Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #41

[Thebottomline]

I’m confused . I read it as GJ was taken off Williams case because of the so called recorded conversation. But some posts allude to it being Matthew Levensons case . I thought it was just his family coming to Jubelin defence ? Perhaps I’ve missed something

 

[SouthAussie]

I’m confused . I read it as GJ was taken off Williams case because of the so called recorded conversation. But some posts allude to it being Matthew Levensons case . I thought it was just his family coming to Jubelin defence ? Perhaps I’ve missed something

I think a poster has seen something somewhere that said that it wasn't the first time that Jubes recorded without a warrant .... or perhaps the poster made that connection themselves.

Which is how Mark Leveson's recorded (with his permission) convo came into the story. There was no warrant for that personal-matter recording, apparently. However, there was Mark Leveson's permission.

 

[Thebottomline]

I think a poster has seen something somewhere that said that it wasn't the first time that Jubes recorded without a warrant .... or perhaps the poster made that connection themselves.

Which is how Mark Leveson's recorded (with his permission) convo came into the story. There was no warrant for that personal-matter recording, apparently. However, there was Mark Leveson's permission.

Thankyou for the clarification South Aussie, I was really only skimming posts so probably didn’t read properly

 

[SouthAussie]

I don't imagine a person who became a suspect in William's case would admit to allowing Jubes to record them. If they became a suspect some time after the recording. And if the recording could prejudice against them ... perhaps the 'suspect' told porky pies that were later discovered to be provable untruths.

It may be that Jubes said on the recording that he was recording with permission, and perhaps the 'suspect' just nodded their head or grunted or made some unidentifiable acknowledgement, instead of clearly verbally acknowledging permission.

Nowhere does it say (that I have seen) that it was a secret recording.

 

[Thebottomline]

I don't imagine a person who became a suspect in William's case would admit to allowing Jubes to record them. If they became a suspect some time after the recording. And if the recording could prejudice against them ... perhaps the 'suspect' told porky pies that were later discovered to be provable untruths.

It may be that Jubes said on the recording that he was recording with permission, and perhaps the 'suspect' just nodded their head or grunted or made some unidentifiable acknowledgement, instead of clearly verbally acknowledging permission.

Nowhere does it say (that I have seen) that it was a secret recording.

I wish recordings were allowed in these situations! Whatever it takes IMO

 

[purpleandgreen]

I wish recordings were allowed in these situations! Whatever it takes IMO

Couldn’t agree more, tbl.

 

[SouthAussie]

I wish recordings were allowed in these situations! Whatever it takes IMO

Yes, I am a little confused by all this.

IIRC Jubes stated quite clearly in one of his pressers that there were covert (and overt) operations going on. So, is recording one part of their covert operations? Even though nothing says that this 'infraction' was a secretly recorded convo.

There is a lot of stuff out there about it. I dont have time at the moment to wade through it, as much of the detail is written in legal mumbo jumbo. But it is something to consider, for sure.


The police powers to carry out undercover operations in NSW are contained in the Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 (the Act). The legislation allows specific NSW law enforcement agencies to carry out controlled operations in situations where conventional measures won’t work.
Authorising the Unlawful: The Powers of Undercover Police in NSW

 

[papertrail]

Yes, I am a little confused by all this.

IIRC Jubes stated quite clearly in one of his pressers that there were covert (and overt) operations going on. So, is recording one part of their covert operations? Even though nothing says that this 'infraction' was a secretly recorded convo.

There is a lot of stuff out there about it. I dont have time at the moment to wade through it, as much of the detail is written in legal mumbo jumbo. But it is something to consider, for sure.


The police powers to carry out undercover operations in NSW are contained in the Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 (the Act). The legislation allows specific NSW law enforcement agencies to carry out controlled operations in situations where conventional measures won’t work.
Authorising the Unlawful: The Powers of Undercover Police in NSW

I do not believe Jubelin acted as a UCO in the Tyrrell investigation. He is a bit high profile to do so.

 

[papertrail]

I’m confused . I read it as GJ was taken off Williams case because of the so called recorded conversation. But some posts allude to it being Matthew Levensons case . I thought it was just his family coming to Jubelin defence ? Perhaps I’ve missed something

I want to clarify that I did not allude anything. The reporter in the news broadcast linked today by another user said that Jubelin had also recorded a conversation in another case as well without warrant. In the same news clip Mrs Leveson admitted she had known Jubelin had recorded a conversation. It was the reporter who suggested recordings without warrant had occurred in the Tyrrell and Leveson case.

I think the discussion about Jubelin has sent this thread off the rails. Where is the discussion about William's case? Maybe there needs to be a specific thread about Jubelin.

 

[SouthAussie]

I do not believe Jubelin acted as a UCO in the Tyrrell investigation. He is a bit high profile to do so.

Perhaps the title of the lawyers article about this makes it appear that covert means only out of police clothing and/or assuming another identity?

The Act is called "LAW ENFORCEMENT (CONTROLLED OPERATIONS) ACT 1997".

I have been reading it, I have yet to find that it specifically says that the participants must not be wearing police or typical detective clothing, or not be acting as themselves ... although it does make allowances for all of those actions.

 

[Thebottomline]

I want to clarify that I did not allude anything. The reporter in the news broadcast linked today by another user said that Jubelin had also recorded a conversation in another case as well without warrant. In the same news clip Mrs Leveson admitted she had known Jubelin had recorded a conversation. It was the repirted who suggested recirdings without warrant had occurred in the Tyrrell and Leveson case.

I think the discussion about Jubelin has sent this thread off the rails. Where is the discussion about William's case? Maybe there needs to be a specific thread about Jubelin.

No problem , I wasn’t pointing any posters out. I don’t think it’s gone off the rails, Jubelin has been such a major part of this case for so long and If his reasons for resignation stem from this then I think it’s relevent to talk about him. I kind of feel like he deserves that recognition for what he has done.
For the record I believe he knows what’s happened to William but stuck between a rock and a lack of evidence

 

[SouthAussie]

I think the discussion about Jubelin has sent this thread off the rails. Where is the discussion about William's case? Maybe there needs to be a specific thread about Jubelin.

Respectfully, I disagree. We have moved onto covert operations - which stemmed from speculation about the unauthorised recording - covert operations are something that Jubes specifically said was happening in William's case.

 

[papertrail]

Perhaps the title of the lawyers article about this makes it appear that covert means only out of police clothing and/or assuming another identity?

The Act is called "LAW ENFORCEMENT (CONTROLLED OPERATIONS) ACT 1997".

I have been reading it, I have yet to find that it specifically says that the participants must not be wearing police or typical detective clothing, or not be acting as themselves ... although it does make allowances for all of those actions.

Any recording undertaken by any NSW police officer no matter if plain clothed or uniformed needs to be done within the confines of the Surveillance Devices Act NSW. The media are reporting that allegations are raised that Jubelin's recordings contravene this Act.

 

[papertrail]

Respectfully, I disagree. We have moved onto covert operations - which stemmed from speculation about the unauthorised recording - covert operations are something that Jubes specifically said was happening in William's case.

The Act you referred to is more specific for covert ops. Jubelin was not operating covertly. He recorded a conversation without warrant are the allegations.

Where is William. Who is responsible?

 

[frogwell]

What is trying to be achieved by removing GJ from heading this case which unfortunately has been the catalyst for his retirement it would seem?
What reasons would members of the force want GJ to be sidelined during the coronial inquest?
If this is a political decision, what is it that the state government wants to achieve?
These are some of the questions swirling around my head in relation to this situation, I don't expect them to be answered, except to say, this case puts a light on 2 govt. departments and I guess they don't like the way they might look to the public...

 

[papertrail]

I think a poster has seen something somewhere that said that it wasn't the first time that Jubes recorded without a warrant .... or perhaps the poster made that connection themselves.

Which is how Mark Leveson's recorded (with his permission) convo came into the story. There was no warrant for that personal-matter recording, apparently. However, there was Mark Leveson's permission.

The Leveson's did not state the recording was done with their permission. They indicated the recording was ok with them and we don't know if they directly mean at the time of recording or what they are stating now ie its ok, is a way of supporting Jubelin currently. But the have unwittingly supported the allegation against Jubelin.

Where is William is much more important to me than any allegation against former investigator.

 

[Thebottomline]

Any recording undertaken by any NSW police officer no matter if plain clothed or uniformed needs to be done within the confines of the Surveillance Devices Act NSW. The media are reporting that allegations are raised that Jubelin's recordings contravene this Act.

And that’s where the law sucks sometimes, as I said whatever it takes to catch this or these mongrels should be fair game. Our laws are too soft.

 

[Thebottomline]

What is trying to be achieved by removing GJ from heading this case which unfortunately has been the catalyst for his retirement it would seem?
What reasons would members of the force want GJ to be sidelined during the coronial inquest?
If this is a political decision, what is it that the state government wants to achieve?
These are some of the questions swirling around my head in relation to this situation, I don't expect them to be answered, except to say, this case puts a light on 2 govt. departments and I guess they don't like the way they might look to the public...

Yes I think you may be right. Politics getting in the way

 

[papertrail]

What is trying to be achieved by removing GJ from heading this case which unfortunately has been the catalyst for his retirement it would seem?
What reasons would members of the force want GJ to be sidelined during the coronial inquest?
If this is a political decision, what is it that the state government wants to achieve?
These are some of the questions swirling around my head in relation to this situation, I don't expect them to be answered, except to say, this case puts a light on 2 govt. departments and I guess they don't like the way they might look to the public...

I personally believe he alleged transgressions were discovered by the Coronial investigation team. They would cross match info on police files with issued warrants to ensure the information passed up as a brief of evidence was obtained lawfully. It is also possible the person who was recorded or knew of an unwarranted recording knew of the recording and reported such to the Coronial investigation team. The timing of the stand down of Jubelin to me indicates.

The timing of the August 2018 hands on altercation between Jubelin and the lead detective is also interesting. It occurred not long after the inquest was announcedand the last search at Kendall and surrounds in June 2018.

Where is William? Who is responsible?

 

[SouthAussie]

What is trying to be achieved by removing GJ from heading this case which unfortunately has been the catalyst for his retirement it would seem?
What reasons would members of the force want GJ to be sidelined during the coronial inquest?
If this is a political decision, what is it that the state government wants to achieve?
These are some of the questions swirling around my head in relation to this situation, I don't expect them to be answered, except to say, this case puts a light on 2 govt. departments and I guess they don't like the way they might look to the public...

I have read that Jubes has done things that make other police 'bristle' or has caused 'chagrin' of his superiors.
I believe the victims are more important to him ... and getting justice and some kind of peace for them is paramount.


Mr Jubelin had a reputation as an unconventional operator who forged extremely close bonds with victims' families, sometimes to the chagrin of his superiors.

Mr Jubelin once joined the families of the slain Bowraville children outside the NSW state government to protest inaction on the case, something that made other police officers, who often try to remain apolitical, bristle.
He received a standing ovation from the victims' families when he gave an emotional account to a parliamentary committee of racial discrimination and poor handling of the case by previous governments and police.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...fter-tyrrell-controversy-20190525-p51r6o.html