Australia AUSTRALIA - 4YO AUGUST (GUS) Missing from rural family home in Outback, Yunta, South Australia, 27th Sept 2025

[FromGermany1]

I was also thinking they may have left for higher, dryer ground based on the forecasts, too.

If the sheep are going to have food, water, and protection from predators, they are okay? Is that how it goes?

MOO

Sheep falling, often referred to as being "cast" (stuck on their backs) or falling over due to terrain or breed-specific vulnerabilities, requires immediate intervention from farmers to prevent death. The farming duty of care, dictated by animal welfare regulations, necessitates regular monitoring to prevent these animals from suffering from organ collapse, starvation, or predation.
AI

bbm

 

[Ruminations]

(Greened by me) They gave up searching for Gus because, not having found him, they concluded that he wasn't there--that he didn't wander. Does there come a point when, after searching for evidence that his family harmed him and not having found it, they conclude that the evidence isn't there--that the family is innocent?

This is my thought.

Continued searches that come up with nothing could be a bit helpful should Gus be found someplace deceased. If the police believe it was murder and defense is he just wandered off, at the very least the police could show where, between the dirt pile and his location, absolutely nothing was found.

It's not going to win a conviction, but it is significant.

It seems to me, a person changing from willing to talk directly with LE to only speaking through an attorney is pretty innocuous. It doesn't seem like enough to identify someone as a suspect. So, I feel like LE is responding to more than that. Most likely, something about the time line reports made person(s) a suspect, IMO.

MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

If the sheep are going to have food, water, and protection from predators, they are okay? Is that how it goes?

MOO

I think so. They likely don't even know where all of their sheep are at any given moment. It is not as if 3,000 sheep necessarily stay in large herds on vast properties.

I have seen (on many occasions in the outback) 4 or 5 sheep sheltering under a lone tree, and 2 or 3 sheep grazing alone - with not another sheep in sight for a vast distance all around.

I have seen flocks of sheep grazing near dry creek beds though, as the vegetation stays a little greener and more plentiful in those kinds of areas.

imo

 

[Cedars]

(Greened by me) They gave up searching for Gus because, not having found him, they concluded that he wasn't there--that he didn't wander. Does there come a point when, after searching for evidence that his family harmed him and not having found it, they conclude that the evidence isn't there--that the family is innocent?

I'd say no, because police investigations are never about finding zero evidence and therefore drawing a conclusion that the lack of evidence 'proves' a negative, eg "he didn't wander", or "no one in the family harmed him".

Investigations are about finding evidence that proves whatever did specifically happen.

If no evidence is found, then we just do not know what happened. No conclusions can be drawn.

JMO

 

[charliethecat]

Cant say I’ve heard of them being referred to as “drop toilets” before. The concrete, the ladder, the cat.. all very interesting.

We call them 'long drops' here in NZ.....

 

[Ellery84]

I'd say no, because police investigations are never about finding zero evidence and therefore drawing a conclusion that the lack of evidence 'proves' a negative, eg "he didn't wander", or "no one in the family harmed him".

Investigations are about finding evidence that proves whatever did specifically happen.

If no evidence is found, then we just do not know what happened. No conclusions can be drawn.

JMO

How does that work with the case of missing woman Lynette Dawson née Simms? Somehow the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that she was murdered.

IMO

 

[gerardo20]

police investigations are never about finding zero evidence and therefore drawing a conclusion that the lack of evidence 'proves' a negative, eg "he didn't wander", or "no one in the family harmed him".

Investigations are about finding evidence that proves whatever did specifically happen.

If no evidence is found, then we just do not know what happened. No conclusions can be drawn.

My reading is the opposite. They did find evidence... They found evidence that the traces that would be expected if Gus wondered off were not there....
To illustrate, if a parent leaves an unopened ready-made meal for a child to open and eat, and then finds that the child has not openned the meal and the meal is still inside, then the parent has evidence that the child did not eat the meal.
OR
If you claim to have just walked across sand or snow or whatever and did not leave a trace, then I would doubt your story if there was no trace within a time in which it would be expected that traces would remain.

The police found evidence that Gus did not wander off.... not because they saw or found nothing, but because they found a farm house surrounded terrain that lacked the signs of disturbance experts would expect.

I completely understand that they may be misreading the evidence. They may have missed signs or disturbed evidence of Gus's footprints, etc.
If I was on a jury and they presented their findings that the area lacked traces of a child wandering off, then I would have to weigh their proof of that, the reliability of their expertise, of experts in what traces would be expected, and so on.

It is not that they found nothing, but that they found a farm that lacked the traces that would be expected if a child wandered off.

How does that work with the case of missing woman Lynette Dawson née Simms? Somehow the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that she was murdered.

Exactly...
Chris Dawson's behaviour afterwards was not consistent with a grieving husband, but of a man who was trying to create the impression that his wife had abandoned him and the children, and who wanted to be able to have a young girl, with whom he had an overly familiar relationship, move in with him as soon as possible afterwards, without the hinderance of the presence of his wife.

 

[Bats]

How does that work with the case of missing woman Lynette Dawson née Simms? Somehow the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that she was murdered.

IMO

In that case there was clear evidence she didn't run away....not...no evidence she did run away therefore she didn't run away.

Beside the point really.
In the hypothetical where person(s) are charged in relation to Gus's death, the crown don't really need to prove he didn't wander off as that would be a given since they would be required to prove that an accident happened or he was met with foul play.

 

[Ellery84]

In that case there was clear evidence she didn't run away....not...no evidence she did run away therefore she didn't run away.

Beside the point really.
In the hypothetical where person(s) are charged in relation to Gus's death, the crown don't really need to prove he didn't wander off as that would be a given since they would be required to prove that an accident happened or he was met with foul play.

Ok, thank you for clarifying. And I guess it’s also very different as in the case of Gus, we are dealing with a child. A child doesn’t have the capacity to just run away or leave in the same way that an adult has capacity to walk away from their lives.

What was the clear evidence Lynette didn’t run away? The fact that she had family photos done?

I’m just struggling to remember how that circumstantial case came together to lead to a conviction.

Imo

 

[Ellery84]

My reading is the opposite. They did find evidence... They found evidence that the traces that would be expected if Gus wondered off were not there....
To illustrate, if a parent leaves an unopened ready-made meal for a child to open and eat, and then finds that the child has not openned the meal and the meal is still inside, then the parent has evidence that the child did not eat the meal.
OR
If you claim to have just walked across sand or snow or whatever and did not leave a trace, then I would doubt your story if there was no trace within a time in which it would be expected that traces would remain.

The police found evidence that Gus did not wander off.... not because they saw or found nothing, but because they found a farm house surrounded terrain that lacked the signs of disturbance experts would expect.

I completely understand that they may be misreading the evidence. They may have missed signs or disturbed evidence of Gus's footprints, etc.
If I was on a jury and they presented their findings that the area lacked traces of a child wandering off, then I would have to weigh their proof of that, the reliability of their expertise, of experts in what traces would be expected, and so on.

It is not that they found nothing, but that they found a farm that lacked the traces that would be expected if a child wandered off.


Exactly...
Chris Dawson's behaviour afterwards was not consistent with a grieving husband, but of a man who was trying to create the impression that his wife had abandoned him and the children, and who wanted to be able to have a young girl, with whom he had an overly familiar relationship, move in with him as soon as possible afterwards, without the hinderance of the presence of his wife.

I agree with all of this. And I think SAPOL and the DPP down there in South Australia are building a very robust case for murder for Gus Lamont.

That’s jmo.

 

[Ellery84]

I guess this is a question we might not be able to answer. But I’ll ask anyway!

The police victim liaison officer. They were working with Josie and Shannon. Keeping them updated on the case and the progress.

Are they now just working with Josh and Jess or have the VLO’s been taken off the case altogether?

IMO

 

[Serononin]

I guess this is a question we might not be able to answer. But I’ll ask anyway!

The police victim liaison officer. They were working with Josie and Shannon. Keeping them updated on the case and the progress.

Are they now just working with Josh and Jess or have the VLO’s been taken off the case altogether?

IMO

I would think they'd be working with Jess and Josh for as long as the case is still being investigated, but I don't actually know

 

[Dotta]

This story of a child wandering off from the house and got lost
seemed very suspicious to me from the very beginning.

How could a person get lost if this was the only mass of buildings in the vicinity?

And visible whenever a person turned.

This story seemed naive and simply unbelievable.
This isn't a town/city where a child can really get lost.

I hope Police get to the bottom of this.

JMO

 

[Serononin]

This story of a child wandering off from the house and got lost
seemed very suspicious to me from the very beginning.

How could a person get lost if this was the only mass of buildings in the vicinity?

And visible whenever a person turned.

This story seemed naive and simply unbelievable.
This isn't a town/city where a child can really get lost.

I hope Police can get to the bottom of this.

JMO

In the very early days, when there was talk of there potentially being multiple unmapped wells/mine shafts/wombat holes on the property, it did seem plausible to me that he might have wandered and met with an accident. But the sheer isolation of the property, and the fact that nobody seemed to know when Gus had last been seen by anyone outside the immediate family, were red flags for sure

 

[Bats]

Ok, thank you for clarifying. And I guess it’s also very different as in the case of Gus, we are dealing with a child. A child doesn’t have the capacity to just run away or leave in the same way that an adult has capacity to walk away from their lives.

What was the clear evidence Lynette didn’t run away? The fact that she had family photos done?

I’m just struggling to remember how that circumstantial case came together to lead to a conviction.

Imo

Yes quite different with Gus though i think there may be some similarities too.

From memory, the main one in the case of Lynette was she wouldn’t have just cut ties with family and everyone she knew, which was evidence she didn't run away.

Since there has allegedly been no evidence of Gus wandering off, it may in future be used to show deceit etc etc

JMO

 

[Cedars]

How does that work with the case of missing woman Lynette Dawson née Simms? Somehow the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that she was murdered.

IMO

I'm not familiar with that case, but after a quick check: One big difference is Gus is 4 and Lynette was 34!

 

[musicaljoke]

It's probably been used by LE to sift through the dirt- it would be weird if there is not one little minion figurine, shards from broken sand pit tools and toys, wheels that snapped off a toy vehicle, "stolen" kitchen utensils .... a four year old can make a good 20 -40 minutes of fun with dirt and a stick as a toy, but if this pit was a regular play spot for him, as I believe was reported, even if he didn't bring more than a stick with him to the pit the afternoon he disappeared, (assuming the reported time line is true), certainly on other days he would have brought in other toys and tools.

If nothing of Gus's is in that dirt, that could be suspicious.

MOO

They would use a screen to sift through the sand, rather than a cement mixer.

 

[Snodge]

I wondered if there was shearing in progress on the outback station at the time of Gus’s disappearance. If so could he have somehow finished up in a wool press and been died.

 

[JLZ]

They would use a screen to sift through the sand, rather than a cement mixer.

I thought police might have taken the mixer at some point for forensic examination.

That location looks very different from ground level and a different angle from the pictures I've previously seen. I think it's the same place after looking at the whole video, but I did wonder.

 

[Ellery84]

I wondered if there was shearing in progress on the outback station at the time of Gus’s disappearance. If so could he have somehow finished up in a wool press and been died.

Surely if he died in a wool press that would not have been an accident.

The wool press process seems to be quite deliberate and considered.

IMO