A former washing machine repairman has been awarded a massive payout in his case against the state of NSW for malicious prosecution after historic child sex allegations against him were disproven.
Bill Spedding brought legal action against the state after he was charged in an unrelated matter concerning historical sexual assault allegations,which he claims were to “put pressure” on him in the investigation into William Tyrrell’s disappearance.
The 70-year-old took on the state of NSW in the Supreme Court and argued he was arrested despite a lack of evidence in order to assist police in the William Tyrrell inquiry after he was at one time a key person of interest in the investigation.
Supreme Court Justice Ian Harrison on Thursday ordered NSW Police pay Mr Spedding $1,484,292 in damages and also to pay his legal costs – a massive win for the former tradie.
Mr Spedding was a person of interest identified by detectives handling the initial investigation into William’s disappearance after the young boy vanished from the home of his foster grandmother in Kendall on the NSW north coast in September 2014.
Police publicly arrested him, searched his home and office in January 2015, participated in a six-hour interview, and was charged with the historic sexual assault allegations.
He had visited the toddler’s foster grandmother’s house to fix her washing machine in the days prior to William’s disappearance.
William has never been found. No charges have been laid.
In 2018 he was cleared of the sexual assault allegations following a trial, which heard the allegations had been falsified.
He was also cleared of involvement in the toddler’s disappearance.
During the malicious prosecution case, his lawyers argued police were aware the allegations, relating to two girls in the 1980s, had previously been investigated and that the girls were pressured by adults to make up the claims.
They further claimed Mr Spedding was verbally abused by officers during the Tyrrell investigation.
Justice Harrison found Mr Spedding was subject to a “long and painful ordeal” which “never should have occurred”.
“The allegations for which he was prosecuted were old and discredited. They were frail and notoriously so,” Justice Harrison said.
In the judgment, Justice Harrison said Mr Spedding’s experience left him “distressed, confused, wrongly imprisoned and separated from his family”.
“His release from custody, which I find to have been extremely distressing and painful, did not restore to him the family from which he had been so improperly removed. Nor has it recovered even now,” he said.