Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #11

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Found said:
Not replying to any quote as such just have a few thoughts.... I dont think he will get bail. I think regardless of all the other factors he will probably not be particularly safe given the intense media surrounding the case.

Also them saying he had 30000 on property..... That's not a lot of assets for a man in his 60s. If he is a peodophile no doubt he is connected to others on the web etc. So is a possible motive for abduction money?

Also everyone mentions why the historical charges were not pursued. I think it's possible the victims family did not pursue it. I know times have changed but I don't think it is uncommon for a parent to not want to put their children through such an ordeal. But then it ends up with victims at an older age not having dealt with the abuse or still angry etc...

I still have some doubt about BS being involved. But not much..... I know there has been plenty of sleuthing of the families etc but although there might be some dodgy characters and distant connections there is nothing I have seen that really means much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Thanks Found. For BS to be granted bail his solicitor will have to put forward to the magistrate what has changed and why now BS deserves to be granted bail since his initial bail was refused in April of this year. There is nothing that I can see that has changed. BS has been in jail since the initial bail application was refused. IMO BS is a risk, not just of absconding but more so in menacing and threatening the victims in this case, both of whom are known/related to him. He has already used intimidation tactics when he contacted one of the victims asking for a 'character reference', which included a denial that he had sexually assaulted her. And MS also contacted one of the victims to let her know how disappointed she (MS) was that the victim had become involved in the case!

I agree that in all probability it was the victim's mother (or another family member) who decided not to pursue the case in 1987. Not wanting to put those little girls through more trauma is understandable. I've asked myself what I would have done and I really do think that I would have ended up in jail for killing the !

I also keep wondering if William's sister was the intended target that day. Once again it all comes back to who knew that the family were going to be there on that particular day/weekend? I tend to agree with Gary Jubelin's scenario that "two worlds collided that day.". Little William and his sister innocently playing in their nana's yard and a sick piece of filth who saw the opportunity to steal William from his family. Whether that piece of filth is BS or someone who lived close by will be revealed soon.

One thing I am particularly interested in is the name/s of the others present when those two little girls were raped back in 1987. Who did BS pass those children onto? Mates? Family members? I'm just hoping that whoever they are, they are named and shamed in court but it may be quite a while before BS goes to trial. He's due for a mention at Port Macquarie court on the 18th and not much will happen there. From memory an accused of an indictable offence (which this is) can have up to three mentions in court before a committal hearing. The committal hearing will then decide if there is enough evidence to send the case to trial before a judge and jury. It's a long road ahead for the victims and my heart goes out to them both. Of course BS could plead guilty and save eveyone any further heartache.
 
krig101 said:
“That belonged to one of the (children) that he got when he was four,” Mrs Spedding said.

“(The child) left it in the van for (Mr Spedding) to keep him company when he was driving.”

Then there would most likely be prints from the child if it were theirs and Police would have already checked this out.

My stomach turned when I read this
Click to expand...

That article that I not long ago read and posted - they concoct wild stories.
He carried a spiderman doll to keep him company. Yeah right.
Clearly that was a surprise question and not a well thought out answer from MS. imo
 
Makara said:
Oh thank God this has finally come out. Some of us have known about this for quite a while but couldn't mention it. Apparently the Spiderman figurine was tucked up under the sun visor in BS's van. Anyone still sitting on the fence?
Click to expand...

Wow I have never heard this before. That is pretty scary. Wish I could bring article back up. Hopefully another news source will post it.
 
sosocurious said:
That article that I not long ago read and posted - they concoct wild stories.
He carried a spiderman doll to keep him company. Yeah right.
Clearly that was a surprise question and not a well thought out answer from MS. imo
Click to expand...

Or MS knows a whole lot more than she is willing to say.
 
krig101 said:
Wow I have never heard this before. That is pretty scary. Wish I could bring article back up. Hopefully another news source will post it.
Click to expand...

Don't worry Krig, it will be all over MSM tomorrow.
 
I am still heavily on the fence about BS involvement with WT; however I do hope he gets what is deserved for the terrible things he has done to those little girls. In regards to the spiderman figurine keeping him company ... well that isn't that far fetched. My 4 year old leaves me small toys on my night stand, on my desk and even in my car so I can have something to play with and not be alone. This is pretty common behavior for a young child. Now if it comes out that WT had a spiderman figurine that he was playing with when he went missing then that is a whole different story but I have not heard that yet.

/just my 2 cents
 
In regard to the Spider-Man toy...if it belonged to William, wouldn't the parents be able to identify it as one of his toys? If not, would that mean BS used that to lure William...in which case, he would have had prior knowledge that little William was fascinated by Spider- Man?! Although, I know all my nephews and cousins loved Spider-Man at that age. Still, I do not for one second believe that it was a coincidence, especially given allllll the other details about BS. For starters, let's not forget his shoddy alibi which couldn't be confirmed!
 
Argh! I just made an enormous post and lost it all.

To summarise:

The first thing I thought when Margaret said it belonged to one of the kids is that those kids seemed too old to have spiderman figurines. Lo and behold, an unnecessary explanation about it being a fourth birthday present. Sounds like quick thinking to me.

There was a pic circulating of William's grandma's porch and a spiderman doll laying by the bikes. It's likely he had several spiderman toys. Why didn't his parents mention it in the interview, though?

How did the police know he was driving around with it on the day, or did MS say it to look like there was nothing to hide?

When did they find it? When they seized the cars or earlier?

Anyway, interesting that more details are being dripfed.
 
If it was already in the van, my thoughts are: here comes BS to grandma's house and there is little Willliam running around in a Spider man costume..........a perfect way to get his attention.
 
Angeline said:
Argh! I just made an enormous post and lost it all.

To summarise:

The first thing I thought when Margaret said it belonged to one of the kids is that those kids seemed too old to have spiderman figurines. Lo and behold, an unnecessary explanation about it being a fourth birthday present. Sounds like quick thinking to me.

There was a pic circulating of William's grandma's porch and a spiderman doll laying by the bikes. It's likely he had several spiderman toys. Why didn't his parents mention it in the interview, though?

How did the police know he was driving around with it on the day, or did MS say it to look like there was nothing to hide?

When did they find it? When they seized the cars or earlier?

Anyway, interesting that more details are being dripfed.
Click to expand...

They may have been told to not mention it due to it being possible evidence.
 
Angeline said:
Argh! I just made an enormous post and lost it all.

To summarise:

The first thing I thought when Margaret said it belonged to one of the kids is that those kids seemed too old to have spiderman figurines. Lo and behold, an unnecessary explanation about it being a fourth birthday present. Sounds like quick thinking to me.

There was a pic circulating of William's grandma's porch and a spiderman doll laying by the bikes. It's likely he had several spiderman toys. Why didn't his parents mention it in the interview, though?

How did the police know he was driving around with it on the day, or did MS say it to look like there was nothing to hide?

When did they find it? When they seized the cars or earlier?

Anyway, interesting that more details are being dripfed.
Click to expand...

That was my first thought Angeline
When did they find it - just how soon after William disappeared was BS interviewed...hours, days or weeks.
 
Ah, ok. I suppose if police already had it and spoke to the parents then there was no need to bring it up.

To view the article I find that if I Google Spedding it brings up recent news articles and it will open if I click on it from Google.
 
A screen grab from the video at the link below. It shows William's Spiderman doll on the floor of the sunroom at the grandmother's house along with his sister's doll pram. Did William take his Spiderman with him when he was running around in the backyard? Did he have it with him when he was abducted? I think he did.


Spiderman%20doll_zpsy8n0dtwy.png


http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...ing-sydney-family-holiday#Z50Puu9o6fbEvYUj.99
 
KinderedSpirits said:
In regard to the Spider-Man toy...if it belonged to William, wouldn't the parents be able to identify it as one of his toys? If not, would that mean BS used that to lure William...in which case, he would have had prior knowledge that little William was fascinated by Spider- Man?! Although, I know all my nephews and cousins loved Spider-Man at that age. Still, I do not for one second believe that it was a coincidence, especially given allllll the other details about BS. For starters, let's not forget his shoddy alibi which couldn't be confirmed!
Click to expand...

More to the point, wouldn't the child who MS said it belonged to recognise it? I don't believe he did.
 
That's the pic, Makara. I can't tell if it was taken before or after.

WHY you would leave something so incriminating in your car? Did he simply forget about it? It could easily have been thrown into the bin. Maybe it was kept to calm William and maybe police searched the car sooner than we think (the mysterious washing repair job days later at grandma's house?)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 61 more.
Total: 2,736 (members: 62, guests: 2,674)

Online statistics

Members online
62
Guests online
2,674
Total visitors
2,736
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
594,082
Messages
17,998,754
Members
229,308
Latest member
PRJ
Back
Top