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

[packetgravy]

Yes - and a statement from police to clarify might help reduce speculation “we have identified everyone present at the time of Gus’s disappearance, there were x family members and y staff on the station at the time and they have all assisted with enquiries, have been ruled out as persons of interests and all have participated in the extensive search efforts…”

Depending on the case and available evidence, this may not necessarily be the right approach.

 

[Lucy.D]

Ha ha my old forgot all about IP addresses

ETA- Today I learned certain words are censored here.

If you are referring to the initials of certain people like Samantha Murphy's alleged killer then I found out that recently as well and I also found swear words get that censorship, which is very clever of WS.

I agree with you wondering about police and the analogy of a duck calmly swimming along with little feet swinging madly below.
There are cases where I have seen that happen and police do get a result and I think they do that because they don't want to frighten a suspect.
Hopefully, it's happening with Gus

 

[packetgravy]

According to the ABC, Gus was last seen around 5 pm near the homestead and police were called about three hours later.

That three hour window just sits with me. I have a four year old myself and even in a crowded playground if I lose sight of her for ten seconds I feel that jolt of panic, that cold rush that something might be wrong. Three minutes feels like forever. Three hours feels unimaginable.

We cannot know how anyone reacts in the moment but as daylight fades and the temperature drops out there calling for help sooner would seem instinctive. Maybe there is context we do not have but it is hard not to focus on that timeline.

IMO I have considered this timeline myself and I agree. I suspect the police were notified shortly after it was discovered Gus was missing. This is just a theory and I would need to watch/listen to the statement from the Grandmother before drawing any conclusions.

Another part that stands out is how police have described Gus. They said he was shy, a good walker, but had never left the family property before. It is a strange combination of traits to then use as the foundation for a theory that he simply wandered off and vanished.

Yes and so we ask ourselves, what is defined as “wandered off.” Does it depend on the individual?

Can this be measured by distance? (For example, can a four year child “wander” off on their own property and what would be the minimum distance?)

Does “wandering” imply the child acted alone or can we assume the possibility of an accomplice?

The language from police has also been noticeably careful. They continue to say they believe Gus wandered off, yet the search has been called off and moved into a recovery phase. When asked about suspicious circumstances they replied “with the evidence available to us at the moment,” which feels like very deliberate wording.

You are right to notice the strategic language from those involved in the investigation. This is deliberate without being deceptive MOO

Police have not called for dashcam footage or public sightings which suggests they are confident he did not leave the property. They have held that line firmly. But after a week of searching with all the tech and manpower they have used it is tough to square that with there being no trace at all.

I agree with the police here, I do not believe the child left the property at all.

This case has really got under my skin. I will probably step back from posting for a bit but that three hour gap and the wording being used just do not sit right with me.

Sorry everyone for the spam, I should have done my replies all in one post but here we are.

 

[HoneyBunOne]

Outside the box, and too obvious not to have been investigated but things do get missed -- how were mail and packages delivered to the property. 5 pm... were they in a regular scheduled route?

Accident. Stowaway. Even an undiscovered stowaway who found himself lost in a completely new area where no one would know to look?

It comes down to the obvious. Either he's still in the area, unfound, or he left the area. This might be one way how.

JMO

I can't speak for all country properties, but my knowledge is this (I'm in Victoria, not South Australia):

- Mail deliveries are only once a day, Monday to Friday. (nearing Christmas there's Saturday mail too) Gus went missing on a Saturday.
-In some country areas, there are groups of mailboxes at a certain point, like a cross road, intersection etc where people further down the road or on smaller roads nearby come to collect their mail.
-Some places are too remote to have a regular delivery service. I believe they would generally collect their mail from a nearby town, whenever they come in for supplies. Based on my knowledge, I doubt this property had a regular mail delivery service.

I understand SAR dogs were used during the initial search.

One would assume that a cadaver dog would be brought in during the 'recovery' phase to scour the area, but I haven't heard any mention of that.

The only cadaver dogs in Australia are in New South Wales and Queensland, not South Australia. That's not to say that SAPOL can't request use of the dogs, much like VicPol did in the ongoing case of SM.

 

[packetgravy]

I agree with you wondering about police and the analogy of a duck calmly swimming along with little feet swinging madly below.
There are cases where I have seen that happen and police do get a result and I think they do that because they don't want to frighten a suspect.
Hopefully, it's happening with Gus

You got it!

All the evidence indicates Gus having NOT left the property (alone, on foot.) Beyond that, it’s almost like he was never outside at all.
IMO the public line of inquiry and investigative procedures may offer up clues on the police’s initial theories.

Something interesting about this case is the delayed release of Gus’s photo (there are of course factors involved that can prevent public release but I suspect this may not be the case here.)

If there are immediate signs of abduction and/or foul play, I wonder if those limitations can be bypassed under policies for missing persons and/or privacy act laws? Particularly if evidence suggests the immediate release could increase the potential of locating an individual and/or prevent serious harm.

MOO

ETA: Found some info that may be of interest:

Guide to the Privacy (Persons Reported as Missing) Rule 2024

A guide for any entity the Australian Privacy Principles covers, and for other entities to understand, and use the Privacy (Persons reported as Missing) Rule 2024

www.oaic.gov.au

Unreasonable or impracticable to obtain consent

An APP entity should be able to point to one or more clear reasons that make it unreasonable or impracticable to obtain an individual’s consent. Relevant considerations may include:

• the potential consequences for the individual associated with any delay to the disclosure of the information to the locating entity. For example, where there is concern for the safety and welfare of the person reported as missing, the urgency of the situation and level of potential threat may require use or disclosure before it is possible to seek consent
• the possible adverse consequences for an individual if their consent is not obtained before the use or disclosure — it may be more difficult for an entity to establish that it was unreasonable or impracticable to obtain the individual’s consent as the risk of adversity increases
• the capacity of the person reported as missing to give consent. For example, it may be unreasonable or impracticable to obtain consent where the person reported as missing is incapable of communicating consent because of their physical state, their psychological state, or their age. Capacity is discussed as part of ‘consent’ in Chapter B (Key concepts) of the OAIC’s APP guidelines.

 

[HoneyBunOne]

According to the ABC, Gus was last seen around 5 pm near the homestead and police were called about three hours later.

That three hour window just sits with me. I have a four year old myself and even in a crowded playground if I lose sight of her for ten seconds I feel that jolt of panic, that cold rush that something might be wrong. Three minutes feels like forever. Three hours feels unimaginable.

We cannot know how anyone reacts in the moment but as daylight fades and the temperature drops out there calling for help sooner would seem instinctive. Maybe there is context we do not have but it is hard not to focus on that timeline.

Another part that stands out is how police have described Gus. They said he was shy, a good walker, but had never left the family property before. It is a strange combination of traits to then use as the foundation for a theory that he simply wandered off and vanished.

The language from police has also been noticeably careful. They continue to say they believe Gus wandered off, yet the search has been called off and moved into a recovery phase. When asked about suspicious circumstances they replied “with the evidence available to us at the moment,” which feels like very deliberate wording.

Police have not called for dashcam footage or public sightings which suggests they are confident he did not leave the property. They have held that line firmly. But after a week of searching with all the tech and manpower they have used it is tough to square that with there being no trace at all.

This case has really got under my skin. I will probably step back from posting for a bit but that three hour gap and the wording being used just do not sit right with me.

I get your concern with the 3 hour thing, but respectfully, losing sight of a child in a crowded playground, and losing sight of a child on an isolated property that's almost a small village in itself, is not the same thing. I get that it's hard to place yourself in the position of waiting 3 hours, but I don't think it's as concerning as you feel it is. All MOO of course.

In any case where a child is missing, I think words have to be chosen carefully. If you try to read between the lines, you might say that him being shy means he wouldn't readily or easily go with someone he didn't know well. Being a good walker suggests he can travel quite a distance for a little kid and wouldn't necessarily be within the initial search area. Saying that he never left the property implies, to me, that although he's a "good walker" he had never walked so far as to get to the property boundary and leave. MOO. Carefully selected words by police? Possibly, or just a few short statements to address a few key issues the wider public seems to have.

Even if it's a case of having wandered off, there comes a time that you have to start thinking it IS a recovery mission. A 4 year old boy on his own in the outback, will likely succumb to his surroundings, given that it's highly unlikely he has access to food or water. Sadly, they can't have full resources on site, day after day, when it's likely Gus is no longer with us.

 

[BreakingNews]

That's also my feeling and somewhat explains the 3 hour wait to call LE. MOO

But did they wait 3 hours to call? I have seen that LE arrived at 8.30 & 9.30 in msm. It would have taken quite awhile for them to get out there.

 

[musicaljoke]

I have a feeling there were no eyes on him for longer than 30 minutes. Maybe grandma got distracted, maybe she fell asleep, maybe she was watching tv, whatever. The 30 minute timeline made it seem like he had time to get away while also making it seem like she was not being too negligent. MOO.

Are you suggesting that she lied? Have you seen any evidence to indicate this, otherwise this accusation could be seen as victim blaming. Given that we have heard no other account of what happened, we should accept that there was a 30 minute window from when she saw the boy playing on the sand pile until she called him and couldn't find him.

 

[packetgravy]

I get your concern with the 3 hour thing, but respectfully, losing sight of a child in a crowded playground, and losing sight of a child on an isolated property that's almost a small village in itself, is not the same thing. I get that it's hard to place yourself in the position of waiting 3 hours, but I don't think it's as concerning as you feel it is. All MOO of course.

You’re right, losing a child in a populated area is absolutely not the same as losing a child in the outback. A child lost in an isolated area is IMO at greater risk.

This comes down to factors such as:
- limited visibility
- delayed emergency response times
- environmental hazards
- terrain
- lack of resources

The unique challenges and risks associated with isolated areas suggests a missing child may be at greater risk (when compared to urban areas.) Its crucial these factors are considered and assessed promptly in the event of a missing persons.

Considering the time of day (17:30) and limited daylight, I feel it was crucial a report was filed MUCH sooner for Gus.

MOO

 

[LadyL]

I call this little guy Gus Gus in my head when I think about him
and I think of him often throughout the days
nothing could be worse for those who love him than the decision to transition to recovery process JMO
I'm glad there seems to be good community support for them

 

[Lucy.D]

I call this little guy Gus Gus in my head when I think about him
and I think of him often throughout the days
nothing could be worse for those who love him than the decision to transition to recovery process JMO
I'm glad there seems to be good community support for them

Is there any proof of the community support. Eg are there neighbours of Oak Park looking around, did they look around the property earlier while there was a chance Gus was alive?
Who and where are the people who love him. Are that still at the station, did they go out looking?

 

[PNW]

Are you suggesting that she lied? Have you seen any evidence to indicate this, otherwise this accusation could be seen as victim blaming. Given that we have heard no other account of what happened, we should accept that there was a 30 minute window from when she saw the boy playing on the sand pile until she called him and couldn't find him.

This is my opinion, like I stated. I don’t believe he disappeared from the property under his own volition in 30 minutes. The timeline in these cases is always subject to scrutiny when it’s just one person’s word.

 

[confused.mp3]

But did they wait 3 hours to call? I have seen that LE arrived at 8.30 & 9.30 in msm. It would have taken quite awhile for them to get out there.

Yes, exactly. I haven’t found anything but I don’t know if there is any regular police officers in Yunta anymore. I know they have a station there but it says hours vary. The police station looks to be about a 45 minute drive at best from the property. Being nighttime, it would be very very unlikely that there was anyone on duty. Being a tiny tiny town, they likely would know the police officers personally and their schedule. I have no idea how long i’d wait to call, but the unique factors would have been a big component that decision.

 

[RiSpy]

In such a life & death situation I’d employ everything at my disposal.

It’s not one or the other for me, it’s all - in the hope they compliment each other & plug each others gaps.

Technology is not without its failings either.

agree! Was thinking about this yesterday after reading an article about the use of Indigenous Trackers. If my child was missing I think I would even resort to clairvoyants if every other avenue wasn't finding answers.