Australia Australia - William Tyrrell Disappeared While Playing in Yard - Kendall (NSW) #78

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
10 News in Qld have reported on the news tonight that the Foster Parents are set to challenge the previous charges in court, as early as next week ???

I can’t find a link to this information as yet … except that it was on the evening news … and confirmed by a family member …..

Does anyone else know anymore about this ???

IMO
I have found the news video. It can be accessed via the 9Now app, and look for Sydney news 29th May 2024. The quick mention of the fosters appealing their criminal conviction is on the video at 12.49. There is no listing on the NSW Registry site, even using their initials. Rather unfair if the public wanted to attend to see justice at work, after all they are the same as other criminals now?

1717051883935.jpeg

1717051930897.jpeg
 
I wonder what matter they are appealing, as it seems that the female foster carer had pleaded guilty….

Apparently the appeal is next week.

Media report from March 2024:-

“The former foster parents of missing boy William Tyrrell have been handed 12-month good behaviour bonds and convictions over the intimidation of a different child.

The two were also fined $1,500 each over a dummy bid placed at a real estate auction.

Magistrate Susan McIntyre, who listened to hours of secret recordings during a contested hearing, found the man intimidated the other child by berating them in a car as they were sobbing one morning, while the woman intimidated them on two occasions by threatening a slap.

The woman also pleaded guilty to two counts of assault after she hit the child with a wooden spoon and kicked them in the thigh.

In sentencing, the magistrate noted the man's verbal intimidation was of a tone and volume that it caused the recording device to distort.

She said it was towards the lower end of examples of intimidation, however that was tempered by the fact the charge was a domestic violence offence.

Magistrate McIntyre ruled that convictions for each former foster parent were warranted.

The former foster mother was cleared over several other occasions alleged to have constituted intimidation, while her partner was cleared of an assault allegation which the magistrate found constituted lawful correction.”

 
I wonder what matter they are appealing, as it seems that the female foster carer had pleaded guilty….

Apparently the appeal is next week.

Media report from March 2024:-

“The former foster parents of missing boy William Tyrrell have been handed 12-month good behaviour bonds and convictions over the intimidation of a different child.

The two were also fined $1,500 each over a dummy bid placed at a real estate auction.

Magistrate Susan McIntyre, who listened to hours of secret recordings during a contested hearing, found the man intimidated the other child by berating them in a car as they were sobbing one morning, while the woman intimidated them on two occasions by threatening a slap.

The woman also pleaded guilty to two counts of assault after she hit the child with a wooden spoon and kicked them in the thigh.

In sentencing, the magistrate noted the man's verbal intimidation was of a tone and volume that it caused the recording device to distort.

She said it was towards the lower end of examples of intimidation, however that was tempered by the fact the charge was a domestic violence offence.

Magistrate McIntyre ruled that convictions for each former foster parent were warranted.

The former foster mother was cleared over several other occasions alleged to have constituted intimidation, while her partner was cleared of an assault allegation which the magistrate found constituted lawful correction.”

MOO - I have considered that the FM and MFC might be appealing the 'intimidation' charges .... especially in the light of the fact that they are in addition to her guilty plea of the 'assaults', and they have been convicted of all charges:


"Despite their lawyers pushing for the matters to be dealt with by way of non-convictions, Ms McIntyre convicted them both and sentenced them to 12-month orders to be served in the community."

JMO - If that sentencing of community corrections order was directed to be served at a 'foster care facility', could they be trusted to not cause some harm to any of the children there!
 
MOO - I have considered that the FM and MFC might be appealing the 'intimidation' charges .... especially in the light of the fact that they are in addition to her guilty plea of the 'assaults', and they have been convicted of all charges:


"Despite their lawyers pushing for the matters to be dealt with by way of non-convictions, Ms McIntyre convicted them both and sentenced them to 12-month orders to be served in the community."

JMO - If that sentencing of community corrections order was directed to be served at a 'foster care facility', could they be trusted to not cause some harm to any of the children there!
BBM - Even if someone pleads guilty, they are entitled to appeal their sentence. IMO they are likely appealing to have a conviction not recorded
 
They shouldn’t be protected! You’re right
"But although their welfare does not provide any basis for the court’s intervention, their interests are not irrelevant, because an impact on them may have consequences, direct or indirect, for the welfare of <modsnip - name of protected child>, whose interests are relevant."

Basically its just a 'protecting their identity helps protect the child's identity'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"But although their welfare does not provide any basis for the court’s intervention, their interests are not irrelevant, because an impact on them may have consequences, direct or indirect, for the welfare of <modsnip - name of protected child>, whose interests are relevant."

Basically its just a 'protecting their identity helps protect the child's identity'.
I understand, but I don't have understanding. The fosters are too much protected, always in the name of William or his sister. Too easy, to avoid witnesses to anything and too easy, to have your name protected re business and reputation. MOO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When the fosters do appeal both of their convictions next week, it seems that if a conviction is placed on them by a magistrate, which it was, by Magistrate McIntyre, an appeal must go before someone higher, such as a judge, and also they could end up having a harsher sentence placed on them, which makes it all very interesting. Remembering that the FFFC did not plead guilty until the first day of the hearing.

I wonder why they risk appealing their convictions, when the magistrate was very clear in her thoughts on the charges, that I have posted previously here. Massive legal fees again for an appeal. I wonder if it is so the fosters can travel overseas? As there are some countries who don’t allow you entry if you have a criminal conviction. USA can refuse entry if you have been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude which covers domestic violence. Similar rules apply to other popular destinations including Canada, UK, China and Japan.

IMHO



 
When the fosters do appeal both of their convictions next week, it seems that if a conviction is placed on them by a magistrate, which it was, by Magistrate McIntyre, an appeal must go before someone higher, such as a judge, and also they could end up having a harsher sentence placed on them, which makes it all very interesting. Remembering that the FFFC did not plead guilty until the first day of the hearing.

I wonder why they risk appealing their convictions, when the magistrate was very clear in her thoughts on the charges, that I have posted previously here. Massive legal fees again for an appeal. I wonder if it is so the fosters can travel overseas? As there are some countries who don’t allow you entry if you have a criminal conviction. USA can refuse entry if you have been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude which covers domestic violence. Similar rules apply to other popular destinations including Canada, UK, China and Japan.

IMHO



The following is a link to the Magistrate's sentencing and her comments about the offences:
https://www.news.com.au/national/ns...e/news-story/03089ec7f12cbe630fd127742ed0ed91 BBM:

“Ms McIntyre also noted that the foster mother had not come into contact with the justice system before she was charged, describing her as an “admired foster parent”.

William Tyrrell’s foster mother and father were on Wednesday sentenced for intimidating a child.

She said while the assault charges occurred in the context of disciplining a child, it was “never justifiable”.

The foster mother was sentenced to a 12-month community corrections order, while the foster father was handed a 12-month good behaviour bond.

Asked if she agreed to the terms of the order, the foster mother told the court: “Yes”.
_____________________________________________________________

I wonder how this question (And FM's answer) by the Magistrate can be explained: "Asked if she agreed to the terms of the order, the foster mother told the court: “Yes”.
 
We have absolutely no idea what aspect is being appealed.

But it is interesting that the Commissioner of Police has made the request of the ODPP to suspend their review, and the FP have an appeal going almost at the same time.

imo
 
The following is a link to the Magistrate's sentencing and her comments about the offences:
https://www.news.com.au/national/ns...e/news-story/03089ec7f12cbe630fd127742ed0ed91 BBM:

“Ms McIntyre also noted that the foster mother had not come into contact with the justice system before she was charged, describing her as an “admired foster parent”.

William Tyrrell’s foster mother and father were on Wednesday sentenced for intimidating a child.

She said while the assault charges occurred in the context of disciplining a child, it was “never justifiable”.

The foster mother was sentenced to a 12-month community corrections order, while the foster father was handed a 12-month good behaviour bond.

Asked if she agreed to the terms of the order, the foster mother told the court: “Yes”.
_____________________________________________________________

I wonder how this question (And FM's answer) by the Magistrate can be explained: "Asked if she agreed to the terms of the order, the foster mother told the court: “Yes”.
I’m confused why you keep posting about her saying yes to that question?”No”isn’t an option, it’s just a legality to ask the defendant that they understand and agree. It certainly doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to an appeal.
 
I attended court today, and Fosters case has been adjourned until the end of the month, for 1st mention then. They did not appear.
Daily Mail has the next date as follows …

They will next appear for a brief mention at Downing Centre District Court on June 25

 
Daily Mail has the next date as follows …

They will next appear for a brief mention at Downing Centre District Court on June 25

I did hear the next date, but I wasn’t sure if it was allowed to be disclosed, so I kept quiet.
Hehe.

Edit: Gary Jubelin was there today.
 
Last edited:
I've got a feeling there is a book in the making ... maybe to be released once the inquest is over.

imo
You know what SA I think after 10yrs of being on WS discussing Ws case most of us could write a book about W and I would be more interested in reading everyone else’s version of Ws story than that of anyone involved in the case.
 
You know what SA I think after 10yrs of being on WS discussing Ws case most of us could write a book about W and I would be more interested in reading everyone else’s version of Ws story than that of anyone involved in the case.

I think it likely that someone is considering a TV series sometime up the track, but IMO any such series (assuming no criminal or other resolution) would have to portray all of the suggested scenarios. It would be quite a complicated production.
 
Last edited:

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
180
Guests online
2,119
Total visitors
2,299

Forum statistics

Threads
600,418
Messages
18,108,457
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top