?

That is what I thought when I read she turned her house into a shrine. I can understand a parent not touching their child's room if they did not know what happened to the child, however having your child removed because you are deemed unfit is another story. Turning your house into a shrine screams bitter to me. Bitter people do desperate things... JMO
 
Is it just me or does that sound like someone who is definitely not stable? The type of person that would make a false accusation?

I don't like how the article seems to make it sound like the Speddings stole the child from her.
 
'The mother said her child was *removed from her home by FACs *because of a domestic situation. She has turned her house into a shrine to the lost child.

The child’s room is untouched and she has not taken the Christmas tree down since the child was removed early in 2011.'

http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news...l-speddings-care/story-fnpn118l-1227198878302

Another confusingly worded newspaper article!
Can anyone please offer me some light on Foster caring?
For e.g this mum had her child removed from her care 3 years ago. . If she cleaned up her act (or removed herself from a DV situation) how difficult is it for her to get custody of her child back??
Once a child is removed from parental care, what are the steps involved in getting your child back?
 
If it was just about the DV situation, she should be able to get the child back in a yr or so. UNLESS the DV situation was a 2 way street? Or unless there was a bit more to the story.
 
I wouldn't have a clue about the actual process of having children returned to bio parent/s, but I am of the opinion it is what is considered the best possible outcome (eg if it's considered safe and appropriate, the best outcome would be bio parent/s rehabilitate or over come whatever the issue was that ended up with child/ren being put into care, and child/ren return to them). I remember about 2 years ago there being a political campaign to relax laws on australian adoption, and some people being pro adoption and getting children out of the foster care system which is seen to yo yo children all over the place and some people saying 'no no, that will reduce the number of children who can be returned to their biological family'... Because adoption is obviously permanent , fostering is temporary.
I have witnessed situations where fostering has been used as a temporary measure. Sometimes because the parent has been admitted to hospital wanting to suicide or has drug overdosed (things along those lines) and there is nowhere for the child to go. Sometimes it is fairly obvious from the start that it has been a one off random situation or crisis that triggers such an event, and the parent will (after the needed treatment) recover and their children will go back to being with them. The process in that case would involved the relevant medical/ psychiatric/ social care workers assessing the parent as safe and appropriate.
Other times people will have a root cause in there life, something that causes them to develops ongoing drug abuse problems, ongoing suicidal risk, socioeconomic boundaries. When problems are ongoing There will many times be a domestic or sexual abuse history. It's a very sad cycle. So victims of DV and other abuse may have issues that continue to impact on their lives even after the violence has ended. That may be totally irrelevant to anything to do with this case. It's just my observation over the years
 
That is what I thought when I read she turned her house into a shrine. I can understand a parent not touching their child's room if they did not know what happened to the child, however having your child removed because you are deemed unfit is another story. Turning your house into a shrine screams bitter to me. Bitter people do desperate things... JMO

i wonder if she got paid for the interview...

the article states she cant be identified - her choice or law??
 
That is what I thought when I read she turned her house into a shrine. I can understand a parent not touching their child's room if they did not know what happened to the child, however having your child removed because you are deemed unfit is another story. Turning your house into a shrine screams bitter to me. Bitter people do desperate things... JMO
Yeah, it seems like the kind of thing someone would do if their child has passed away. It's like she can't accept the child was removed, like she was not at fault and has been wronged.
 
If BS was so great at encryption - why is his Facebook page not private?!
 
i wonder if she got paid for the interview...

the article states she cant be identified - her choice or law??

That is is good question. Before the latest developments I would have said by law. However, considering the presses flippant naming of BS as a foster parent, I honestly do not know the answer to that question. I can say my opinion which is she does not want to be ID by choice. I have been on the fence about BS however after learning about this bio-mom, I am close to falling off that fence.
 
I may be wrong but I highly doubt that a judge would authorise a search warrant for multiple properties that includes digging up septic tanks etc without more concrete evidence than a call to Crimestoppers by a bitter daughter in law? I imagine the Crimestoppers hotline has had hundreds of calls, what made BS stand out?
 
I may be wrong but I highly doubt that a judge would authorise a search warrant for multiple properties that includes digging up septic tanks etc without more concrete evidence than a call to Crimestoppers by a bitter daughter in law? I imagine the Crimestoppers hotline has had hundreds of calls, what made Bill Spedding stand out?

And this is what I keep coming back to... I find the statements of the unidentified mother questionable because she obviously wanted her child/children back, however like you stated, what made Bill Spedding stand out?
 
If BS was so great at encryption - why is his Facebook page not private?!

.....and still not private. You'd think he'd have changed settings by now.

I just don't think he had anything to do with it, but he might know someone who did.
 
Drug addicts get their children fostered out if they fail duty of care. Understandably it can be tough getting the children back, even if they love them.
 
.....and still not private. You'd think he'd have changed settings by now.

I just don't think he had anything to do with it, but he might know someone who did.

The police still have his phone(s), computers etc.
 
Exactly. So bizarre!

And waiting for DNA evidence is one thing we are all doing - but on the other hand, I'd suspect evidence on his computers would of been identified by now. Unless he is smart enough to do heavy encryption, which seems to be a concern with LE around pedophiles.

If it turns out he is such a person, who goes to great lengths to cover his tracks, then I'd be surprised. An accident or idiot opportunism I could believe, but not something sophisticated that is delaying the police arresting him.

And what will DNA evidence show? That he was in his own house, that he touched the washing machine?

It has to connect him to a victim to mean anything. uh-oh.
 
All I see happening atm is C.A.R.E. Cover Arse Retain Employment. Yep, sad situation all round
 
And what will DNA evidence show? That he was in his own house, that he touched the washing machine?

It has to connect him to a victim to mean anything. uh-oh.

True. But the absence of WT's DNA would be an important thing too. Media highlights the mattress in the disused office... on the surface that sounded creepy.... but if WT was there you'd expect DNA, so the absence of that would help convince the community of BS's innocence. Or it should, I'd say. Whether the community ever lets this go remains to be seen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
79
Guests online
866
Total visitors
945

Forum statistics

Threads
589,925
Messages
17,927,731
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top