Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #37

[SouthAussie]

My belief is that detective Jubelin and his team are very sure of who took William and what the outcome of that may have been (with exception of course of his remains. I’m sorry to sound crass) Prehaps they are on a timeline to find that circle to dot that i . Yes it’s been 4 harrowing years but maybe they are very close to the evidence an and arrest. Fingers crossed.

I agree with you. I believe the SF know exactly who is responsible. Have known for some time. I believe they have slowly and methodically been gathering evidence all this time. I imagine they would have overwhelming circumstantial evidence. That’s not enough Gj
wants to secure a conviction.
I’m confident there will be an arrest.
next Tatic will be to pressure BS wife - who is critical to his alibi. This could be with the prospect of a lengthy jail term ? If she ends up perjurying herself in the inquest.
That’s if it gets to an inquest - I believe GJ is two steps ahead. It won’t be long now.

It looks as though the police are truly prepping for the inquest now, according to The Australian.
I will be very happy to see these people that 'know something' - and haven't yet come forward with the truths that they know - sit at a Coronial inquest and answer questions to the satisfaction / dissatisfaction of the Coroner.
If they lie at the inquest, I will be more than happy to see them incur a lengthy prison sentence for perjury. Enough is enough.


BBM
Homicide detectives are scrambling to firm up their brief of evidence for a full coronial inquiry into the disappearance almost four years ago of three-year-old William Tyrrell.

The Australian understands the first high-profile suspect in the investigation remains “a person of interest” but there are also four other “high priority” suspects being looked at, with an inquest set to begin this year.
The Australian - June 28, 2018

 

[SouthAussie]

Yes, only a little over 4 months from the time William went missing until his case was referred to the State Coroner. (Over 6 years for Daniel’s case.)

Geez, it certainly did take a long time for the referral.
At least William's case was referred promptly.

I think that laws may be a bit different between NSW and Qld.

In NSW, the police are required to report a missing persons matter to the Coroner within 12 months ... if there are no signs of life.
With the early report to the Coroner in William's matter, it seems the police may have thought William was likely deceased quite early in the case (according to the info I have linked and stated below).

In Qld, the Coroner does not have to be notified until there is a reasonable presumption of death, in a missing persons case.


In NSW, the OIC is required to report the matter to the Coroner as soon as the investigation leads police to reasonably believe the missing person is deceased or “if after 12 months, the missing person has not been located and there are no signs of life”.
Some investigations may be reported to the Coroner earlier than 12 months if police believe there is enough evidence of a suspected death occurring. If a police investigation is continuing at 12 months the Coroner may choose not to investigate the matter at this point and may refer it back to police.
http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/Missing persons guide updated Feb 18.pdf


Qld:
The State Coroner requires notification by report as soon as a missing person is reasonably suspected of being dead. Investigating officers who reasonably suspect that a missing person is deceased are to consult with the Missing Persons Unit, State Crime Command. It is the responsibility of the Missing Persons Unit to provide notification by report to the Coronial Support Unit as initial advice.
https://www.police.qld.gov.au/corporatedocs/OperationalPolicies/Documents/OPM/Chapter12.pdf

 

[Bohemian]

I think that laws may be a bit different between NSW and Qld.

In NSW, the police are required to report a missing persons matter to the Coroner within 12 months ... if there are no signs of life.
With the early report to the Coroner in William's matter, it seems the police may have thought William was likely deceased quite early in the case

(according to the info I have linked and stated below).

In Qld, the Coroner does not have to be notified until there is a reasonable presumption of death, in a missing persons case.


In NSW, the OIC is required to report the matter to the Coroner as soon as the investigation leads police to reasonably believe the missing person is deceased or “if after 12 months, the missing person has not been located and there are no signs of life”.
Some investigations may be reported to the Coroner earlier than 12 months if police believe there is enough evidence of a suspected death occurring. If a police investigation is continuing at 12 months the Coroner may choose not to investigate the matter at this point and may refer it back to police.
http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/Missing persons guide updated Feb 18.pdf


Qld:
The State Coroner requires notification by report as soon as a missing person is reasonably suspected of being dead. Investigating officers who reasonably suspect that a missing person is deceased are to consult with the Missing Persons Unit, State Crime Command. It is the responsibility of the Missing Persons Unit to provide notification by report to the Coronial Support Unit as initial advice.
https://www.police.qld.gov.au/corporatedocs/OperationalPolicies/Documents/OPM/Chapter12.pdf

Thanks for finding the information irt the timeframe for the NSW Coroner to be notified of a missing person. I vaguely remembered it was 12 months but couldn’t find a link.

The information regarding the same scenario in Queensland must be the reason for the difference in timeframes between the two cases being referred.

 

[SouthAussie]

Thanks for finding the information irt the timeframe for the NSW Coroner to be notified of a missing person. I vaguely remembered it was 12 months but couldn’t find a link.

The information regarding the same scenario in Queensland must be the reason for the difference in timeframes between the two cases being referred.

Of course, Daniel's case may have been referred to the Coronial Support Unit in Qld much earlier than April 2010. It may have been that the Coroner did not want/require the extensive investigatory report and files until April 2010.

This is the info you provided earlier:
April, 2010:
The State Coroner receives an extensive investigation report, containing thousands of pages, from police regarding the suspected death.
Timeline: Daniel Morcombe case - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

[butterstick]

Following an inquest, coroners may make recommendations to governments and other agencies with a view to improving public health and safety. The Coroner has no power to enforce compliance with such recommendations.

<modsnipped OT>

That case almost certainly shows law enforcement acting to suppress. But we shall see.

 

[gregjrichards]

How seriously does the coroner take perjury in cases like this? In the Shelia and Katherine Lyon case in the States a couple of family members of the perp committed perjury and were convicted but given ridiculously lenient sentences i.e no jail time. I just hope it isn’t more of the same here if this is what happens.

 

[louisepiglet]

I agree with you. I believe the SF know exactly who is responsible. Have known for some time. I believe they have slowly and methodically been gathering evidence all this time. I imagine they would have overwhelming circumstantial evidence. That’s not enough Gj
wants to secure a conviction.
I’m confident there will be an arrest.
next Tatic will be to pressure BS wife - who is critical to his alibi. This could be with the prospect of a lengthy jail term ? If she ends up perjurying herself in the inquest.
That’s if it gets to an inquest - I believe GJ is two steps ahead. It won’t be long now.

agree

MS can only be charged with perjury if it can be proved she lied under oath. I would imagine the alibi she provided for BS would be hard to dislodge as it is very easy to argue that just because no-one noticed him does not mean he was not there.

 

[frogwell]

This certianly rings true for anyone listening to the Teacher's Pet podcast (pretty good media despite coming from Murdoch).

That case almost certainly shows law enforcement acting to suppress. But we shall see.

Where would I find that podcast Butterstick?

Again using the recent Belinda Peisley documentary to look at cronial inquiries, I found it interesting, that a POI could seek to not give evidence on the grounds of self incrimination. Now, I'm sure there is interesting policy about that in a CI, but the basic premise could be, I won't perjure myself, but I am assuming you are going to ask me something that will incriminate me, so I am indicating I may have knowledge/guilt of the crime, but it's up to the police to find it and prove it, but I can see how it could be used as a red herring as well, so to speak. IMO

 

[papertrail]

Thankyou JLZ. Is does seem it’s the coroner who decides in the end and not the general population if I’m correct.

Exactly

 

[Thebottomline]

MS can only be charged with perjury if it can be proved she lied under oath. I would imagine the alibi she provided for BS would be hard to dislodge as it is very easy to argue that just because no-one noticed him does not mean he was not there.

I recall (maybe wrongly) that she said there was another friend with them, prehaps someone who took photos that could also vouch for his prescence.

 

[papertrail]

Just in case people are not familiar with the role and powers of the NSW Coroner:

‘Coroners investigate certain kinds of deaths in order to determine the identity of the deceased and the date, place, circumstances and medical cause of death.’

‘In short, the Coroner’s role is to find out what happened, not to point the finger or lay blame.’

‘In some cases, inquests are held and witnesses are called to give evidence of their knowledge of the circumstances of the case under investigation.’

‘Following an inquest, coroners may make recommendations to governments and other agencies with a view to improving public health and safety. The Coroner has no power to enforce compliance with such recommendations. It is a matter for the relevant government minister(s) or agencies to determine whether a Coroner’s recommendations should be adopted.’

‘The Coroner cannot find someone guilty of a crime. If, at any time during the course of an inquest or inquiry, the Coroner forms an opinion that a known person has committed an indictable offence in connection with the death the Coroner is required to suspend the inquest or inquiry and refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions. It is entirely a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions to determine whether charges should be laid against the person, and a matter for the criminal courts to determine whether the person is guilty.’

There are a few others:

The Coroner's role

<modsnipped rude comment>

I can see your point, JLZ. I would say people do have the right to petition the Coroner. But does the Coroner have to cede to their demands? Under the law; no. But, I agree, in certain circumstances, the public may have a legitimate stake in a Coroner’s inquiry. For instance, in matters of public safety, ie; fires and explosions.

There is a difference between a coronial inquest and a coronial inquiry. Its in the ACT i posted link to.

 

[papertrail]

Yes, only a little over 4 months from the time William went missing until his case was referred to the State Coroner. (Over 6 years for Daniel’s case.)

I believe you will find the Coroner is automatically involved in the background of a police investigation the moment police consider human intervention and possible death. It is the Coroner who instructs.

 

[Thebottomline]

This getting pretty repetitive. Can we move on


There is a difference between a coronial inquest and a coronial inquiry. Its in the ACT i posted link to.

Yes the inquest follows the enquiry but not in all cases, I fact I believe only a small percentage .

 

[papertrail]

I recall (maybe wrongly) that she said there was another friend with them, prehaps someone who took photos that could also vouch for his prescence.

Youngberry said about friend and school attendance not Margaret.

 

[Bohemian]

I believe you will find the Coroner is automatically involved in the background of a police investigation the moment police consider human intervention and possible death. It is the Coroner who instructs.

Do you have a link for that information please pt?

 

[Thebottomline]

Sorry I don’t think I worded my above post correctly.

 

[papertrail]

Yes the inquest follows the enquiry but not in all cases, I fact I believe only a small percentage .

Nup a coronial inquiry is about fires and arson

 

[Thebottomline]

Youngberry said about friend and school attendance not Margaret.

Ok thanks. One would assume either Margaret or Bill gave him this information .

 

[papertrail]

Do you have a link for that information please pt?

No sorry already provided link to ACT

 

[Thebottomline]

Nup a coronial inquiry is about fires and arson

Sorry I’m not sure where I got that information from !