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

[jepop]

Like I said earlier I think we need to stop talking about the families version of events. There is no credibility that any of it is true.
It's likely Gus died long before the call to police. They would of wanted time to deal with any evidence and make a story up. They could of waited days/weeks/months to call police.

BBM. Well, that is your opinion. However, moo posters are good with their own opinions and theories and bringing them to the thread.

"I think we need to stop talking about the families version of events"

Posters are free to consider the families version of events.

 

[SouthAussie]

I do find it hard to see how this could have happened without the mother finding out about it though.
Wouldn't both the grandparents have been devastated/behaving strangely even if they were 'only' trying to cover up an accident?

Not knowing her, I really wouldn't know.

But I do think it is possible that Gus' mother was so overcome with fear, worry, and sorrow that she wasn't really paying attention to other people's reactions - if they seemed as concerned as she.

Plus she has a one year old to shelter from the situation. Likely that her last anxious and grieving energy was spent caring for him.

It is hard to imagine that a person in such a terrible situation as losing their child would be thinking clearly and watching others (other than her youngest son).

imo

 

[Detechtive]

I don't think this was an accident at all. I think a certain someone lost their temper.

I agree. Normal people contact the authorities if there’s an accident.

However, given social media rumour about a custody battle, it’s not in the realms of impossibility that there was an accidental death coverup, imo.

This is pure speculation - perhaps the bio dad was concerned about his wife and their children living with JM, and as such, JM would want to hide it from the dad if power and control were big factors in this family dynamic which it looks like is reasonable, to me. IMO

However, it’s still grossly abnormal that an accident would be covered up in this manner and so therefore it’s probable that this was not an accident, IMO.

When I refer to an accident I mean things like “he accidently got buried in sand playing outside” as opposed to “someone snapped and beat him or shot him”. The latter not being what I consider an accident.

IMO only

 

[essareem]

Grandma? ‘He’ catered? It’s unfortunate that there’s been such rampant transphobia entwined with this case (despite so many mod warnings) because it’s made it hard to trust whether people’s intuition and ideas have been guided by actual red flags and concerns or bigotry. And it’s Gus’ memory and the questions for those who loved them that have suffered for it.

Hi, welcome to Websleuths!

Just wanted to touch on the use of 'he' or 'she' - correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the Lamont family have yet specified Josie's preferred pronouns. They could be he/him, she/her, they/them... or even neopronouns such as xe/xem, ze/zir, etc.

If you don't know someone's pronouns, and have no way of asking them - it is relatively safe to start with 'they/them/theirs'.

Assuming that Josie prefers she/her solely on the basis of their presentation as a transgender woman would be an unwarranted and intellectually lazy presumption, as pronoun preferences are personal and not automatically dictated by gender identity or presentation.

 

[BreakingNews]

I think we're all jumping to conclusions. Police wanted to do some searches, evidently there was a lack of consent because they got a warrant. The searches in question were probably of a private nature--say computer records rather than cavities capable of hiding a body. To get a warrant for those things police had to come out and declare the person a suspect. I'm not saying the suspicion isn't genuine. But the first suspect isn't always the last suspect.

JLZ, I am only going on Qld laws, but police usually turn up unannounced with a warrant. Police only divulge to the person hearing the reasons for needing a warrant eg magistrate or JP. They don't want to alert anyone so evidence can be destroyed. Let's just hope there is justice for Gus really soon.

 

[SouthAussie]

As the person is a suspect, much firmer stance than a POI, I really think there must be some hard evidence. Even if it is a little.

Perhaps they have been able to disprove certain elements, so the inconsistencies started (changing stories), and perhaps they found some evidence in their January search of the property.

imo

 

[Poirot's niece]

Like I said above I can’t recall but I’ll get back to you when I find it.

Thanks, do you recall if it's from a verifiable source or written hearsay?

 

[MrJ]

Struck by the incredible tech was being used to try and locate Gus. Really incredible effort by SAPOL (South Australian Police).

 

[SouthAussie]

Struck by the incredible tech was being used to try and locate Gus. Really incredible effort by SAPOL (South Australian Police).

That image with all of the identifiable beings, from the drone imagery, is really something.

Very specific identification of all the beings.

13 detections of interest, as well. Presumably, those areas were then checked - perhaps in their January search.

imo

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Thanks, do you recall if it's from a verifiable source or written hearsay?

It was in at least one main stream media article.

 

[Serononin]

In a way, I'm almost relieved by the latest announcement. At least now we can be pretty sure that Gus didn't die slowly, all alone somewhere in that vast landscape. I just hope they find the poor little lad soon

 

[Poirot's niece]

There was an article shared in this thread that established that the father and one of the grandmothers didn't get along and that the father believed that the residence was unsafe for the children. But the thread is now 200 pages, so it would take some work to find it.

Thanks, I've done what I think are the most appropriate web searches for the content claimed and so far all I've found is a Daily Mail article with some official records of family history in the Yunta area. The mentions of 'a friend says' this re Gus's father and in laws are so far purely speculative and haven't been confirmed by a reputable source. Given its form with inaccuracies, fabrications, misreporting, and lack of fact checking I'll be waiting to see if a serious and reliable publisher comes to the fore. It might be true, but I wouldn't be taking a tabloid's claim as proof.

 

[kurtneverdied]

BBM. Well, that is your opinion. However, moo posters are good with their own opinions and theories and bringing them to the thread.

"I think we need to stop talking about the families version of events"

Posters are free to consider the families version of events.

The version of events that the police have said there are many discrepancies with, so much so that they publicly name one member a suspect?
I never said that people can't have their own opinion. I'm sick of people treating the family version as fact though.

 

[Serononin]

What I mean is if something happened to Gus while Shannon was with the children alone, it is possible that Josie helped conceal Gus and maybe move him later.


Only three people were on the property at the time of Gus' disappearance, Fielke said.

Person with close ties to household of Gus Lamont identified as suspect in his disappearance

www.9news.com.au

When they say "three people" I assume they actually mean three adults?

 

[JLZ]

JLZ, I am only going on Qld laws, but police usually turn up unannounced with a warrant. Police only divulge to the person hearing the reasons for needing a warrant eg magistrate or JP. They don't want to alert anyone so evidence can be destroyed. Let's just hope there is justice for Gus really soon.

That's all right, but if they're talking to the person of interest, they need to mark the moment the person becomes a suspect, and tell him his rights. Failure to do so will make the interview and perhaps its fruits inadmissible as evidence. If police have told a judge that somebody is a suspect in order to get a warrant, they can't plausibly claim that the person wasn't a suspect three days later while police and POI were having an informal and very interesting chat.

 

[Detechtive]

Thanks, do you recall if it's from a verifiable source or written hearsay?

Im sure ive seen it in the media but i cant remember. Other posters have said they recall it too but I’ll have to do some more digging tomorrow. Sorry!

 

[SouthAussie]

When they say "three people" I assume they actually mean three adults?

I don't know. Can't really assume anything. We don't know. Children are people too.
He could have said adults, if he meant three adults.

 

[Detechtive]

Thanks, I've done what I think are the most appropriate web searches for the content claimed and so far all I've found is a Daily Mail article with some official records of family history in the Yunta area. The mentions of 'a friend says' this re Gus's father and in laws are so far purely speculative and haven't been confirmed by a reputable source. Given its form with inaccuracies, fabrications, misreporting, and lack of fact checking I'll be waiting to see if a serious and reliable publisher comes to the fore. It might be true, but I wouldn't be taking a tabloid's claim as proof.

The DM is notoriously unreliable, however if it’s in MSM it qualifies as a source, here.

 

[kurtneverdied]

That would mean Gus' mother was involved ... and the police say she wasn't.

Maybe she does know and has known the whole time but was/is manipulated or threatened by someone to go by their story.
The police have confirmed their story doesn't line up and now confirmed that Josie or Shannon is the suspect.
Perhaps bits of it are true, maybe none of it is true.

 

[SouthAussie]

Maybe she does know and has known the whole time but was/is manipulated or threatened by someone to go by their story.
The police have confirmed their story doesn't line up and now confirmed that Josie or Shannon is the suspect.
Perhaps bits of it are true, maybe none of it is true.

My feeling is that if she knew, she would be deemed complicit. Unless she has finally gone to the police with different information (turned someone in) and that is why it is now a major crime.

imo