Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #49

[sleepinoz]

BBM, And i think police definitely fed the media with BS's forthcoming arrest, because the people in Kendall would of had no clue about that, IMO.

The people of Kendall have nothing to do with it.

His office on the main street of Laurieton was raided, people were posting on SM and the local newspaper is around the corner. I don't think the Police needed to feed the media, his name was all over the building.

 

[Karinna]

There was also the tip to police from DP that BS vehicle was on the bush track the day after WT disappeared, but evidence showed it could not have been BS because there is video evidence BS was at the football function at a local club that day, but police failed to check.
Police had his diary days after WT went missing, and it was in the diary about the football AFL presentation that BS was attending.

 

[SouthAussie]

i wonder if police can collect all pings say in a 5km radius and from 10.10am to 10.45 say and check numbers..is this possible ?

Yes, that is possible. They can do tower dumps and dump the whole lot of mobile phone info from individual towers. It has been done in cases before.

For example, that is how they tracked and located the Belgian bombers in Europe. And we were speaking of it on the Theo Hayez thread, hoping they had done tower dumps during his investigation.

 

[Karinna]

So why couldn't police determine where BS was with cell phone ping locations in this case?

 

[Karinna]

The people of Kendall have nothing to do with it.

His office on the main street of Laurieton was raided, people were posting on SM and the local newspaper is around the corner. I don't think the Police needed to feed the media, his name was all over the building.

Yeah you're right BS wasn't living in Kendall, my bad LOL.

 

[SouthAussie]

The people of Kendall have nothing to do with it.

His office on the main street of Laurieton was raided, people were posting on SM and the local newspaper is around the corner. I don't think the Police needed to feed the media, his name was all over the building.

I think people (including lawyers like O'Brien) underestimate how much info is almost instantly revealed and discussed on SM by bystanders. Doesn't take long for the media to see that info, they are always watching. imo

 

[deugirtni]

The people of Kendall have nothing to do with it.

His office on the main street of Laurieton was raided, people were posting on SM and the local newspaper is around the corner. I don't think the Police needed to feed the media, his name was all over the building.

This is true and can potentially explain the media presence during the searches of Spedding's properties in January 2015, but that does not explain how all kinds of media were camped out ahead of time, in advance of BS's arrest at his home on historical charges, which occurred months later, in April I believe.

Spedding didn't know about his imminent arrest, his neighbours didn't know, so how did the media know something newsworthy enough to be ready and waiting with cameras and video, was about to happen?

 

[Cleaver Greene]

This is true and can potentially explain the media presence during the searches of Spedding's properties in January 2015, but that does not explain how all kinds of media were camped out ahead of time, in advance of BS's arrest at his home on historical charges, which occurred months later, in April I believe.

Spedding didn't know about his imminent arrest, his neighbours didn't know, so how did the media know something newsworthy enough to be ready and waiting with cameras and video, was about to happen?

I think it’s pretty obvious that the media were given advance notice of BS arrest. I don’t even understand why people are trying to deny that police leaked info to the media. Police do it all the time. They did in this case too. The only problem in this case is that police leaks drew a heap of media attention to an innocent man.

 

[Whàngarei]

Thank god for media . Imo. Sometimes the pics help.

 

[SouthAussie]

I think it’s pretty obvious that the media were given advance notice of BS arrest. I don’t even understand why people are trying to deny that police leaked info to the media. Police do it all the time. They did in this case too. The only problem in this case is that police leaks drew a heap of media attention to an innocent man.

No problem for me. As some of us have tried to explain before, he is likely not 'innocent'. imo
Just that the historical case was hard to prove. I highly doubt the prosecutor would have taken him to court if they felt he was 'innocent'.

Even Margaret needed 'reassurance' from a clairvoyant that her husband wasn't involved in the disappearance of a small child.

Too may alleged pedos get off their charges, or are never charged at all. Their victims are too young, they are not believed, they make for poor witnesses against an adult, the alleged pedos are smart in concealing their horrific crimes ..... and it was even worse, in this regard, many years ago.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

No problem for me. As some of us have tried to explain before, he is likely not 'innocent'. imo
Just that the historical case was hard to prove. I highly doubt the prosecutor would have taken him to court if they felt he was 'innocent'.

That’s what I don’t get. How can anyone “explain” that he is “likely not innocent” when all charges against him have been dismissed, at an unusually early stage in the prosecution case, with an even more unusual award of costs against the Crown, and he is no longer a Suspect/POI in the WT case.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

Even Margaret needed 'reassurance' from a clairvoyant that her husband wasn't involved in the disappearance of a small child.

Several people are reading something into the fact that MS went to a clairvoyant. I don’t see anything suspicious about it. If someone I loved was subjected to massive police interest, questioning, searches etc, I would probably have a small nagging doubt in the back of my head even if I completely believed that person. Especially if police were continuously telling me that the person was involved. There were allegations about a paedophile ring, which means that people may have been involved even if they had an alibi at the time WT went missing.

Someone who goes to see a clairvoyant would probably ask questions about all sorts of issues in their lives. I don’t think it means that BS wasn’t with MS at the cafe. She was probably just asking all sorts of questions about uncertainties in her life at the time.

 

[SouthAussie]

That’s what I don’t get. How can anyone “explain” that he is “likely not innocent” when all charges against him have been dismissed, at an unusually early stage in the prosecution case, with an even more unusual award of costs against the Crown, and he is no longer a Suspect/POI in the WT case.

What I am getting from these posts is that you feel that the prosecutor was involved in applying weak and perhaps unnecessary charges against Spedding.

And that the prosecutor wasn't involved in applying weak and perhaps unnecessary charges against Jubes.

That the police were negligent in 'leaking' to the press that Spedding was charged.

That the police were not negligent in 'leaking' to the press that Jubes was charged.

I can understand a criminal lawyer not understanding the common person's opinion, being schooled in and practising only the letter of the law - and perhaps understanding a person's need for a clairvoyant to reassure them.

But I cannot understand the juxtaposition of this apparent stance.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

What I am getting from these posts is that you feel that the prosecutor was involved in applying weak and perhaps unnecessary charges against Spedding.

And that the prosecutor wasn't involved in applying weak and perhaps unnecessary charges against Jubes.

That the police were negligent in 'leaking' to the press that Spedding was charged.

That the police were not negligent in 'leaking' to the press that Jubes was charged.

I can understand a criminal lawyer not understanding the common person's opinion, being schooled in and practising only the letter of the law - and perhaps understanding a person's need for a clairvoyant to reassure them.

But I cannot understand the juxtaposition of this apparent stance.

I feel that weak and unnecessary charges were laid against BS. That is supported by the Judge finding no case to answer, dismissing the charges at the close of the prosecution case and then awarding costs.

The fact that the media were outside BS house BEFORE police arrived to arrest him suggests that the media have been tipped off. I don’t necessarily think it was negligent, but I think police tipped off the media and I don’t know why people are saying that they didn’t.

I have no idea about the charges against Jubelin or whether police tipped the media off (although they probably did). I don’t know anything about the merits of the charges. We will probably know a lot more when we see how the trial folds. It’s usually after a trial finishes that we can look in hindsight what went right or wrong.

I think it was the right thing to remove Jubelin from the investigation. You can’t have the lead investigator of an active investigation under a cloud if you want to keep an investigation alive, regardless of whether they have done what they have alleged. Just the cloud is enough to damage the entire investigation.

You are reading things into my posts that just aren’t there. It’s fine if you don’t agree. Perhaps ignore my posts.

 

[Whàngarei]

More to MS than is known. Imo.

 

[Georgy]

We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

 

[sleepinoz]

That’s what I don’t get. How can anyone “explain” that he is “likely not innocent” when all charges against him have been dismissed, at an unusually early stage in the prosecution case, with an even more unusual award of costs against the Crown, and he is no longer a Suspect/POI in the WT case.

The only people that have stated he is NOT a POI in WT case is the Media and his Lawyer. IMO

 

[Georgy]

We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

 

[Cleaver Greene]

The only people that have stated he is NOT a POI in WT case is the Media and his Lawyer. IMO

I think he is no longer a suspect/POI for the following reasons:

1. He was on the stand at the inquest where he could have been compelled to answer questions. This was a perfect opportunity for police to subject him to a thorough cross examination. This was the best time for the Coroner, or lawyers of other POI to grill him. They didn’t.
2. BS lawyer withdrew from the inquest at the end of BS evidence. If he was still a suspect, the lawyer would have sat through the rest of the inquest and cross examined all the other POI’s to arm himself with defence strategies if BS was ever charged
3. Four Corners ran a story about the “wrong man” being pursued. They would not have done this unless they were satisfied that he was not a suspect/POI. If they had, Four Corners would run the risk of being sued by police.
4. Jubelin has acknowledged that the media intrusion on BS was over the top. He would not have done this if BS was still a suspect.

The police will not publicly state that BS is no longer a suspect because as soon as they do, they are conceding the misfeasance and abuse of process lawsuits. It’s not relevant to the malicious prosecution claim.

 

[Blues Clues]

I can only think that footy friend's inquest evidence is strong if that is the only award the grandson got, at that assembly.

And that is something that we don't know. But the Coroner should know .. if the school keeps any kind of records - or his teacher remembers - about the grandchild's awards.

To add to the layers, which when put together strengthened the alibi, was a school document provided by Angela Eschler whose Child was also receiving an award on Sept 12th. The document listed all children receiving an award at that assembly and included the name of the child in the Spedding’s care.

The link from Lia Harris's twitter account won't load for some unknown reason, but if needed it is in her tweets of 21/8/19.