Current Disappearance of 3yo William Tyrrell Pt 3 * Coroner's Hearings Concluded

[Kurve]

Continued from PART 2

Criminal charges:

• Apprehended Violence Orders on both (AVOs)
• Lying to the NSW Crime Commission on former foster mother *Not Guilty
• Lying to the NSW Crime Commission on former foster father *Not Guilty
• 2 x charges of assault against a child on former foster mother *Guilty
• 1 x charge of assault against a child on former foster father *Not Guilty
• Stalking &/or Intimidation on FF *Guilty Overturned on Appeal
• Stalking &/or Intimidation on FM *Guilty
• Dummy bidding real estate fraud *Guilty

TIMELINE

Where's William Tyrrell? - The Ch 10 podcast (under Coroner's subpoena)

Operation Arkstone

Please type names out in full for those who are not covered by suppression orders.

For those covered by suppression orders, please use the following to indicate:

WT - William Tyrrell
FM - Foster Mother
FF - Foster Father
FGM - Foster Grandmother
FD - Foster Daughter
FPs - Foster Parents

Up to you if you wish to refer to them as former fosters but please write it in full, strictly using the above. No deviations.

Other initials posters will use informally but should not are:

BCR - Batar Creek Road
FA - Frank Abbott
MW - Michelle White
SFR - Strike Force Rosann
AMS - Anne Maree Sharpley
CCR - Cobb and Co Road
GO - Geoff Owens
One even reduced bike riding to - BR
COG - Consciousness of guilt. Like WHO KNEW?

 

[Earls Smother]

Thx for clarification.

I’m GraceE. The E is first letter on my surname which, given the nutter behaviour of the three stooges, will remain secret.

What about when you were paulineberyl or Pauline 23081934?

 

[GraceE]

What about when you were paulineberyl or Pauline 23081934?

You do realise I hope you can search member names?

 

[winyhill]

I instead think they were intentionally trying to prove FM lied that she took the trip at all and Peter the truckie goes a long way to proving that.

What rubbish. What do you know about proof?
They would be laughed out of court if they tried to say that. Have you heard of reasonable doubt?
All his testimony proved was he didn't recall seeing her.
You can't prove a negative.
You have come up with some mad ideas, Pauline, but this takes the cake Suggesting that the truck driver's evidence proved she didn't take the drive.
Perhaps someone on here who knows about court evidence can explain to you why you are wrong.

 

[GraceE]

What rubbish. What do you know about proof?
They would be laughed out of court if they tried to say that. Have you heard of reasonable doubt?
All his testimony proved was he didn't recall seeing her.
You can't prove a negative.
You have come up with some mad ideas, Pauline, but this takes the cake Suggesting that the truck driver's evidence proved she didn't take the drive.
Perhaps someone on here who knows about court evidence can explain to you why you are wrong.

She said she drove to a riding school to look for W which is at that corner too. Diagonally opposite the bush tract they searched. So she didn’t go where she said she did nor to where SFR had signalled she had to take a lifeless W.

Double whammy. Proves she didn’t take W nor go where she said she did.

So Q. Who took W and where and when?

Will she change her testimony AGAIN and now say there was another trip?

 

[Lady O]

From what I understand on my reading, the police almost always have a clear heads up of what a witness intends to discuss at an inquest including content.

If that is true then the SFR wanted to hear Peter the truckie trash their entire theory of the FM drive to Cobb & Co with the body. The people who think FM was involved after 9.37 must accept that. Why would SFR do that? Think about it. Why?

I instead think they were intentionally trying to prove FM lied that she took the trip at all and Peter the truckie goes a long way to proving that.

SFR have determined a definite time for Crabbes car 10.08 to 10.13. How did they possibly come to that gap when Crabbes were 30 minutes apart on their testimony? There must be something we aren’t privy to which narrows this gap then.

BBM I can't see that "Peter The Truckie" gave evidence at the Inquest. Do you have any transcript of reporters at the court to confirm this?

 

[GraceE]

BBM I can't see that "Peter The Truckie" gave evidence at the Inquest. Do you have any transcript of reporters at the court to confirm this?

Detail provided on thread at time of inquest hearing and since when it was discussed. Mentioned just recently too I recall. What he saw in town. The suspicions he had about a woman in car behind him. What cars he saw on trip. The reason to go there for delivery. No sorry I don’t have that detail with step by step chronological detail but it is on thread and can be easily found with a thread search.

His testimony was intentionally building a view that he was very very observant because of the detailed comments about the woman parked behind him in town. How her being there was out of ordinary

The testimony was in my view laced with detail that was seeking to prove he was a highly observant person who noticed everything. That was window dressing to satisfy everyone who reads that he wouldn’t miss a thing. That in turn suited the SFR true theory to prove FM never went where she said she did. Prove the negative contrary to what Winy asserts

Why would they want to prove a negative? Because they have to close arguments that FM went anywhere in car. They want to prove who really was heard at 10.08 to 10.13 in my virw

Conjecture and opinion on case analysis

 

[christine spence]

Here we go with more Leon the Liar antics. Just because you quoted one early article (16th of Sept from the Daily Fail) saying the dogs didn't detect any scent on the property, doesn't make it correct.

You also state "The initial report is probably the most accurate", which, if you knew anything about police investigations, is highly unlikely to be the case. The police will release what suits them and when it suits them.

There have been multiple sources confirming that his scent was found on the property. Here is just 2:

ABC 17 Nov 2021
Police dogs were brought to the scene shortly after William disappeared in 2014 and they detected his scent but only within the property's boundaries.

Michael Sheather Sept 6, 2015
Police dogs were brought in and they managed to find William’s scent, but only within the boundaries of the backyard.

Stop your misleading bullshit.

 

[Lady O]

Detail provided on thread at time of inquest hearing and since when it was discussed. Mentioned just recently too I recall. What he saw in town. The suspicions he had about a woman in car behind him. What cars he saw on trip. The reason to go there for delivery. No sorry I don’t have that detail with step by step chronological detail but it is on thread and can be easily found with a thread search.

His testimony was intentionally building a view that he was very very observant because of the detailed comments about the woman parked behind him in town. How her being there was out of ordinary

The testimony was in my view laced with detail that was seeking to prove he was a highly observant person who noticed everything. That was window dressing to satisfy everyone who reads that he wouldn’t miss a thing. That in turn suited the SFR true theory to prove FM never went where she said she did. Prove the negative contrary to what Winy asserts

"THE TRUCK DRIVER

Truck driver Peter Bashkurt was the final witness to appear at the inquest into the three-year-old’s disappearance from Kendall on the Mid North Coast in September 2014.

On September 12, 2014, Mr Bashkurt was driving his truck to a Cobb and Co Rd property in Kendall to pick up an excavator.

He told the court on Wednesday that he stopped in the neighbouring town of Kew in the morning and saw a black Camry.

He again saw the same car and a blonde woman in Kendall a short while later.

He claimed the car “caught my attention” because she didn’t know what she was doing and when he later heard about William’s disappearance, he passed on the tip to Crime Stoppers and 2GB.

He then met up with the woman, Michelle, whose property he was collecting the excavator from and followed her to Cobb and Co Rd.

There he loaded the yellow excavator onto his truck and snaked his way out of town at low speed.

He turned left onto Batar Creek Rd and saw two cars as he made his way out of town.

He said he was driving at a maximum of 40km/h, telling the court he was “creeping out of the place”.

Mr Bashkurt said he saw a grey ute, which looked like it belonged to a tradie, approaching him.

He told police in a statement that he also saw a black ’80s BMW with a ladder on the roof.

Mr Bashkurt told the court on Wednesday that the BMW may have been dark coloured or “burgundy”.

Police have alleged that the foster mother used her mother’s grey Mazda 3, which does not match either of the vehicles seen by Mr Bashkurt as he made his way out of town, to dump William’s body.

Mr Bashkurt also said while he often used a dashcam, he didn’t have one equipped on that day.

“I wish I did, I didn’t have one on that vehicle that day,” he said."

I didn't record this part of the Inquest, as I remember at the time I was otherwise engaged.

Unfortunately, the article doesn't give a time frame for his presence on Batar Crk Rd, so given that we don't have a difinite time for WT's disappearance, it doesn't seem very strong evidence to prove or disprove whether the drive actually happened.

I can't work out why SFR wanted his evidence which was really no evidence at all that their theory held any validity. To say that one person who may have been in the vicinity at around the time, didn't see anything isn't very convincing.

 

[GraceE]

"THE TRUCK DRIVER

Truck driver Peter Bashkurt was the final witness to appear at the inquest into the three-year-old’s disappearance from Kendall on the Mid North Coast in September 2014.

On September 12, 2014, Mr Bashkurt was driving his truck to a Cobb and Co Rd property in Kendall to pick up an excavator.

He told the court on Wednesday that he stopped in the neighbouring town of Kew in the morning and saw a black Camry.

He again saw the same car and a blonde woman in Kendall a short while later.

He claimed the car “caught my attention” because she didn’t know what she was doing and when he later heard about William’s disappearance, he passed on the tip to Crime Stoppers and 2GB.

He then met up with the woman, Michelle, whose property he was collecting the excavator from and followed her to Cobb and Co Rd.

There he loaded the yellow excavator onto his truck and snaked his way out of town at low speed.

He turned left onto Batar Creek Rd and saw two cars as he made his way out of town.

He said he was driving at a maximum of 40km/h, telling the court he was “creeping out of the place”.

Mr Bashkurt said he saw a grey ute, which looked like it belonged to a tradie, approaching him.

He told police in a statement that he also saw a black ’80s BMW with a ladder on the roof.

Mr Bashkurt told the court on Wednesday that the BMW may have been dark coloured or “burgundy”.

Police have alleged that the foster mother used her mother’s grey Mazda 3, which does not match either of the vehicles seen by Mr Bashkurt as he made his way out of town, to dump William’s body.

Mr Bashkurt also said while he often used a dashcam, he didn’t have one equipped on that day.

“I wish I did, I didn’t have one on that vehicle that day,” he said."

I didn't record this part of the Inquest, as I remember at the time I was otherwise engaged.

Unfortunately, the article doesn't give a time frame for his presence on Batar Crk Rd, so given that we don't have a difinite time for WT's disappearance, it doesn't seem very strong evidence to prove or disprove whether the drive actually happened.

I can't work out why SFR wanted his evidence which was really no evidence at all that their theory held any validity. To say that one person who may have been in the vicinity at around the time, didn't see anything isn't very convincing.

The prior testimony of AMS hearing FF in yard and his arrival home and FM meeting her to START. the search means that 10.30 becomes the pivotal point. That is the time Peter went to that corner. It was after he went missing that she allegedly went looking but clearly that couldn’t be. The sequence of events then unfold without space for a drive.

Did she go looking before she started search? Clearly not. That’s a ridiculous concept. So it appears she was mistaken when she said she went to look for him or was a lie

The problem is she only starred searching after FF arrived home in my opinion

 

[Lady O]

The prior testimony of AMS hearing FF in yard and his arrival home and FM meeting her to START. the search means that 10.30 becomes the pivotal point. That is the time Peter went to that corner. It was after he went missing that she allegedly went looking but clearly that couldn’t be. The sequence of events then unfold without space for a drive.

Did she go looking before she started search? Clearly not. That’s a ridiculous concept. So it appears she was mistaken when she said she went to look for him or was a lie

The theory at the time, was that she jumped into FGM's car and went for the drive shortly after she noticed him missing and before raising the alarm. That is prior to 10.30. When FF arrived home @ ~ 10.35, it was then she began searching the street on foot and raised the alarm with the neighbours. This fitted the accident-cover up theory then being proposed by SFR.

 

[Curious Clues]

"THE TRUCK DRIVER

Truck driver Peter Bashkurt was the final witness to appear at the inquest into the three-year-old’s disappearance from Kendall on the Mid North Coast in September 2014.

On September 12, 2014, Mr Bashkurt was driving his truck to a Cobb and Co Rd property in Kendall to pick up an excavator.

He told the court on Wednesday that he stopped in the neighbouring town of Kew in the morning and saw a black Camry.

He again saw the same car and a blonde woman in Kendall a short while later.

He claimed the car “caught my attention” because she didn’t know what she was doing and when he later heard about William’s disappearance, he passed on the tip to Crime Stoppers and 2GB.

He then met up with the woman, Michelle, whose property he was collecting the excavator from and followed her to Cobb and Co Rd.

There he loaded the yellow excavator onto his truck and snaked his way out of town at low speed.

He turned left onto Batar Creek Rd and saw two cars as he made his way out of town.

He said he was driving at a maximum of 40km/h, telling the court he was “creeping out of the place”.

Mr Bashkurt said he saw a grey ute, which looked like it belonged to a tradie, approaching him.

He told police in a statement that he also saw a black ’80s BMW with a ladder on the roof.

Mr Bashkurt told the court on Wednesday that the BMW may have been dark coloured or “burgundy”.

Police have alleged that the foster mother used her mother’s grey Mazda 3, which does not match either of the vehicles seen by Mr Bashkurt as he made his way out of town, to dump William’s body.

Mr Bashkurt also said while he often used a dashcam, he didn’t have one equipped on that day.

“I wish I did, I didn’t have one on that vehicle that day,” he said."

I didn't record this part of the Inquest, as I remember at the time I was otherwise engaged.

Unfortunately, the article doesn't give a time frame for his presence on Batar Crk Rd, so given that we don't have a difinite time for WT's disappearance, it doesn't seem very strong evidence to prove or disprove whether the drive actually happened.

I can't work out why SFR wanted his evidence which was really no evidence at all that their theory held any validity. To say that one person who may have been in the vicinity at around the time, didn't see anything isn't very convincing.

Hence why the FM refuses to give a time for her drive. She’s intelligent remember.

But she’s pretty limited in her timeline though isn’t she? According to her it has to be between about 10:15 to 11:05. And I’m pretty sure you will find that Peter’s truck is the only one known to be on that road around that time.

Not hard to work out what trucks were in the vicinity.

Or is it a ghost truck?

 

[Lady O]

Hence why the FM refuses to give a time for her drive. She’s intelligent remember.

But she’s pretty limited in her timeline though isn’t she? According to her it has to be between about 10:15 to 11:05. And I’m pretty sure you will find that Peter’s truck is the only one known to be on that road around that time.

Not hard to work out what trucks were in the vicinity.

Or is it a ghost truck?

I think it would be drawing a long bow to say that Peter's was the only truck on that road in that time frame.

 

[Inspector Small]

Photoshop.

There is a real consequence of detecting a photoshop of any of the images. If not performed by the police then it points the finger at the person(s) who delivered the photos to the police.

It would immediately bring into question everything they have claimed.

I hope the police have looked at these images carefully.

 

[Lady O]

Photoshop.

There is a real consequence of detecting a photoshop of any of the images. If not performed by the police then it points the finger at the person(s) who delivered the photos to the police.

It would immediately bring into question everything they have claimed.

I hope the police have looked at these images carefully.

If the photos were sent for forensic testing, which is what I think the Coroner asked for, then those Police would be well qualified to detect any photo shop or alterations to the data on the photos and in the camera.

 

[Inspector Small]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...olice-say-chances-of-survival-are-diminishing

A direct quote from the officer in charge.

"Neither police sniffer dogs nor cadaver dogs had been able to pick up any sign of the boy, Fehon said."

But apparently the dogs changed their minds by the time of the inquest.

I think the testimony was a hot pile of dog shit that fit the theories.

 

[Curious Clues]

I think it would be drawing a long bow to say that Peter's was the only truck on that road in that time frame.

I don’t.

Why would they bother putting Peter Bashkurt on the stand if his testimony had absolutely no evidentiary value?

Makes no sense.

 

[GraceE]

Photoshop.

There is a real consequence of detecting a photoshop of any of the images. If not performed by the police then it points the finger at the person(s) who delivered the photos to the police.

It would immediately bring into question everything they have claimed.

I hope the police have looked at

Copyright owners and authors are most definitely under suspicion if photo shop
edits are detected in their photos. The police are careful. They ask for a source / link from where a reported photo has been obtained. They then repeat their own forensic analysis to confirm the results claimed. That is known.

For a reporting party to have confidence that the results are the sane and in multiple MSM examples you simply repeat the examination to replicate the results in those multiple sources. Have

 

[Inspector Small]

Here we go with more Leon the Liar antics. Just because you quoted one early article (16th of Sept from the Daily Fail) saying the dogs didn't detect any scent on the property, doesn't make it correct.

You also state "The initial report is probably the most accurate", which, if you knew anything about police investigations, is highly unlikely to be the case. The police will release what suits them and when it suits them.

There have been multiple sources confirming that his scent was found on the property. Here is just 2:

ABC 17 Nov 2021
Police dogs were brought to the scene shortly after William disappeared in 2014 and they detected his scent but only within the property's boundaries.

Michael Sheather Sept 6, 2015
Police dogs were brought in and they managed to find William’s scent, but only within the boundaries of the backyard.

Stop your misleading bullshit.

"Neither police sniffer dogs nor cadaver dogs had been able to pick up any sign of the boy, Fehon said."
September 15 2014.

What changed the dog's mind?

I don't think the dogs changed their mind. Perhaps police had their minds changed to explain why they pursued someone when they had no indication at all that William Tyrrell was even there.

 

[winyhill]

"THE TRUCK DRIVER

Truck driver Peter Bashkurt was the final witness to appear at the inquest into the three-year-old’s disappearance from Kendall on the Mid North Coast in September 2014.

On September 12, 2014, Mr Bashkurt was driving his truck to a Cobb and Co Rd property in Kendall to pick up an excavator.

He told the court on Wednesday that he stopped in the neighbouring town of Kew in the morning and saw a black Camry.

He again saw the same car and a blonde woman in Kendall a short while later.

He claimed the car “caught my attention” because she didn’t know what she was doing and when he later heard about William’s disappearance, he passed on the tip to Crime Stoppers and 2GB.

He then met up with the woman, Michelle, whose property he was collecting the excavator from and followed her to Cobb and Co Rd.

There he loaded the yellow excavator onto his truck and snaked his way out of town at low speed.

He turned left onto Batar Creek Rd and saw two cars as he made his way out of town.

He said he was driving at a maximum of 40km/h, telling the court he was “creeping out of the place”.

Mr Bashkurt said he saw a grey ute, which looked like it belonged to a tradie, approaching him.

He told police in a statement that he also saw a black ’80s BMW with a ladder on the roof.

Mr Bashkurt told the court on Wednesday that the BMW may have been dark coloured or “burgundy”.

Police have alleged that the foster mother used her mother’s grey Mazda 3, which does not match either of the vehicles seen by Mr Bashkurt as he made his way out of town, to dump William’s body.

Mr Bashkurt also said while he often used a dashcam, he didn’t have one equipped on that day.

“I wish I did, I didn’t have one on that vehicle that day,” he said."

I didn't record this part of the Inquest, as I remember at the time I was otherwise engaged.

Unfortunately, the article doesn't give a time frame for his presence on Batar Crk Rd, so given that we don't have a difinite time for WT's disappearance, it doesn't seem very strong evidence to prove or disprove whether the drive actually happened.

I can't work out why SFR wanted his evidence which was really no evidence at all that their theory held any validity. To say that one person who may have been in the vicinity at around the time, didn't see anything isn't very convincing.

Thank you for that, very comprehensive.
It doesn't prove anything one way or the other.
And of course he remembered the black Camry. Truckie will always remember someone who parked him in.
Time was not exactly pinpointed, and he was only on that section of road for about 2 minutes. (Each way)

"THE TRUCK DRIVER

Truck driver Peter Bashkurt was the final witness to appear at the inquest into the three-year-old’s disappearance from Kendall on the Mid North Coast in September 2014.

On September 12, 2014, Mr Bashkurt was driving his truck to a Cobb and Co Rd property in Kendall to pick up an excavator.

He told the court on Wednesday that he stopped in the neighbouring town of Kew in the morning and saw a black Camry.

He again saw the same car and a blonde woman in Kendall a short while later.

He claimed the car “caught my attention” because she didn’t know what she was doing and when he later heard about William’s disappearance, he passed on the tip to Crime Stoppers and 2GB.

He then met up with the woman, Michelle, whose property he was collecting the excavator from and followed her to Cobb and Co Rd.

There he loaded the yellow excavator onto his truck and snaked his way out of town at low speed.

He turned left onto Batar Creek Rd and saw two cars as he made his way out of town.

He said he was driving at a maximum of 40km/h, telling the court he was “creeping out of the place”.

Mr Bashkurt said he saw a grey ute, which looked like it belonged to a tradie, approaching him.

He told police in a statement that he also saw a black ’80s BMW with a ladder on the roof.

Mr Bashkurt told the court on Wednesday that the BMW may have been dark coloured or “burgundy”.

Police have alleged that the foster mother used her mother’s grey Mazda 3, which does not match either of the vehicles seen by Mr Bashkurt as he made his way out of town, to dump William’s body.

Mr Bashkurt also said while he often used a dashcam, he didn’t have one equipped on that day.

“I wish I did, I didn’t have one on that vehicle that day,” he said."

I didn't record this part of the Inquest, as I remember at the time I was otherwise engaged.

Unfortunately, the article doesn't give a time frame for his presence on Batar Crk Rd, so given that we don't have a difinite time for WT's disappearance, it doesn't seem very strong evidence to prove or disprove whether the drive actually happened.

I can't work out why SFR wanted his evidence which was really no evidence at all that their theory held any validity. To say that one person who may have been in the vicinity at around the time, didn't see anything isn't very convincing.

I wonder who the blonde in the Camry was. The one who cant park! This has never been clarified, but surely she would have either come forward of her own bat or SFR would have tracked her down.
But I remember testimony from the inquest, (2019 version) that they still had dozens of cars past that camera that they were not able to identify.

 

[winyhill]

I don’t.

Why would they bother putting Peter Bashkurt on the stand if his testimony had absolutely no evidentiary value?

Makes no sense.

Because he was the only one they were able to identify. And they wouldn't have identified him if he hadn't thought the blonde woman was suspicious and phoned in to the radio station.

 

[GraceE]

We are back on photos. Don’t particularly want to go there but will make a few simple remark

The incriminating images (whatever their worth as evidence) exist in multiple MSM photos by different organisations and the results each time are identical. Most edits are enlargements and lightening and nothing more. Nothing that changes the character of what is produced. The quality varies. What you see originates from the source product. It is very easy to repeat the process once you know source unaffected by filters and non publication orders. Anyone can do it. An interesting dichotomy arises as between the roar shot and the entire rest. The roar shot shows 10% which I assume is non publication order in some cases satisfied by filters. The rest have no non publication order and easily produce identical outcome each time save variances in quality

This mechanism and methodology produced outcomes that sheet home to author and only author that is why you use the approach to cross check results and eliminate error

Conjecture and opinion on case analysis

 

[Inspector Small]

"Neither police sniffer dogs nor cadaver dogs had been able to pick up any sign of the boy, Fehon said."
September 15 2014.

What changed the dog's mind?

I don't think the dogs changed their mind. Perhaps police had to save face by changing their statements and explain why they pursued someone when they had no indication at all that William Tyrrell was even there.

Sniffer dogs = No William Tryrrell. 75% reliable
No eyewitnesses to William Tyrrell. Reinforces this.

Can someone prove William Tyrrell made it to Kendall.

When the photos are proven to be a concoction and they will be, You will have to move in the direction he was not actually there.

Look at the journey between Heatherbrae and Kendall. There are clear leads which the police ignored. This journey should have always been the focus.

 

[Curious Clues]

Because he was the only one they were able to identify. And they wouldn't have identified him if he hadn't thought the blonde woman was suspicious and phoned in to the radio station.

Umm, you’re forgetting that FM told police she allegedly saw a truck and the truck driver acknowledged her.

Pretty sure that would have prompted police to do a truck search for that morning. And if they didn’t, Laidlaw’s team certainly would have.

 

[GraceE]

Sniffer dogs = No William Tryrrell. 75% reliable
No eyewitnesses to William Tyrrell. Reinforces this.

Can someone prove William Tyrrell made it to Kendall.

When the photos are proven to be a concoction and they will be, You will have to move in the direction he was not actually there.

Look at the journey between Heatherbrae and Kendall. There are clear leads which the police ignored. This journey should have always been the focus.

The neighbour hearing children (plural) playing. That is the only tie to 12th. The FD was spoken to by police twice and referred to WT leaving the verandah in search of FF then elaborated and indicated by pointing where she went around the corner in search. You have to disregard FGM FM and FF as being there and accordingly under suspicion

In addition if the night before is the trouble then the whole FGM debacle becomes a red herring. I don’t accept that it is

 

[winyhill]

Sniffer dogs = No William Tryrrell. 75% reliable
No eyewitnesses to William Tyrrell. Reinforces this.

Can someone prove William Tyrrell made it to Kendall.

When the photos are proven to be a concoction and they will be, You will have to move in the direction he was not actually there.

Look at the journey between Heatherbrae and Kendall. There are clear leads which the police ignored. This journey should have always been the focus.

That would be a good theory, except that it is only you who says the dogs didn't pick up his scent.

The Police have testified they DID. And spent 11 years now chasing suspects in Kendall. And digging up Kendall.