Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #34

Status
Not open for further replies.
In my world, I don't call my inlaws related, other than by marriage. There is no other relation, no shared biology, upbringing, etc.

ETA: When a marriage dissolves in divorce.... do you still call your inlaws related? What's that saying, 'you can choose your friends but not your family'? BS did not choose Hillsley, he chose Hillsley's sister. The sister remains related to Hillsley, no matter what marital discord takes place with any of her life partners.
The noun for relative is someone connected by blood or marriage. So he was a one time relative . I guess the term now would be ex relative
 
I’m only going off what was said about him saying he was fixing the neighbours hot water system which according to neighbor was incorrect
You have the wrong suspect here, Spedding was supposed to be at his grandchildren's school. The man fixing the hot water system is yet another paedo.
 
I’m sorry but he is a relative in the general term of the word.
If Hillsley were BS's biological brother and they had shared the same upbringing (which I can only imagine what type of parenting might produce a monster such as the likes of Hillsley), then I could see potentially associating the two. As it stands, it seems pretty far fetched to link the two, when the monster is his wife's brother - his ex wife at that.
 
The noun for relative is someone connected by blood or marriage. So he was a one time relative . I guess the term now would be ex relative
If you were madly in love with your spouse, and your spouse happened to have a monster for a sibling.. would it suit you to be considered two birds of a feather just because you are related by marriage? Just asking.
 
Just a feeling that I have.
I "think" that if and when someone is brought to justice over what happened to William, it's going to turn about to be someone that has been overlooked by everyone. Except by the police, who I believe do know who it is but haven't yet got the evidence they need to bring a case against this person, or persons.
I was hoping, as tragic as it was, that it would be found to be an accident and they would find William somewhere out of the search range, fallen into a hole or something like that. I am "starting" to believe he didn't just wander off and have an accident.
 
Yes, as are others, but I still disagree with the way media has behaved. jmo.

Well on this case, it has been said the police will be harnessing the media, and, therefore, I disagree with police tactics. Before GJ was the spokesperson for this case, Mick Willing said that the media may have consequences for how they have reported if a conviction does not come about. What I always took from that was that it's OK to be unethical or possibly illegal if it secures a positive result.

Nocookies
Suspicion torments NSW community as police probe toddler’s disappearance
 
Last edited:
Just a feeling that I have.
I "think" that if and when someone is brought to justice over what happened to William, it's going to turn about to be someone that has been overlooked by everyone. Except by the police, who I believe do know who it is but haven't yet got the evidence they need to bring a case against this person, or persons.
I was hoping, as tragic as it was, that it would be found to be an accident and they would find William somewhere out of the search range, fallen into a hole or something like that. I am "starting" to believe he didn't just wander off and have an accident.
Never mind.
 
I think it is likely that the poor mobile phone coverage in Kendall is one of the biggest hinderances in this case.

When I think of the mobile phone tracking they have done in almost every case that we have followed, how much it has aided the police in tracking the movements of their POIs, I realise that the lack of ping coverage in Kendall and some surrounding areas denies the police much of that ability and form of evidence in this case.
 
Yes, I understand that there is one more house on the same side of the street as FG's house, which is #52... but what does that house have to do with any cars, when the cars were not parked anywhere near that house, but way down around the corner and up the road on the other side?

nothing to do with the cars, just another scenario of a lone person hanging around the cemetary and wandering down and hiding along that fenceline with a perfect view of the side porch where the family were sitting and grabbing william while the others were inside.
 
He definitely seemed more ‘twitchy’ and a lot more menacing when addressing the ‘someone who knows something’ via the media. You know when a predator, particularly a big cat, is focussed on their prey? Their muscles ripple and twitch in anticipation of the kill. That is what Jubes reminded me of on the morning of the latest presser. Whatever searchers find, or don’t find in the forest, I think he has someone in his sights. If it was me, I’d be afraid; very afraid. But then again, they probably don’t think Jubes can catch them. Big mistake.
Agree, Jubes is so dedicated to this case and those who work along side he and the police. I agree he has someone in his sights, i really beleive there has been a tip off IMO or new information has come to hand. When you watch and listen to them digging and pulling back those rakes in the scrub, it is all to eerie and real. There is something there that holds the key.
 
I think cars were there . I don’t see why they would have fm make up the sighting for stategical reasons. They could have done that without her .

I agree, mainly because if they weren’t there it sends a direct message to the people the police are trying to place at the scene, that they really have no idea what happened, or who is responsible, the owners of those cars know if they were there or not & in what exact location if they were, having the FM pin point the location if they weren’t actually there, would be a bad move IMO.

ETA - obviously the police could have falsely released information about cars being in the street, when they were not - for tactical reasons, but I still think that sends the wrong message to the perp/s - or could even help ease the conscience of a questioning partner/family member or friend who was maybe helping out with an alibi because they believe someone to be innocent & seeing the police reveal cars that don’t match this persons vehicles description, would help them believe in their innocence.
 
Last edited:
This is just a thought.... and as some of you know, I am not in Australia, I am in Canada.. so perhaps some things are different.... however, I am close to someone who works for our 'Victorian Order of Nurses (VON)', a highly regarded nursing service that has been around for a long time. This person travels from client to client during the course of his work shift, in his own vehicle, to provide nursing assistance to those in need of assistance yet still living in their own homes. He is not allowed to park in the clients' driveways, it is against the rules. No idea why, although around here, it makes sense, because you could potentially be blocking another household occupant from either entering or exiting their own driveway. With huge long driveways, it wouldn't matter obviously, however, the rules are the rules. Just a thought that perhaps something similar could exist over there, and this could easily be an explanation for why the cars were there i)early in the morning; ii)for a certain, perhaps extended length of time; iii)not parked in the driveway; iv)with the windows down (safe neighbourhood/hot/nothing to steal in the car?);
Also, clients sometimes require a two-person visit for various reasons, ie perhaps if there might be heavy lifting of a patient involved. Or sometimes there are team meetings involved, where say a worker, and a supervisor or planner, might both attend a meeting at the client's home to review needs/reassess, whatever. I wonder if GJ has checked out all of these types of services, which I'm sure must also exist over there, to see if anyone on the street may have been receiving services that morning?
Sorry for the lack of paragraph formatting :/
This is a country area. No issues with parking would be relevant.
 
It seems from this drawing/map, that the homes are numbered by 4's, rather than by 2's. jmo.
In acreage estates and rural areas, the houses are numbered by the distance they are from the beginning of the street. #48 would be .48 of a km from the Batar Creek Road intersection. #52 would be .52 from Batar Creek Rd. The Wilson's #30 were .30km's from the intersection.
 
In acreage estates and rural areas, the houses are numbered by the distance they are from the beginning of the street. #48 would be .48 of a km from the Batar Creek Road intersection. #52 would be .52 from Batar Creek Rd. The Wilson's #30 were .30km's from the intersection.

What an interesting fact that is. I will remember that. Thanks, Blues Clues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
94
Guests online
1,274
Total visitors
1,368

Forum statistics

Threads
589,168
Messages
17,915,101
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top