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

[JLZ]

A circumstantial alibi for a circumstantial investigation?

A very small accumulation of weak evidence does not make for a strong alibi. imo

I think it's strong evidence but not leakproof. And the alibi does become stronger with the accumulation of such evidence, provided the sources are independent of each other.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

BS did get the receipt from his bank statement asap, it's not his problem that police didn't do a proper investigation asap, but months later when memories fade, IMO.

Police often don’t investigate thoroughly and they collect only the evidence that supports their theory. They get criticised in Supreme Courts regularly for this. I have a matter at the moment where my client is charged with failing to do something he was legally required to do. We have written to police to invite them to inspect my clients property so they can see he had met requirements and we have evidence that he met requirements at the time he was charged. They have ignored that invitation and he’s now being prosecuted for something prosecution can never prove. Of course, prosecution will withdraw the charges when they find out, but if it was properly investigated in the first place, police would have realised that my client didn’t commit an offence.

It’s disappointing that this has happened in a large scale and well resourced investigation though.

 

[Karinna]

A circumstantial alibi for a circumstantial investigation?

A very small accumulation of weak evidence does not make for a strong alibi. imo

Alibi or not, when arresting and charging someone with a crime you better have solid evidence, or the case will fall apart at Trial, and a jury will acquit if not convinced someone committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Just my observation from following Trials.

 

[Karinna]

Police often don’t investigate thoroughly and they collect only the evidence that supports their theory. They get criticised in Supreme Courts regularly for this. I have a matter at the moment where my client is charged with failing to do something he was legally required to do. We have written to police to invite them to inspect my clients property so they can see he had met requirements and we have evidence that he met requirements at the time he was charged. They have ignored that invitation and he’s now being prosecuted for something prosecution can never prove. Of course, prosecution will withdraw the charges when they find out, but if it was properly investigated in the first place, police would have realised that my client didn’t commit an offence.

It’s disappointing that this has happened in a large scale and well resourced investigation though.

BBM, Do you mean in this case CG? Or in the case you have mentioned?

 

[Cleaver Greene]

Alibi or not, when arresting and charging someone with a crime you better have solid evidence, or the case will fall apart at Trial, and a jury will acquit if not convinced someone committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Just my observation from following Trials.

And more than just a case falling apart at trial, if there is evidence that police didn’t investigate properly, a defendant can sue the state for maladministration or, in very extreme circumstances, malicious prosecution. Most maladministration claims are settled out of court so we don’t hear about them very often. But they are becoming increasingly more common.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

BBM, Do you mean in this case CG? Or in the case you have mentioned?

I meant in the WT investigation. I can understand (but not condone) failure to investigate in minor criminal charges. Police are very underresourced. But the WT investigation was very well resourced. There is no excuse for failing to follow up on every bit of information given by a POI.

 

[Karinna]

I meant in the WT investigation. I can understand (but not condone) failure to investigate in minor criminal charges. Police are very underresourced. But the WT investigation was very well resourced. There is no excuse for failing to follow up on every bit of information given by a POI.

Yes agree, and thanks for clarifying.

 

[SouthAussie]

I think it's strong evidence but not leakproof. And the alibi does become stronger with the accumulation of such evidence, provided the sources are independent of each other.

I really am not debating your opinion, because we are all entitled to our opinions ...... but as far as I can tell there is only one piece of alibi-evidence that may be worth a grain of salt. And that is the friend who said he was at an assembly where the child got an award, he hi-fived the child, and he saw Spedding there.
He just doesn't recall which assembly it was. He thinks it was the one where they sang Hallelujah.

 

[Karinna]

And more than just a case falling apart at trial, if there is evidence that police didn’t investigate properly, a defendant can sue the state for maladministration or, in very extreme circumstances, malicious prosecution. Most maladministration claims are settled out of court so we don’t hear about them very often. But they are becoming increasingly more common.

Right, and the reason BS's lawyer is suing for Misfeasance and Malicious prosecution from what was stated in MSM.
(quote)
Mr Spedding's lawyer Peter O'Brien on Friday confirmed to AAP legal action would be taken against police on the grounds of malicious prosecution, misfeasance in public office and collateral abuse of process.
Spedding to sue NSW Police over treatment in Tyrrell case

 

[sleepinoz]

I meant in the WT investigation. I can understand (but not condone) failure to investigate in minor criminal charges. Police are very underresourced. But the WT investigation was very well resourced. There is no excuse for failing to follow up on every bit of information given by a POI.

I agree that the WT investigation was well resourced, but was it resourced enough for the amount of information that was received? I doubt it, at one point they had thousands of tip offs, POI's, information, statements to take etc - these things, well resourced or not, can take a very long time to investigate.

BS wasn't the only person that had his property searched, he wasn't the only POI, he was however ID'd by the public in a small country town and MSM got a hold of his details - hence the publicity. IMO

 

[SouthAussie]

"I thought it was odd as it is not a street that people would cruise up to pick up children. My personal thought is that it is targeted and not random," he said of William's disappearance in the same statement.

It was said a long time ago by a criminal profiler that the abductor would have had to have a reason to be in the street at that time. Either living there, visiting there or working there.

When we consider the POIs who have appeared or are scheduled to appear at the inquest, they are all people who lived and/or worked in the area at the time.



A criminal profiler helping in the year-long search for missing boy William Tyrrell has revealed details of his suspected kidnapper and what she says was likely an opportunistic crime.

Sarah Yule says her investigations suggest possible explanations for the then three-year-old’s disappearance....

“So if no one but William’s parents and grandmother knew in advance of his visit to Kendall, then you would have to have some other reason to be there and take that opportunity; either visiting, residing or working in the vicinity.”

William Tyrrell: suspected kidnapper was 'visiting, residing or working locally'

 

[interested64]

I really am not debating your opinion, because we are all entitled to our opinions ...... but as far as I can tell there is only one piece of alibi-evidence that may be worth a grain of salt. And that is the friend who said he was at an assembly where the child got an award, he hi-fived the child, and he saw Spedding there.
He just doesn't recall which assembly it was. He thinks it was the one where they sang Hallelujah.

so is this the same friend who now says he did see bs..

 

[Karinna]

I agree that the WT investigation was well resourced, but was it resourced enough for the amount of information that was received? I doubt it, at one point they had thousands of tip offs, POI's, information, statements to take etc - these things, well resourced or not, can take a very long time to investigate.

BS wasn't the only person that had his property searched, he wasn't the only POI, he was however ID'd by the public in a small country town and MSM got a hold of his details - hence the publicity. IMO

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.

 

[SouthAussie]

so is this the same friend who now says he did see bs..

I think he always said he saw Spedding, he just doesn't recall which assembly it was. It was an assembly where the grandson received an award. But that still didn't clear Spedding, so perhaps the grandson has received several awards over time.

 

[JLZ]

so is this the same friend who now says he did see bs..

Not the same person who changed his mind about the van, if that's what you mean.

 

[interested64]

I think he always said he saw Spedding, he just doesn't recall which assembly it was. It was an assembly where the grandson received an award. But that still didn't clear Spedding, so perhaps the grandson has received several awards over time.

yes thats what it thought,so who is now saying they did see him there that morning ?

 

[Karinna]

We have read about BS alibis regarding the cafe and the assembly, but why has there been no evidence by police about BS cell phone pings as to his location that morning? They would of checked that wouldn't they? The cell phone locations can also be important as to where someone was at in a given time that is in question.

 

[SouthAussie]

yes thats what it thought,so who is now saying they did see him there that morning ?

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.

 

[interested64]

yes thats what it thought,so who is now saying they did see him there that morning ?

Alibi or not, when arresting and charging someone with a crime you better have solid evidence, or the case will fall apart at Trial, and a jury will acquit if not convinced someone committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Just my observation from following Trials.

We have read about BS alibis regarding the cafe and the assembly, but why has there been no evidence by police about BS cell phone pings as to his location that morning? They would of checked that wouldn't they? The cell phone locations can also be important as to where someone was at in a given time that is in question.

agree with that,that is what i dont get as far as WHY hasnt anything like that been said,like with the bio family and the foster family..something musnt add up,even the lawyer hasnt said anything concrete imo

 

[interested64]

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.

We have read about BS alibis regarding the cafe and the assembly, but why has there been no evidence by police about BS cell phone pings as to his location that morning? They would of checked that wouldn't they? The cell phone locations can also be important as to where someone was at in a given time that is in question.

agree,one would hope so as this could of ended right in the beginning instead of 5 years later.....also going on this...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 ?