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

[Megnut]

If Jess' parents are indeed responsible for his death and disappearance, I just can't with them. How do you see your daughter in utter distress and not try to alleviate it? How do you prioritize your needs over hers?

She may never forgive you for the death, but you know what she'll never never forgive you for? The death AND the ANGUISH of not knowing when she learns you knew.

Obviously I can't speak for Jess, but as a mother, I can imagine the depth of betrayal.

It would go toward mercy if they'd own it now. Let LE bring that little boy home, to his parents. Give them that.

JMO

 

[linge]

Re reinterviews.

Some say that every time one recollects something,
the recollection differs slightly from the previous one

It is something connected with how a brain stores memories.

Is it true?

If someone asked me about detailed day routine from 4 months ago
I would stare emptily into the space.

But I understand this day was "special" in horrific way.
And we usually remember clearly such distressing events in detail even with passage of time.

JMO

Memories are definitely less fixed and reliable than we like to imagine. Also maybe something to consider, but people's memories can also be influenced by what they believe happened, details can be magnified or minimized to fit the story as your mind attributes significance to them.

In this case, for the sake of the hypothetical, imagine the major crime designation is true, one of the grandparents actually did something (whether harming him directly or just covering up an accidental death) and the other two didn't know anything about it. In the initial panic to find Gus, fully believing he was lost out there and time was running out, your memory and account of what happened that day would likely revolve around that at first. But then time passes, and you're no longer looking for him alive and you're maybe still living in close quarters with the one who did it, someone who's maybe just acting wrong. Maybe you start to have doubts. The way you remember that day is likely to change if you don't believe he wandered away anymore. The significance of details shifts. You don't see the story the same way anymore, and so you won't tell it the same way anymore.

 

[linge]

Was it said what the category "detections of interest" meant? Does it mean that something living or recently deceased was detected but the program can't determine what type of animal? Or is it a tactful expression for "potential remains of a child", each instance of which would warrant priority on-ground examination?

They didn't specify in the presser, but they did also say that they didn't find anything dropped by him (such as the hat, toy shovel, shoes, etc. that posters earlier on thought he'd be likely to lose at some point). So maybe at a guess picking up things in unnatural colors and shapes showing up on the landscape, anything irregular. Every bit of blue that ends up being a bit of garbage blown in caught under a bush instead of a Minions shirt. As well as possibly holes, crevasses, rocks, abandoned vehicles or equipment, vegetation or debris that could conceal a child. Maybe patches of earth that look recently disturbed. MOO.

 

[Lucy6226]

Was it said what the category "detections of interest" meant? Does it mean that something living or recently deceased was detected but the program can't determine what type of animal? Or is it a tactful expression for "potential remains of a child", each instance of which would warrant priority on-ground examination?

I was curious about this too. Everything else was so detailed. Seems like it's something they didn't want us to know about (yet) so gave it the vague 'detections of interest' title. MOO

 

[ChatteringBirds]

I mean, this was so obviously what happened. I wonder how people that VEHEMENTLY defended the family feel now?

I don't think this (direct involvement by a family member in Gus' disappearance) was obvious at all nor do I think it's still obvious. Because "wandering away" scenarios do happen, families do search for hours themselves before calling, the timelines sometimes aren't clear, there aren't always any clues found.

Mind if I ask what made this case different for you?

 

[SouthAussie]

Was it said what the category "detections of interest" meant? Does it mean that something living or recently deceased was detected but the program can't determine what type of animal? Or is it a tactful expression for "potential remains of a child", each instance of which would warrant priority on-ground examination?

I am guessing that it is whatever looked like it could be a being, but was unidentifiable to the AI parameters that were set. Because the AI program seemed to be set (by the shown results) to identify beings.

There would likely be other beings out there. Like maybe large lizards. Lace Monitors found in the region can be up to 2 metres in length. And I didn't notice any emus on the list. There are a ton of emus in our SA outback.

imo



(from the 13:06 mark in the presser video)

 

[JLZ]

I am guessing that it is whatever looked like it could be a being, but was unidentifiable to the AI parameters that were set. Because the AI program seemed to be set (by the shown results) to identify beings.

There would likely be other beings out there. Like maybe large lizards. Lace Monitors found in the region can be up to 2 metres in length. And I didn't notice any emus on the list. There are a ton of emus in our SA outback.

imo

View attachment 642743

(from the 13:06 mark in the presser video)

Looking at that list again, the detections actually total to 22,958, not 23,304 as stated. I'd say there must be another page somewhere, but the exclusion has to be deliberate filtering because the list is sorted by quantity most to least.

 

[gerardo20]

Things that are left out of the media timelines ....

1) Gus seen in town by locals, very clingy and cosie with gran. Not anything about being seen in town with either parent. So gran very close to Gus.
2) Dad Josh moves out due to tension with Gran Josie, starts preparing a home for Gus and mum Jess away from Grans. Dad arranges a childcare place for Gus a long distance away from Grans homestead, so Grans will no longer have regular sustained contact or control over care of Gus.
3) Gran Josie shows prepared to run the show and threaten any defiance or talk that does not like with a gun in hand.
4) Gran Shannon is caring for kids while Gran Josie is looking for lost sheep with mum Jess. Gus dissappears with no trace, bringing to a halt dad's plans to move Gus out of care of grans.

Add that to the things police have stated...and look around at how often grandparents take extreme steps to stop an estranged parent having access or increased custody.

 

[essareem]

I don't think this (direct involvement by a family member in Gus' disappearance) was obvious at all nor do I think it's still obvious. Because "wandering away" scenarios do happen, families do search for hours themselves before calling, the timelines sometimes aren't clear, there aren't always any clues found.

Mind if I ask what made this case different for you?

It was obvious to me due to many reasons, but mainly the hostile and aggressive behaviour of one of the grandparents.

In Australian culture this is not normal.

 

[_sleuthdog_]

Looking at that list again, the detections actually total to 22,958, not 23,304 as stated. I'd say there must be another page somewhere, but the exclusion has to be deliberate filtering because the list is sorted by quantity most to least.

Ah-ha! I had literally just tallied this myself before reading your post. Indeed, the total of these numbers is actually 22,958. Descrepency of 346. A line item omitted perhaps?

 

[_sleuthdog_]

2) Dad Josh moves out due to tension with Gran Josie, starts preparing a home for Gus and mum Jess away from Grans. Dad arranges a childcare place for Gus a long distance away from Grans homestead, so Grans will no longer have regular sustained contact or control over care of Gus.

In my firm opinion, JL never lived at Oak Park. Perhaps had spent time there but never called it home. I believe he lived between properties in Adelaide suburbs and Belalie North.

 

[linge]

Ah-ha! I had literally just tallied this myself before reading your post. Indeed, the total of these numbers is actually 22,958. Descrepency of 346. A line item omitted perhaps?

Maybe anomalies that couldn't be identified by the AI that they checked out in person? Trying to remember how many of those they said there were (or if they put a number to it).

 

[Eloise]

I mean, this was so obviously what happened. I wonder how people that VEHEMENTLY defended the family feel now?

I vehemently defend Websleuths policy of treating family as victims until LE states otherwise. Its a good policy that keeps the tone here high compared to social media.

We all know the stats on who is most likely to harm a child or woman. But there's no harm in keeping an open mind. It isn't always the most obvious suspect, after all. Innocent parents and husbands have been treated awfully by social media in some cases where everyone jumped to conclusions.

 

[JLZ]

Maybe anomalies that couldn't be identified by the AI that they checked out in person? Trying to remember how many of those they said there were (or if they put a number to it).

You have a table with quantities and a line that says "total" at the bottom, there's a strong expectation that the quantities add to the total. Either there is an intention to deceive or police forgot that sometimes AI can't count.

 

[seasideForest]

I vehemently defend Websleuths policy of treating family as victims until LE states otherwise. Its a good policy that keeps the tone here high compared to social media.

We all know the stats on who is most likely to harm a child or woman. But there's no harm in keeping an open mind. It isn't always the most obvious suspect, after all. Innocent parents and husbands have been treated awfully by social media in some cases where everyone jumped to conclusions.

Yes. Including Lindy Chamberlain who even spent time in prison because inconceivable in those days that her baby could have been taken by a dingo.

 

[SouthAussie]

In my firm opinion, JL never lived at Oak Park. Perhaps had spent time there but never called it home. I believe he lived between properties in Adelaide suburbs and Belalie North.

The DM, if accurate, says Josh has never permanently lived at the homestead.

It also says that one of Josh's friends said that Josh is always falling out with people for running his mouth off.

Gus Lamont's grandmother waves pump-action shotgun at reporter

Daily Mail went to speak to Josie Murray on Wednesday afternoon but after we offered our sympathies to the family, she waved a gun.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[_sleuthdog_]

The DM, if accurate, says Josh has never permanently lived at the homestead.

It also says that one of Josh's friends said that Josh is always falling out with people for running his mouth off.

Sorry, I laughed at the very first few words of that

Anyway, those sound like people's opinion rather than fact, from unnamed sources no less.

 

[SouthAussie]

It was obvious to me due to many reasons, but mainly the hostile and aggressive behaviour of one of the grandparents.

In Australian culture this is not normal.

Maybe unusual, but not unheard of.

Eg: TV personality Jo Silvagni was caught on camera lashing out at a reporter after her son, Tom Silvagni, was sentenced to six years’ jail for two counts of rape. Link

Many examples out there: The chef had shoved 7NEWS reporter Deanna Williams into a bench before grabbing another journalist's microphone. Link

 

[Dotta]

So...

If I understand correctly,
the Suspect got this status because this person's timeline was questioned and decided to "clam up", right?
This Suspect's sudden "not cooperating" might be the sign of anger that this person's testimony is doubted.
So the Suspect got a lawyer.

But what is the other person's status?
The other person is not named a Suspect,
but hired a lawyer too.
A different lawyer.

Was this other person allegedly warned by Police to be a POI?

If the other person allegedly helped with the cover up,
isn't it a crime too?
Shouldn't the other person be named a Suspect as well?

Or is the other person cooperating with Police with just the help of the lawyer?
Is the other person some kind of witness?



JMO

 

[musicaljoke]

I wonder
how much time it takes to forensically examine objects taken by Police?
I mean - bike, car, phones, computer, etc?

Honestly,
I'm surprised it wasn't done earlier
as I've always thought
that it is by default that family members are checked in missing person situation.
That it is Procedure.

Why suddenly,
after 4 months!!!,
a person is, out of the blue, considered a Suspect?
But there was not forensics done concerning the house or above mentioned objects.

Also,
Police said 138??? tips were sent.
What is it all about?
Who sent them?
Neighbours???

This farm/station is so recluse,
so how anybody knows what is going on there?

And suddenly 138 tips appeared?
I doubt they have that many neighbours.

I really don't know what to think about all this

Is the Suspect still living at home?
I guess Yes,
as this person was not charged.

But what is the evidence that this person is a Suspect?
And that others are not?

JMO

The case was transferred to the Missing Persons Investigation Section of SAPOL within the week of when Gus Went missing. A person may have been considered a suspect from day one. We aren't privy to that information. Neither do we know what evidence they gathered at that time.

I doubt that it took four months to start looking at a certain person as a suspect and then start looking for evidence.

https://www.police.sa.gov.au/sa-police-news-assets/add-to-all-lsas/disappearance-of-gus-lamont-declared-a-major-crime