Discussion in '2010's Missing' started by Coldpizza, Sep 11, 2016.
At inquest the FFC would have been testifying according to her sworn Affidavit and Statements.
I am not a DCI putting out a hypothetical scenario such as Jubelin did. Very unusual.
I agree investigators do consider hypothetical scenarios but it is very rare they do so in public. There is a very good reasons for that and include it cannot be proven to be factual and can give the public a false sense of a crime. People may have considered such a senior investigator stating such that he did that the immediate area within the 30km zone was safe.
I am interested to hear more at the 2nd round of the inquest (and I hope we do hear more about it) as to why Jubes speculated that a seatbelt may have been put over William and he could have been 30km away by the time the police were called.
Perhaps a vehicle was seen, in profile, on the tennis club CCTV with its passenger seatbelt extended, but no taller person seen sitting in the passenger seat? Mentioning the seatbelt a couple of times in his scenario seemed to be quite detailed. Why not just say that William could have been placed in a vehicle and taken away?
I also imagine that the police have tested how far a vehicle could travel, at the usual speed limit, from 10:30am on a typical Friday until the police were called. Similar to the way tests were conducted in the Karen Ristevski case to gauge times for her vehicle to have travelled to and from the Mount Macedon site.
I also wonder exactly when an unspecified vehicle was seen entering the forest at the search site of 3 March 2015. Was it around the time that the police were called? Perhaps this also gave police a measured time period/distance to test, when Jubes alluded to that 30km.
You can be guaranteed there will be no hypothetical discussed at Inquest. The purpose of an Inquest is to deal the facts not hypothetical.
i would hope professionalism.
that is simply unacceptable and police do not cross those lines.
I know this on personal good authority.
i'll give him the benefit that he wouldn't befriend and divulge or jeopardise justice for William by 'befriending anyone involved in an active investigation.
warm and supportive sure. but 'close friends' definitely faux pas and not on.
On two occassions in the press, BGM has had aspersions thrown her way about possibly being involved in WT's disappearance. We know that the media has been harnessed by the police during this investigation to put pressure on POIs. BGM had been interviewed initially by Taylor Auberbach for the Sydney Telegraph and built rapport with her. He seemed to be getting all the top stories for a while about this case and then it was strongly guessed at that he was getting the scoop because he was willing to co operate with the police. Taylor Auerbach produced the KL, BGM segment for a current affair and also the interview with APS, again a rapport building exercise in my opinion. The point being in the following 2 media links are examples of police showing suspicion around BGM, she knows it and yet claims that they haven't pulled her in for an interview. So I think her comments to the media are a bit more than wanting attention or cuddles from the police. I think she has been saying, " I know you have suspected me, well here I am, come and ask me your questions instead of hinting at it in the media." IMO
Last year a photo came across the desks of NSW detectives showing a young boy and a woman in a McDonald's in Central Queensland.
The boy looked eerily similar to William, and the woman he was with looked like his grandmother, BGM* (name changed by me).
William's complicated background prevents reporting of certain aspects of his family life. However BGM*(name changed by me) is not the grandmother who lived at the Kendall house where William disappeared from.
Fairfax Media reported last year that the hopes of detectives were dashed when police on the ground in Queensland confirmed the mother and boy were not who they hoped.
BGM* (name changed by me) had already been tagged as a person of interest in the investigation, a suggestion she strenuously disputes.
Frogwell, I'd feel safer if you used non-name-related initials like BGM.
What category of medical condition would be blanked out for the recording? Something that seems of a more permanent nature and occurrs to the FFC before asthma. My reasoning being if he had a cold that day or flu or bronchitis, why would it be blanked out of the recording? IMO
edited, should I edit the article that names her as well?
Thank you. Well, maybe you could make your point with a smaller snippet that excluded the name? The link is there for those who want more detail.
I get you but the whole point of my post was to show that she had been named in the media as a POI. re-edit, name change to BGM, done.
Substitute with "<name of BGM>"?
That sounds reasonable. Perhaps/probably anything of a permanent nature would have been blanked for privacy. It might have been something with behavioural implications. Anyway we know William was being a handful that day, and on average a kidnapper would be less tolerant than carers. So that might have placed him at extra risk.
A diagnosis of a behavioural issue takes months to a year. WT was only being looked at by a community service worker within the month before he went missing and they can't make a diagnosis, only refer on for a more specialised review by a medical practitioner. I am not trying to pry into WT's medical history for the sake of it but to explore the idea if there could have been an underlying condition that may have endangered him that day. Wild guess here but I am guessing about epilepsy, due to the neighbor saying that the FFC had said, either he has hit his head and he can't reply or he has been taken. That would maybe indicate that he could have been prone to a seizure. Or even childhood diabetes. IMO
The dates of the articles.
The ACA interview was about the 24 August 2016.
4:40 the BGM says she is stunned that the detectives think she is somehow responsible.
1o September 2016 there were 600 poi's.
BGM strenuously denied she had been tagged as a poi
19 January 2018
BGM is quoted
"A lot of people have made money going on television talking about William and me. I'm still a 'suspect' and the police have yet to sit down and have a proper chat with me and find out what I know.
Stunning revelations in William Tyrrell case
I am very curious as to what she knows. Will we hear in August?
RSBM - I'm a little confused as to why she would think she was a suspect even though she hasn't had a 'sit down' with the Police. Is she assuming?
But, it seems she has given a statement as mentioned at the Inquest.
Lia Harris on Twitter
Lia HarrisVerified account
The court heard William’s biological grandmother told police the biological father called her that morning and said “something doesn’t feel right” and he wasn’t going to work. He says he doesn’t remember the conversation. @10Daily @10NewsFirst
They hadn't sat down and told her she wasn't a suspect? And all about the progress of the case to prove they didn't suspect her? Could be she wanted information as much as or more than attention.
Hmmm - she really does confuse me. Why would you assume you are a suspect?
In the statement, the birth mother recalled what she did in Sydney on the day her son disappeared, including a phone call she may have had with William’s grandmother and her trip to the shops to buy baby products.
William Tyrrell's birth mother was warned toddler had ‘a black eye from accidental fall’ before she saw him for the final time – as its revealed the boy was in a 'neglectful state' after his birth parents took him on the run
I have seen the smh article posted before except instead of the word POI it has used the word suspect. I think she had general cause to feel she was suspected by police by what the article that I posted said. A child who looked like WT and a woman that looked like her had their picture taken in QLD and police investigated it. Then her "friend" who she was applying for housing with, who had links to known POI's was put out in the MSM. I think at the very least it's a reasonable assumption to make that she thinks the police see her as a suspect. IMO