Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sep 2014 - #73

[JBowie]

I looked to see who the Director was in Dec 2021 (has been director since Aug 2021). Sally Dowling SC. Apparently, the appointment of the director is for a 10 year term.

Leadership team | ODPP

www.odpp.nsw.gov.au

Thanks. (She will now be Sally Dowling KC )

 

[Warshawski]

My few comments about things I think some others may be interested in are probably not going to present any clear view of the book, or the discussions about William that are dotted through the book.

But I find it interesting to read all of the different things he mentions about the case ... the little details. Some of the things I didn't know.


Eg: Some time after the last tranche, the State Director of Inquests wrote to Jubes and asked him to lay out on paper what he knew about the case.

(Source: Badness by Gary Jubelin and Dan Box, chapter Stolen From Me)

I don’t doubt your interest SA. It’s all very intriguing to say the least.

I’m interested to know who / what is the ‘State Director of Inquests’. I‘m aware of a State Coroner role but not previously come across the afore mentioned.

 

[Chrissy74]

And as an aside, back in December, Jubes had been invited by the Governor of NSW (Margaret Beasley) to attend a Justice Reform Initiative reception at Government House.

“The invitation feels like a chance to rejoin those on the right side of the criminal justice system.”

Jubes attended, along with “two former federal Cabinet ministers, a Director of Public Prosecutions, a prisons inspector, four judges and the former leader of the State Liberal Party, and the VP of the Nationals Party”.


Source: Badness by Gary Jubelin and Dan Box, chapter Whose Values Are Working?

It’s interesting to see the mfc choice of legal representation for his 2 charges of giving false or misleading information to a public authority. Top criminal lawyer Carly Hydes was hired by the mfc to defend him in court on alleged lying charges.
www.dailymail.co.ukWilliam Tyrrell's foster dad faces prison if guilty - as glamorous lawyer demands ...
Carly Hydes is a partner of the law firm “Macdougall and Hydes lawyers”. Lawyers from the same firm as Hydes “Lauren MacDougall and Margaret Cunneen” were the lawyers representing GJ in court for his charges of illegal recorderings.


https://www.macdougallhydes.com.au › ...The ironic Prosecution of Gary Jubelin - MacDougall & Hydes Lawyers

I wonder if mfc choice in lawyers was a personal recommendation from GJ.

It’s also possible that the coroner referred the inquest papers to the DPP.

 

[Couldbe]

JMO – Following Jubelin’s very public detective work directed at Bill Spedding (the washing machine repairman) he then appeared to switched his attention to Paul Savage (who lived opposite FFGM). I am sure other avenues of investigation were pursued, one of which was ‘going hard’ on FFC and MFC.

It would appear that Jubelin is now directing his attention to questioning whether the tactics being used by police could “destroy lives”, and this is an understandable view, especially in the light of what we saw eventuate in regard to Spedding and Savage.

 

[Chrissy74]

JMO – Following Jubelin’s very public detective work directed at Bill Spedding (the washing machine repairman) he then appeared to switched his attention to Paul Savage (who lived opposite FFGM). I am sure other avenues of investigation were pursued, one of which was ‘going hard’ on FFC and MFC.

It would appear that Jubelin is now directing his attention to questioning whether the tactics being used by police could “destroy lives”, and this is an understandable view, especially in the light of what we saw eventuate in regard to Spedding and Savage.

So are you suggesting GJ is questioning his own tactics used in the WT investigation or implying these sorts of life destroying tactics are generally used by police?

 

[Couldbe]

So are you suggesting GJ is questioning his own tactics used in the WT investigation or implying these sorts of life destroying tactics are generally used by police?

What I was trying to convey was that Jubelin would have had demonstrated to him how devastating it has been for Spedding and Savage, and he has now chosen to express his view of such effects ..... in his endeavour to 'speak for and defend' other POIs. MOO

 

[JLZ]

What I was trying to convey was that Jubelin would have had demonstrated to him how devastating it has been for Spedding and Savage, and he has now chosen to express his view of such effects ..... in his endeavour to 'speak for and defend' other POIs. MOO

I think it's the publicity as to who is suspected that Jubelin is opposing. He says he's not responsible for the media being all over Spedding, and we didn't find out about Savage's POI status until the inquest. He's not apologising for the damage done to those two by his investigation tactics.

 

[Chrissy74]

What I was trying to convey was that Jubelin would have had demonstrated to him how devastating it has been for Spedding and Savage, and he has now chosen to express his view of such effects ..... in his endeavour to 'speak for and defend' other POIs. MOO

More like making a very BOLD statement rather than a display of redemption!!

 

[Chrissy74]

I think it's the publicity as to who is suspected that Jubelin is opposing. He says he's not responsible for the media being all over Spedding, and we didn't find out about Savage's POI status until the inquest. He's not apologising for the damage done to those two by his investigation tactics.

Good on GJ for going hard in his interrogation of the fp in 2016. I wouldn’t be surprised if their statements raised more questions than answers.

 

[Wexford]

I think it's the publicity as to who is suspected that Jubelin is opposing. He says he's not responsible for the media being all over Spedding, and we didn't find out about Savage's POI status until the inquest. He's not apologising for the damage done to those two by his investigation tactics.

He wasn't on the case when Spedding's name hit the media. A friend of the family indicated early on who it was that gave Spedding's name and that person presumably also mentioned he had some historical allegations against him. That is what caused the intense media interest and if that person had a grudge against him (as was indicated) then they probably contacted the media as well. Once the media got that story it would be hard to stop. Probably why it was not made public about Savage until later on. The media coverage of the walk through done with Jubelin and the Speddings seemed to be him giving them the opportunity to clear their names to the media and the public.

 

[JLZ]

He wasn't on the case when Spedding's name hit the media. A friend of the family indicated early on who it was that gave Spedding's name and that person presumably also mentioned he had some historical allegations against him. That is what caused the intense media interest and if that person had a grudge against him (as was indicated) then they probably contacted the media as well. Once the media got that story it would be hard to stop. Probably why it was not made public about Savage until later on. The media coverage of the walk through done with Jubelin and the Speddings seemed to be him giving them the opportunity to clear their names to the media and the public.

I think what's under discussion though is whether there's an inconsistency between Jubelin saying "what if they're innocent--you're ruining lives" about the recent treatment of the foster parents, and the way he treated other POIs when he was a cop. And if so, is the explanation that he values some lives more than others, or is it that he's learnt from experience--rather late in the day--or what? I was trying out an "or what" explanation: that from his point of view there's no inconsistency, because he supports going hard on suspects whoever they are, but he doesn't support certain uses of the media against them and he certainly doesn't support police leaking. I don't necessarily agree that he went equally hard on the foster parents when he was in charge, but that's an adjacent issue.

 

[SouthAussie]

I think what's under discussion though is whether there's an inconsistency between Jubelin saying "what if they're innocent--you're ruining lives" about the recent treatment of the foster parents, and the way he treated other POIs when he was a cop. And if so, is the explanation that he values some lives more than others, or is it that he's learnt from experience--rather late in the day--or what? I was trying out an "or what" explanation: that from his point of view there's no inconsistency, because he supports going hard on suspects whoever they are, but he doesn't support certain uses of the media against them and he certainly doesn't support police leaking. I don't necessarily agree that he went equally hard on the foster parents when he was in charge, but that's an adjacent issue.

I think the point is that Jubes didn't treat the POIs in the same manner as the FPs have been treated.
Bottom line ..... he didn't leak to the media.

He didn't leak Spedding's search, he didn't leak Spedding's arrest.

Both of those leaks came from higher ups. He has stated it many times (and I believe I have linked the statements before). And he would like to see a public inquiry about it all - presumably, in part, so the right people are accountable for their actions. And so we can all see if everything that can be done, has been done.

Spedding's search leak was out before Jubes picked up the case. Spedding's arrest leak was done by a higher up.
No leak about Savage at all, the inquest (and Jubes' charges) brought him to light.

Jubes makes no apology for going hard on Spedding and Savage.
I don't think he has a problem with them going hard on the FPs.
It is all the publicity that is the problem, and has been the problem for the POIs all along.

imo


There is a part in the latest book where the Director of Inquests told Jubes he needed to search Savage's property.

"What about the email I received from the Director of Inquests at the New South Wales Department of Justice suggesting I apply for another order, this time to search Paul's home? Without a search, that email said, 'should any person be charged in the future, such person could reasonably say that a necessary step to eliminate Paul from suspicion had not been taken'. I provided that email to the police when I was under investigation."

Source: Badness by Gary Jubelin and Dan Box, chapter Badness

 

[T-dawg420]

Jubes makes no apology for going hard on Spedding and Savage.
I don't think he has a problem with them going hard on the FPs.
It is all the publicity that is the problem, and has been the problem for the POIs all along.

I totally agree with this comment. Jubelin shouldn’t have to apologise for going hard on any POI, nor should any police officer. As long as they do it in the right way then if someone has nothing to hide then they shouldn’t have an issue with getting the police spotlight put on them IMO.

The leaks to the media are obviously done for a reason, but they seem to do nothing but cause a lot of damage to the subject of the leak, regardless of their guilt or innocence! Which to me just stinks to high heaven!

And with the media leaks that have happened in this case, they don’t seem to be any closer to solving it!

 

[Awakening]

I totally agree with this comment. Jubelin shouldn’t have to apologise for going hard on any POI, nor should any police officer. As long as they do it in the right way then if someone has nothing to hide then they shouldn’t have an issue with getting the police spotlight put on them IMO.

The leaks to the media are obviously done for a reason, but they seem to do nothing but cause a lot of damage to the subject of the leak, regardless of their guilt or innocence! Which to me just stinks to high heaven!

And with the media leaks that have happened in this case, they don’t seem to be any closer to solving it!

What's it been now? 10 months since they announced the "big dig" and made it sound like an arrest was imminent? Certainly expected a big break in the case by now.

 

[HavenWood]

If the area for the "big dig" was based on phone pings, or even a witness seeing the car in that area ... that doesn't necessarily mean a body would be found there? You would think that if William or his clothes had been found, we might have heard something.
Could it be possible that (if William was dead) he was driven to the area of the "big dig" but instead of being buried there was instead given to another person to dispose of the body somewhere else, OR (if alive) could he have been passed on to another person for nefarious purposes? Afterall it is starting to look like the people that we always held to be innocent in his disappearance aren't exactly the people we were led to believe. Possible anger issues, possible abuse, possibly not wanting a child that was too much for them.

 

[Megnut]

If the area for the "big dig" was based on phone pings, or even a witness seeing the car in that area ... that doesn't necessarily mean a body would be found there? You would think that if William or his clothes had been found, we might have heard something.
Could it be possible that (if William was dead) he was driven to the area of the "big dig" but instead of being buried there was instead given to another person to dispose of the body somewhere else, OR (if alive) could he have been passed on to another person for nefarious purposes? Afterall it is starting to look like the people that we always held to be innocent in his disappearance aren't exactly the people we were led to believe. Possible anger issues, possible abuse, possibly not wanting a child that was too much for them.

OR he was there. At one time. But later moved.

JMO

 

[Couldbe]

JMO - I can't help but wonder what Jubelin thinks about the LE Charges of alleged Common Assault, and the recorded evidence in connection with those Charges of FFC and MFC.

 

[Awakening]

JMO - I can't help but wonder what Jubelin thinks about the LE Charges of alleged Common Assault, and the recorded evidence in connection with those Charges of FFC and MFC.

Who knows? But based on his continued defence of them, I'm going to assume he believes they are innocent of these charges, just like he believes they are in no way involved in William's disappearance.

There's no clear or direct evidence they are involved in his disappearance. It's all speculative at best. IMO.

JMO - there may be evidence that they are unpleasant people. Dishonest. Unkind. Self absorbed. Entitled. Hard to say because the public doesn't know who these people are so we can only base our opinions on the charges against them (which they are defending) and media reports. But none of those things make them murderers or complicit in his disappearance.

 

[SouthAussie]

Who knows? But based on his continued defence of them, I'm going to assume he believes they are innocent of these charges, just like he believes they are in no way involved in William's disappearance.

I think that would be a wrong assumption, on both counts.

Having read both of his books, I think it is clear that Jubes is defending/explaining SFR's investigation - up until January 2019. Not that he is 'defending' any POI within that investigation.

imo

 

[SLouTh]

Is this where we are up to regarding the charges against the Foster Parents? Or does anyone have an update?

Charges of Alleged Lying to NSWCC

Foster Mother
This is from The Telegraph regarding the alleged Charge of Lying to the NSWCC by the FM

About 500 pages of evidence would form part of the case and some audio recordings from the NSW Crime Commission would be played during the hearing, the court was told before November 3 and 4 were chosen as dates the hearing would take place.


Foster Father
The FF hearing of the Lying Charge against the NSWCC was set down for October 12 and 13.

The hearing — which has been set for October 12 and 13 — will include the 55-year-old's interview with police and other electronic material.

Secret recordings to be played at hearing as William Tyrrell's foster father denies giving false evidence

The foster father of missing boy William Tyrrell faces a two-day hearing in court after pleading not guilty to two charges of knowingly giving false or misleading evidence to the NSW Crime Commission.

www.abc.net.au

Charges of Alleged Assault

And the Alleged Assault Charges were being heard together (FF and FM )- Also from The Telegraph ….

The foster mother will face a three-day hearing alongside her husband in January.
From Article June 30

In the Foster Father’s case, a three-day hearing will be held from January 16, 2023.
From Article June 7

References:

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/b...e/news-story/b45311aa9d49dffe32d5f2e680b87618

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/b...l/news-story/e75f6b918434d5bb109163d9fd257191

I haven’t looked for dates of the new alleged fraud charges as I assume they will further down the track ….

imo
Edit to add additional reference and dates