Repairman takes to You Tube to protest innocence over William Tyrell’s disappearance 71



View Profile

The 63-year-old washing machine repairman who was named as a “person of interest” in the ongoing case of the disappearance of toddler William Tyrell has recorded a phone video protesting his innocence.

In the short clip, Bill Spadding describes why he visited William’s grandparents’ house and where he was on the day the toddler disappeared.

Mr Spedding was investigated by police in relation to his being at the house to repair a washing machine. His home was searched by police and he was later charged with unrelated historic child sex offences, according to 9 News.

Other persons of interest on the case are former members of two grandparenting support groups.

In the video, Mr Spedding says, “My wife Margaret and I offer the Tyrrell family our sincere commiserations in the disappearance of William Tyrrell,” he said.

“I wish to state that I have no involvement in the disappearance of William Tyrrell”.

At the end, he asks anyone with information to contact Crime Stoppers.

The video was originally posted on a support page for Mr Spedding, and was then shared on to YouTube.

It’s an interesting move by Mr Spedding – and one that shows how strange a world we live in, where a mass audience is available at the press of a button.

Assuming Mr Spedding is innocent, which we must until proven otherwise, we may also assume this is an attempt to stem abuse or disdain in his local community. A false accusation of this kind could destroy a person’s life, after all.

Take a look at the clip below and tell us what you think.


What do you think of the video – would you have done something similar if you were in this situation? 


Starts at 60 Writers

The Starts at 60 writers team seek out interesting topics and write them especially for you.

  1. He may or may not have anything to do with William’s disappearance, but I don’t think the word ‘innocence’ is appropriate for this man. I’m not watching the video.

    1 REPLY
  2. I think he is mentioned every time the case comes up and am sure police would have found something if he had been part of it. I do not like guilty by press it might make people not think of other things that could help solve the case if they prejudge someone and that ends up bieng wrong.

  3. Incredible damage is done to a persons reputation when named as a person of interest or accused of a crime. School teachers accused of sexual assault or misconduct that is later found to be a purely malicious allegation by an aggrieved student, probably have already lost their job and reputation, personally been subjected to abuse and probably their family. I followed one case in Australia where this occurred and although the accuser admitted their statement was a complete lie and apologised the damage already done and the period of abuse, hatred and suspicion couldn’t be reversed and some still considered him guilty of something. Do I know if this guy had anything to do with William Tyrells disappearance, I have no idea, but he has every right to address the community at large with his version. I personally need real evidence, not coincidence or a maybe, anyone can find themselves in the vicinity of a crime and be accused. One of my sons as a boy was delivered home by the police, he was dressed in similar clothing as described by a witness to a crime and in the area of the crime. He only got delivered home after his alibi had been checked out and his innocence proven with an apology by the police for causing us worry as they’d kept him till long after his scheduled time to be home.

    15 REPLY
    • He’s still a convicted child molester. Of course he would be a person of interest. Innocent is not something I would call him

    • Yes June if they are convicted, but suspicion or an allegation is not proof. Reputations, families and careers can be torn apart, and a ‘whoops we got that wrong’ won’t fix it.

    • Yes Carol he should be treated as a possibility and his whereabouts carefully checked out but suspicion is not proof and guilt has to be proven in a court. He has a right to his say and we can believe or disbelieve him considering his history, but that vital evidence of guilt is obviously not there or he’d have been charged.

    • Carol Muston , with respect , what has he been convicted of? he has been charged re an old accusation, this is simply a tool used by police that allows them to arrest him and take DNA ETC, search his home and work place, they didnt (dont) have enough evidence to charge him on the Tyrells case, so had to come up with a much lesser charge. I dont know if the man is guilty , if he is I would gladly line up to “pull the plug “. innocent till proven guilty. Ask yourself why he wasnt charged before on these “historic matters” which by the way are yet to be proven.

    • A three year old child’s life is the important thing here I think, I personally think it matters little who is called what and when, what is important is getting that little boy back. Too many do gooders losing focus on what matters. He’s an adult, if he’s innocent he’ll get over it, if he’s guilty he’ll be dealt with. Let’s stop being woosey about suspects feelings and keep in mind that little boy. The police may know something about this guy that they can’t give details on.

    • A person of interest usually means that person is a suspect. However, they need evidence to convict that person. Not all people of interest are guilty of any crime, but once they release a name it generally means they are pretty sure about it. The main thing is that the little boy is found.

    • June if you were falsely accused of something like this type of crime I doubt that the only thing you’d have to worry about is your feelings being hurt, you’d be abused every time you showed your face, you’d likely lose your job or your business would go under, your house, car and every thing else you owned would be vandalised . Yes the child’s life is the most important thing and I hope he is found. This man is of interest to the police, but they are looking into other possibilities now. It matters greatly who is called what and when, apart from anything else it can result in police resources all looking the wrong way. People have committed suicide because of the vile behaviour of accusers who have it all wrong.

    • He isnt a convicted child molester he has been accused and is out on bail …. Let us not be judge and jury till proven guilty

  4. this man is already vile ,in my opinion,as he has already sexually abused children…..when people have nothing to hide,there is no need to protest innocence,as the truth will always find a way……if he is telling the truth,he has nothing to worry about….

    1 REPLY
    • The man has previously abused children? The historic “child sex offence” hasn’t been confirmed by police. Since when has “according to Channel 9” been of any legal significance. Surely the civilised thing to do is give this man a fair hearing in a COURT OF LAW… not in a trial by media.

  5. In this country a person is innocent until proven guilty. We cannot be judge and jury based on media reports.
    The disappearance of little William is tragic and I pray that the guilty are found. I cannot imagine the pain of William’s family. I saw the 60 minutes interview, it was hard to watch, my heart goes out to them.

  6. This guy has prior history with the police so he isnt an innocent only maybe not guilty of this crime,i wont watch the video

    3 REPLY
    • He has? Please share… because the linked article states clearly that this alleged offence is “according to Channel 9″… not the police! So forgive me if I withhold judgement until it’s been confirmed BY THE POLICE.

    • I’ve heard prior to the Channel 9 story that he has been charged in the past with child pornography or something like that. That’s probably why he has been named a person of interest.

    • The allegations came out long after he was named as a person of interest, & if you go back to the first reports, he became a person of interest after it was reported he was to come back to the house on that day to carry out repairs he had said he would do. Unfortunately, if he is involved in any way, because of ‘trial by media’, his legal representative may argue he would not get a fair hearing in court because any jury may be prejudicial towards him. The media ought to remember they need to report, not sensationalise. Unfortunately, we have all become judges and juries without full knowledge of the relevant information.

  7. Trial by media worries me. No charges have been laid against this man but unfortunately mud sticks. It is scary that this man feels that he must protest his innocence to the world at large when he has not been arrested for the crime. I am sure that he is not the only person of interest. People should go about their daily lives and let the police do their work.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *