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

  • #4,581
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.


I understand.

But...
The car, bike and electronic devices have only recently been collected for forensic analysis, no?

Or am I mistaken?

I understood
they were collected only after re-interviews (in January???)
when some doubts in timeline appeared.
And when the analysis of drones' footage showed no traces of Gus.

And only then we heard about the Suspect and the devices and vehicles taken.

But I thought that members of the family were checked thoroughly at the very beginning.
And all the devices + vehicles were collected then.

I thought it is a normal procedure in a missing person case.
Because time is of essence.
Vital evidence might be lost.

If there was foul play,
what evidence is still there after 4 months?

JMO
 
Last edited:
  • #4,582
I really don't think Gus is on the property and maybe he was not there when he was reported missing.

If Gus wandered off and died of natural causes, IMO he would have been found in the first week.

Police may have suspicions of what happened, but they will be playing the long game and comparing original statements to new statements and looking for discrepancies IMO.

If multiple people are involved, Police will be hoping that one eventually cracks under pressure.
I posted this 4 weeks ago and now that both grandparents have lawyered up, I think things will go quiet for a while again.

The Police wont show their cards until they have to and they wont want to make any mistakes by going too early. They will be waiting for the Ace of Spades to come out in the deck.

They will be hoping that the pressure becomes too much IMO.
 
  • #4,583
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
What is your point in mentioning these outliers?
 
  • #4,584
If the adjoining Park is considered as a place in which Gus was hidden
then I'm a little pessimistic that the boy will be found.
It is déjà vu of Samantha M's situation
and never-ending, fruitless searches in all kinds of Parks.
She was never found :(

JMO
It would be hard to believe that the perpetrator would choose an area where Gus would be easily found so hiding the child somewhere where they cannot be found is paramount. We have to understand the psychology of the main individuals involved. We have to go back and see who assisted and who helped Police. Did we see any footage and photographs of Shannon assisting. I don't believe we have but she may have. Have we seen Josie out and assisting the Police. Yes we have. Why haven't we seen Shannon? We have been told that Shannon was the adult looking after the two children.
Was this an accident and then a cover-up? Or did someone commit murder? Why are the parents of Gus silent? We have been told that the parents are not the suspects. Surely the parents have voiced their conclusions to the Police and the Police are basing their findings on their statements.
 
  • #4,585
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.
RBBM. Moo
Context is needed if we are to begin discussing how JM aggressive behaviour, documented by one reporter on one occasion, could ( or should) have reasonably been taken as an indication of propensity for foul play in relation to Gus.

At the time that incident occurred, my opinion is we should remember that it was one media outlet which had not long before chosen to sensationally broadcast highly personal, private and irrelevant ( to Gus being missing) details about JM to the entire world.

Sorry, but given that as context, *JM's aggressive behaviour as reported on by certain media, I, for one, found it impossible to just assume that this aggression must likely indicate a propensity for foul play in relation to Gus IMO

As of now I don't feel any differently about that specific point ie that JM aggression as previously reported must now somehow obviously be equated with a propensity to hurt Gus. Jmo

EBM to bold part of OP post

EBM to remove one sentence that might possibly be taken as indicating anything to do with OT topic
 
Last edited:
  • #4,586
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.

Whilst I don't think a specific suspect was likely being considered from day one, concurrent investigations and keeping options open, yes to within the first week. Jmo
 
  • #4,587
Moo
Context is needed if we are to begin discussing how JM aggressive behaviour, documented by one reporter on one occasion, could ( or should) have reasonably been taken as an indication of propensity for foul play in relation to Gus.

At the time that incident occurred, my opinion is we should remember that it was one media outlet which had not long before chosen to sensationally broadcast highly personal, private and irrelevant ( to Gus being missing) details about JM to the entire world.

Sorry, but given that as context and all the other at-the-time context attached to the incident during which JM's aggressive behaviour was reported on by certain media, I, for one, found it impossible to assume that this aggression must likely indicate a propensity for foul play in relation to Gus. IMO

As of now I don't feel any differently about that specific point ie that JM aggression as previously reported must now somehow obviously be equated with a propensity to hurt Gus. Jmo
I've really flogged this topic to death previously, but here I go again.

It really worries me that so many people on this thread view the firearm incident as rational, innocent or justified. I truly hope the people that hold these views don't also hold gun licenses. IMO

Holding onto the gun while angrily confronting a journalist (instead of putting it away safely inside, calling police about trespass/nuisance, or simply closing the door) is disproportionate and irrational behaviour. IMO

The brief muzzle sweep across the direction of the journalist was extremely dangerous, unnecessary, and threatening. IMO

This incident tells me the grandparent responsible for this action lacks impulse control in high-emotion moments. IMO

Australian police and courts treat firearm displays in disputes very seriously due to the potential for escalation. Why they didn't act on this (that we know of, publicly) is strange to me, and perhaps tied to strategy. IMO
 
  • #4,588
I've really flogged this topic to death previously, but here I go again.

It really worries me that so many people on this thread view the firearm incident as rational, innocent or justified. I truly hope the people that hold these views don't also hold gun licenses. IMO

Holding onto the gun while angrily confronting a journalist (instead of putting it away safely inside, calling police about trespass/nuisance, or simply closing the door) is disproportionate and irrational behaviour. IMO

The brief muzzle sweep across the direction of the journalist was extremely dangerous, unnecessary, and threatening. IMO

This incident tells me the grandparent responsible for this action lacks impulse control in high-emotion moments. IMO

Australian police and courts treat firearm displays in disputes very seriously due to the potential for escalation. Why they didn't act on this (that we know of, publicly) is strange to me, and perhaps tied to strategy. IMO
I'm NOT talking about the firearm incident which is OT, please re-read my post. My point is equating aggressive behaviour directly to guilt without any context. This was the subject of your post, which I responded to.

ETA My post is JMO, with an explanation of why I hold that opinion that is all. I am explaining why I have a different opinion to yours. I am not trying to change your opinion, just express my own on the topic raised by you.

EBM for clarity
 
Last edited:
  • #4,589
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?
BBM
I assumed things such as ground that looked disturbed. Possible burial sites?
 
  • #4,590
I'm NOT talking about the firearm incident in and of itself which is OT, please re-read my post. My point is equating aggressive behaviour directly to guilt without any context. This was the subject of your post, which I responded to.
Reframing a firearm threat display as something that should be contextualised away doesn't change what it was: holding a gun while angrily confronting someone. That's not benign aggression... it's dangerous. Claiming it has no link to risk assessment feels (to me) like minimisation rather than objective analysis. IMO

The idea that it has zero bearing on any propensity for risk or poor impulse control under pressure seems inconsistent with how Australian authorities and most reasonable people view such conduct. IMO

It is not something you wave away with "the media did xyz first." IMO

The display was evidence of poor impulse control and willingness to escalate violently when angry or confronted. IMO
 
  • #4,591
Australian police and courts treat firearm displays in disputes very seriously due to the potential for escalation. Why they didn't act on this (that we know of, publicly) is strange to me, and perhaps tied to strategy. IMO
Because Josie claimed that he had just shot a snake and in this instance having a firearm in your hand is justified. But on film Josie has been seen in raising that firearm up in the air to their right.
 
Last edited:
  • #4,592
I've really flogged this topic to death previously, but here I go again.

It really worries me that so many people on this thread view the firearm incident as rational, innocent or justified. I truly hope the people that hold these views don't also hold gun licenses. IMO

Holding onto the gun while angrily confronting a journalist (instead of putting it away safely inside, calling police about trespass/nuisance, or simply closing the door) is disproportionate and irrational behaviour. IMO

The brief muzzle sweep across the direction of the journalist was extremely dangerous, unnecessary, and threatening. IMO

This incident tells me the grandparent responsible for this action lacks impulse control in high-emotion moments. IMO

Australian police and courts treat firearm displays in disputes very seriously due to the potential for escalation. Why they didn't act on this (that we know of, publicly) is strange to me, and perhaps tied to strategy. IMO
I completely agree with you on this. It was a very dark orange flag to me when it first happened.
In a previous post I mentioned in 'most normal' circumstances, the family will do anything to keep their loved ones in the news cycle, making pleas, even if its uncomfortable to do so.
Given what we know now it especially is worrisome because she was involved to some extent. That indicates to me they didn't want anyone snooping around bcus they might uncover the truth.
 
  • #4,593
DBM
 
Last edited:
  • #4,594
Because Josie claimed that he had just shot a snake and in this instance having a firearm in your hand is justified. But on film Josie has been seen in raising that firearm up in the air to his right.
And therein lies a serious concern that needs to be addressed about the disappearance of Gus Lamont.
If Josie was shooting at a snake on the property then why was Gus left alone to play in the dirt 27 September 2025. Snakes are generally more active during the warmer months, from September to April. Was Gus bitten by a snake and the situation escalated from there. Eastern brown, tiger snake, a copperhead etc.
 
  • #4,595
Reframing a firearm threat display as something that should be contextualised away doesn't change what it was: holding a gun while angrily confronting someone. That's not benign aggression... it's dangerous. Claiming it has no link to risk assessment feels (to me) like minimisation rather than objective analysis. IMO

The idea that it has zero bearing on any propensity for risk or poor impulse control under pressure seems inconsistent with how Australian authorities and most reasonable people view such conduct. IMO

It is not something you wave away with "the media did xyz first." IMO

The display was evidence of poor impulse control and willingness to escalate violently when angry or confronted. IMO
Moo this OT. My post has nothing to do with justifying JM's aggression as reported. I am explaining why I hold an opinion as to why JM could have behaved as she did, and ergo why I do not equate her aggressive behaviour as reported directly to a propensity to harm Gus. That is in response to your opinion that it does. Please re-read my post.
 
  • #4,596
So because the SAPOL presser contained so much information but also isn't really convenient to reference, I made a transcript. It's as verbatim as I could get it, down to the ums and uhs, although the device I was listening to it on didn't have the best audio. Anything that I wasn't certain on got marked with a [ph], [inaudible], or [indecipherable]. The people asking questions off microphone get the murkiest at a few points. If anyone wants to take a crack at filling in the blanks (looking at you Australians particularly), I'd be happy to edit it to include whatever you were able to make out.

I've also attempted to mark where images are referred to in the presentation (they often weren't shown on camera), and copy in or link to any I could find copies of.

04/02/2026 (Was it 05/02/2026 in Australia? Time zones...)
Press release with Detective Superintendent Darren Fielke, SA Police Major Crimes Detective


DARREN FIELKE: Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for - for coming in. Um, here today to provide you an update in relation to the ongoing missing person investigation relating to Gus Lamont. Um, the search for 4-year-old Gus, who disappeared from Oak Park Station on the 27th of September last year, has been the largest and most intensive missing person search ever undertaken by SAPOL. Every police officer and civilian involved in the search for Gus has had the sole focus of locating Gus and returning him to his parents.

Sadly, um, to date, our efforts to locate Gus have not been successful. Um on the 14th of October last year, uh, the commissioner, um, approved the establishment of Task Force Horizon to continue the investigation in relation to locating Gus.

Since Gus's disappearance, there's been a groundswell of support from a range of government agencies, uh, private companies, and community groups, all with the same focus as us, and that is to locate Gus. The scale of the air and ground search as part of this investigation, um, is unprecedented and today I'm going to provide you, uh, much more detail around what we have done in relation to that as part of the Task Force Horizon investigation.

Uh, the search for Gus, uh, was based on him walking off from Oak Park Station and becoming lost. Uh, this is one of three investigation options that have been explored by the members attached to Task Force Horizon. The other two investigation options are focused on Gus being abducted from Oak Park Station or whether someone known to him, uh, was involved in his disappearance, uh, and suspected death. I will provide you further details on all of those concurrent investigations, uh, this afternoon.

As well as that, um, today I'm also declaring the disappearance of Gus Lamont to be a major crime. So, I'll start with, uh, the foot search. Um, as I've indicated, the foot search has been unprecedented and the resources that have been used have been significant. And just to give you a snapshot of what that is, um, 163, uh, SAPOL members, including recruits, um, have been used in the search operation. 230 non-SAPOL resources have been used. That includes, uh, the SES, uh, the Australian Defence Force, the Army, um, who deployed twice, um, in and around the Oak Park Station area. Uh, Indigenous trackers and community groups have all been involved. Um, we've had deployments to Oak Park Station for over 20 days as part of that search operation. And there's been eight separate searches, at least eight separate churches conducted at Oak Park Station.

Due to the, uh, remoteness, um, of Oak Park Station and the challenges that that environment, um, provides, um, the searching would not have been possible, uh, without the assistance of these resources. And I'd just like to very quickly thank the Australian Defence Force and particularly the Army and the State Emergency Service for their participation in those searches.

Detailed ground search, um, to a radius of 5.47 47 kilometres, um, out from Oak Park Station, uh, was conducted over several days. So, I'd just like to show you what that is.

[IMAGE SHOWN] So, you'll see on the slide here, Oak Park Station in the middle and the -the blue line that goes around that is the distance of 5.47 km. That equates to about 94 square kilometres. To give you some context, uh, this is what it looks like if you overlaid that, um, into the CBD. [IMAGE SHOWN] You can see that 5 square kilometres, um, takes up the majority of the inner suburban metropolitan area of Adelaide. Um, it's a significant distance that has all been searched on foot, as I've said.

We’ll just go back to the slide that now shows you what that looks like on Oak Park Station. [IMAGE SHOWN] So, you'll see in the shaded area is, um, Oak Park Station itself. That is the boundary of the station. Um, the 5.4 - that 5.47 km, um, takes in a significant portion of the station, but you'll also see that it also just cuts, um, out of the station into some of the neighbouring properties. Again, all of that area there, 95 – or. 94 square kilometres has all been searched on foot.

Um, that search has been overseen by police forward commanders, experienced police forward commanders and very experienced field search controllers. We have a large degree of confidence that that area has been searched thoroughly.

You might ask, why 5.47 km? Uh, the national search and rescue manual, um, indicates to us scientifically, um, soundly based statistical data that children aged 4 to 6 years of age, um, are located 95% of the time within 4 - uh, 5 - uh, sorry, 5.47 kilometres of their last known place they were seen. So it's not guesswork. It's based on scientific, factual, reliable, statistical data is why we, um, put the foot surge into that area and why we invested so much time and effort into that area in the early part of this investigation.

As you'd appreciate, um, and you – you already know, this area contained three dams. Uh, those dams have been searched twice. Uh, on one of those occasions, we actually drained the dams, uh, so that the police divers could, um, satisfy themselves, uh, as close to 100% as they could, uh, that Gus, um, is not in any of those dams and we are confident, um, that he's not.

While I don't have a picture of it, there is a water course that also runs through Oak Park Station, uh, and that has also been thoroughly searched.

In total, as I said, eight searches have been conducted at Oak Park Station, uh, around the homestead, um, and outbuildings, interior and exterior of all of those buildings. You'll see, uh, in the top right is an overhead picture of Oak Park Station Homestead and some of those outbuildings. [IMAGE NOT SHOWN ON CAMERA] Uh, the larger picture is a picture of the shearing shed, um, and then the bottom right are some other outbuildings attached to, uh, Oak Park Station. Uh, not necessarily nearby to the homestead, um, some of them are a few kilometres away, but all of those out buildings, um, have been searched multiple times and some of those outbuildings have also been subjected to forensic testing. No stone has been left unturned in terms of searching those outbuildings and the homestead.

Coupled with that, um, the owners of Oak Park Station and the neighbouring properties have also been conducting their own searching. Um, we know that, uh, their properties have been, uh, mustered with the, uh, stock that's on those properties, um, at least once since the 27th of September, which effectively means they've covered a significant amount of ground in Oak Park Station, uh, mustering stock, uh, during that time. We've got no information, uh, that would suggest that Gus has been located during those searches either.

You'll also know that, uh, we've searched some mine shafts, uh, that are located - located within 10 kilometres of Oak Park Station. Uh, those two photographs there are indicative of what those mine shafts look like [IMAGE NOT SHOWN ON CAMERA]. Um, they were taken by, um, Task Force Horizon members who were on the ground the day that those mine shafts were searched. Um, we are confident, very confident, that Gus is not in these mine shafts. Um, six of them were done. Um, and gives you an indication of what they look like. That's ground searching, significant.

I'll just go to aerial searching now. So, we've conducted, um, aerial searching of vast areas surrounding Oak Park Station. Initially, Polair attended, um, and searched from Oak Park Station, um, out to a distance of around about 12 km, um, on the night that Gus disappeared, using their forward-looking infrared technology attached to the - to the helicopter, um, but there was no sign of Gus using that capability.

We then employed the services of a specialized drone company who did some, uh, specific searching out to 2 1/2 kilometres from the homestead, 2 km around the dams that I spoke about, and also down, uh, some roadways leading in and out of Oak Park Station, about 8 km down one roadway and 6 kilometres down another. The imagery - um, and I I'll speak about the imagery shortly.

Um, we also engaged the services, um, of an aircraft that had, um, highly specialized, uh, camera equipment, uh, in the aircraft. That aircraft flew on two occasions for us. Um, firstly out to a distance of 10 km, which included the - the 5. So you'll see the red line gets out to 10 [IMAGE NOT SHOWN ON CAMERA] and also it flew out to 15 kilometres, and that's the green line. Again, I'll give you an indication of what that might look like in terms of area as you overlay it onto the metropolitan area of Adelaide. [IMAGE NOT SHOWN ON CAMERA] That's the area that has been searched, um, by a highly specialized, um, aircraft. It's not an insignificant, um, area. In fact, out to the green line is 706 square kilometres has been searched.

05-feb-gus-lamont-release-2.webp


Just go back, um, to the Oak Park - to the Oak Park Station. There you can see 94 square kilometres was initial search out to 10. Um, we then went out to 15. Uh, as I've said earlier 95% of 4 to 6-year olds statistically are located, uh, within that blue circle; we are reducing that percentage even further by going out significantly further than - than the 5 km. Such as the effort, um, that we've made to - to locate Gus.

What we did with the imagery that was captured by the aircraft and the drone, we gave to an external, um, AI company, who was able to provide us really high definition, uh, pictures and - and footage, and all of this imagery has been reviewed by members who attached to Task Force Horizon.

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

So I'd just like to give you just a bit of an indication of what that looks like. So when we get our report back from the company, you'll see on the right, um, is essentially a circle. That is the circle out to 15 km, and you'll see different colours within that. And what those colours are relates to what's on the left of the screen, uh, in terms of livestock and, um, and animals. So, um, from the AI we know that at that particular time Oak Park Station had almost 10,000 sheep, which are blue, um, on their station. Um, 6,300-plus goats, kangaroos, it even distinguishes between red and grey ones, such as the ability of the AI. Um, and - and so it goes on. So all of those animals are depicted there within that - within that circle.

You'll see down the bottom that it's detected one human, and I'll - I'll show you what that is, um, in a minute. Um, but what we've what it also does is it, um, identifies to us areas of interest that should be searched that is not obvious to the AI, um, where they can't distinguish whether it's an animal or they can tell us, um, what it is. So we have attended Oak Park Station on a number of occasions checking out those individual sites.

[IMAGE NOT SHOWN ON CAMERA] So here's a, um, a slide that shows you what that imagery looks like. Really high quality. The human is, uh, on the right there, that's riding the motorbike. Um, clearly that's not Gus, but that will show you, um, that the will pick up what a human is compared to a sheep or a goat or - or a kangaroo.

[IMAGE NOT SHOWN ON CAMERA] So we just go to the next slide and that's how we can zoom in, um, on the imagery and how clear that is and what we can actually see on the ground, um, particularly out past that 10 and 12 -- uh, 10 and 15-kilometer mark. There's a couple of sheep there.

So, this is a capability that hasn't previously been used by SAPOL. Um, and really, uh, getting this imagery, um, captured and analysed for us would not have been possible without the assistance of some of these companies. And I just want to take a very short moment to thank them and they are Nearmaps [sic] Proprietary Limited, Working Drones Australia, Fujitsu, Sci - Sci-eye Proprietary Limited, and the Australian Federal Police also assisted, and I want to thank them for the support that they've given to Task Force Horizon and the support that they continue to give is much appreciated.

So, what's the result of all of this? The ground searches and the aerial searches with the images that you've seen, um, have failed to locate Gus or any items belonging to Gus. At this time, despite all of the combined search efforts, we have found no evidence, physical or otherwise, to suggest that Gus has merely wandered off from the home park - from the Oak Park homestead. However, if we do get new information that does come to hand, um, I'm not going to discount that further searching will be done. But you can see from the, uh, level of searching that has been undertaken, um, we have a high level of confidence that he hasn't wandered off.

As I said earlier, uh, the investigation, um, has also focused on, uh, whether Gus was abducted from the property. Um, and that has been a significant part of the Task Force Horizon members’ day-to-day work, uh, in terms of establishing whether that has or has not happened.

What we've done in relation to abduction, uh, we have spoken to all people in the broader area, um, around the mid north and - and out even further who presents a risk profile associated with abduction or child offending. Those people have been discounted. We've identified and spoken to neighbours and people who were or had been working on Oak Park Station or neighbouring properties at around the time of Gus's disappearance. We've identified people and vehicles in the vicinity of or traveling around the area of Oak Park Station at the time of Gus's disappearance. All of those people have been contacted and have been discounted.

In addition to that, we've assessed, reviewed, and investigated 380 Crime Stopper actions, 38 emails directly received from members of the public, two letters that were received with information from members of the public, and a large number of internal South Australia Police intelligence documents. Through all of this effort, we have found no evidence to suggest that Gus was abducted from the property.

So on that, I just want to quickly go through to firm that up for you what opportunity for abduction might look like. Oak Park Station is remote. It is 45 km inland from the nearest main roadway, which is the barrier highway. Oak Park Station doesn't have a signpost or anything like that off a road that points you to Oak Park Station. There's nothing obvious that would lead you to Oak Park Station unless you know, uh, where you're going and the way there. It can only be accessed by one of two 45 km dirt roads that come in from different directions.

[IMAGE NOT SHOWN ON CAMERA]

The red line, um, on the bottom right there, uh, will show you - it looks like one road, but it's actually two. You'll see Oak Park Station kind of in the - the middle there. Uh, the one line that comes in, uh, from the left of that picture and the other from the top right are the two roads that come into Oak Park Station. They can only be accessed, uh, by 4-wheel drive. Um, if you're driving on those roads, you're going to one of the stations or you're lost. It's not a place that you just go to.

There are several gates on each of the driveways which impede access to Oak Park Station, and a number of these gates are regularly locked and secured by the station owners and the property owners in the area. Both the driveways, um, bypass other neighbouring properties. You have to drive past other stations to get to Oak Park. The roads are not a thoroughfare. And as I've said, if you're driving on those roads, you - you're there for a reason.

There were no vehicles, uh, foreign to the area at Oak Park Station, uh, that have been identified by either the property owners themselves or the neighbouring properties at the time that Gus went missing. We know that if there is a vehicle that is cited, um, anywhere in the vicinity of Oak Park Station, I'm saying anywhere kilometres away from Oak Park Station, there is normally dust in the air that will tell you that a vehicle, um, is either arriving or leaving that area. No dust, no sighting of any vehicles at the time that Gus, uh, went missing. There's been no foreign tracks located arriving or leaving the property.

The timing of being in the area when Gus was playing outside would need to be impeccable. If Gus has been abducted it is absolutely fortuitous. There is no, um, pattern of Gus playing outside at Oak Park Station. So for someone to, um, start to, um, get a dossier together on movements and time of the day, et cetera, um, is - we are very confident is very, very unlikely. So the opportunity for anybody, um, to abduct Gus is extremely low, uh, with what I've just explained about the remoteness of the property and with the work that Task Force Horizon investigators have done around, uh, people in the area at the time.

So it leaves us with, uh, the other part of the investigation, and that is, um, investigating whether people known to Gus were involved in his disappearance. So from the time that Gus went missing, the family members have been cooperating with police and providing information that has assisted with establishing the movements of Gus around the time that he went missing. Um, a detailed review of all of that information has been conducted by Task Force Horizon members. As a result of that, we've identified a number of inconsistencies and discrepancies, uh, with that information as it relates to, uh, timelines and the versions of events provided to us, uh, by the family members.

As a result of these inconsistencies and investigations into them, a person who resides at Oak Park Station has withdrawn their support, uh, for the police and is no longer cooperating with us.

On the 14th and 15th of January this year, Task Force Horizon investigators attended at Oak Park Station and executed a search warrant. A further comprehensive forensic search was conducted of the Oak Park Station homestead and a number of items were seized, including a vehicle, a motorcycle, and some electronic devices. All of these items are now subject to forensic testing.

The person who has withdrawn their cooperation, uh, is now considered a suspect in the disappearance of Gus. I do want to stress, however, that Gus's parents are not suspects in his disappearance. You'd appreciate at this time I cannot make any further comment about the suspect, given that this is now a criminal investigation and a declared major crime. What I can say, however, is that we'll continue to thoroughly and meticulously investigate the disappearance of Gus until we get an outcome. We are all focused and determined to locate Gus and return him to his parents. Nothing is off the table as we work towards that outcome.

Just want to take just a short opportunity to thank some people so far. As I've said, it's a 4-month investigation, uh, that is - is ongoing. I do want to thank the members of the public who have provided information to police. Uh, the information has been overwhelming at times, but it has been valuable and all of that information has been investigated. On that, I again encourage anyone who has any information that might assist the investigation and particularly to, um, assist us to locate Gus, uh, to contact police or to call Crimestoppers on 1-800-333-000.

I want to acknowledge, uh, the assistance that has been provided to Task Force Horizon by the local police attached to the Yorke-Mid North region and the other specialist areas including those sections, uh, within Star Group [sic]. Uh, their support has been a very, very important part of progressing this investigation.

Finally, I'd like to sincerely thank, uh, the detectives, intelligence, and uniformed members who are attached to Task Force Horizon. These members have worked tirelessly and displayed unwavering commitment, uh, dedication, and resilience during what has been a very complex and challenging investigation. All of these officers at times have made personal sacrifices, but they remain as committed today to this investigation as what they were at the start. Um, we are all, uh, working towards locating Gus and returning him to his parents. I'm proud of the work that Task Force Horizon have done and continue to do, and the community should take comfort that no stone is being un - left unturned in this investigation.

Just some advice, uh, for you as the media. I want to take the opportunity to remind you that, uh, on the instructions of the family, you don't have permission to enter Oak Park Station. If you don't heed those instructions, there is a very good chance that, uh, you'll face trespassing charges. That's on the instructions of the family. On the same note, the family members have requested privacy in relation to this as they continue to work through the grief of losing 4-year-old Gus. I would appreciate if you would, um, respect their privacy. It would help them a lot, um, as they work through this.

So, I'm happy, um, to take any questions that you have. Um, you would appreciate that there are some operational and investigational matters that I can't, um, make comment on or expand on at this time, but I'm happy to take your questions.

QUESTION: Superintendent Sergeant - Detective [sic], [indecipherable] sorry. Um, it's obviously been widely reported before that there was Gus’s grandmother, grandparent, mother, and younger brother on the property at the time. You've obviously discounted, um, uh, other workers on neighbouring properties on the property. Were the [ph] police identified any other family members or friends that were on the property at the time?

DARREN FIELKE: No, they're the only people that were on the property at the time.

[CROSS TALK]

DARREN FIELKE: Sorry?

QUESTION: Are you confident that there'll be an arrest?

DARREN FIELKE: The investigation it clearly is continuing. As I've said, um, we want to find Gus. Um, if we make an arrest, then that is - I'm not discounting that we will, definitely.

QUESTION: Will you be conducting other searches outside of Oak Park now that you’re confident he’s not there?

DARREN FIELKE: If information comes to hand that would lead us to another area to search, um, we will search those areas. As you can see, um, from the pictures I showed you earlier - earlier, uh, 15 kilometres out from Oak Park homestead is a significant distance. It covers a significant amount of, um, country, or, um, area. Uh, we don't intend to search, um - or, we don't have any information that would s [sic] - to go to search any other areas at this time. Uh, but as I've said, if we get new information, we - we will search almost anywhere to find Gus.

QUESTION: In terms of the suspect, are they still living on the property and how difficult does that make your investigation?

DARREN FIELKE: Um, as I said, I can't talk too much. Well, I - not even too much. I can't give you any more information about the suspect or where the suspect is, um, and why that person is a suspect. Um, when we have a suspect in an investigation, it can prove - its - have its own challenges. So, we're working through those. Task Force Horizon are completely aware of what those challenges are. Um, but we'll continue to pursue the investigation on that front.

QUESTION: When have police first become aware of the discrepancies in the timeline [inaudible]?

DARREN FIELKE: So, we've been obtaining information from family members right at the start of this investigation. Um, we have spoken to, uh, members of the family on multiple occasions, um, in order to get information, uh, in relation to Gus's disappearance. Only as recently as the 14th and 15th of January when we attended there did we get more information, uh, that we've analysed, um, and reviewed, which, again, has highlighted some discrepancies. So when we lined the information that we received up - received from the family against what we've been doing concurrently in relation to searching and the abduction possibility, um, all of that information has taken some time to get here or to get to this point. Um, so we've been looking at information almost right from the start.

QUESTION: Can you elaborate on those discrepancies?

DARREN FIELKE: No, I'm not going to elaborate, no, on those.

QUESTION: And I imagine that you have to be really careful with your language here and you wouldn't declare someone a suspect if you didn't have good reason. Can you just talk us through how delicate this investigation is?

DARREN FIELKE: Uh, yeah, it's very delicate. Uh, a person - we have a suspect, um, who we believe is known to Gus. So, um, I - I'm not going to, uh, speak too much about that at all, but I can tell you that, um, Task Force Horizon members, um, myself, are very cognizant of how delicate that is and - and what that means for the family. Yeah.

QUESTION: Just coming back to the option of [indecipherable] someone known to him is involved in the disappearance. When you say that [sic] - obviously it's been publicized before that the police believe Gus is dead. You're suggesting that somebody known to him has killed him either deliberately or accidentally? Is that specifically what we're saying?

DARREN FIELKE: That is - that - that is what is being explored. Yes. Yep. We - we don't believe now that Gus is alive. That is true.

QUESTION: How - how difficult is an investigation like this where you go into a potential disappearance to then be able to treat it as a potential murder or accidental death? How difficult is that line to tread for police in these investigations?

DARREN FIELKE: Yeah, that's - it is difficult to tread, but we work on follow the evidence. We work on the information that comes in and that's why, you know, it's - it's 4 months we've been - been doing this. So, uh, investigations take many twists and turns. Um, as I said, we - 380 Crime Stopper actions that need to be followed up. We don't know whether any of those have a - the small part of the jigsaw puzzle or the small snippet that we're looking for.

So, it's challenging. It's delicate at times when you're dealing with family members. It's challenging when you're dealing with a - the broader community, when you know a 4-year-old child is missing. Um, but our people, uh, have been unwavering in all of that. They've kept an open mind, uh, and still do, um, for much of the time. So it has its challenges, but we've got a great team of people working on Task Force Horizon and I'm confident we'll come up with the right resolution.

QUESTION: Does the suspect have legal representation now?

DARREN FIELKE: Yes.

QUESTION: And how - how is that - is that causing a challenge for police?

DARREN FIELKE: Uh, I'll just leave it at that. They've got legal representation.

QUESTION: Do you think Gus was ever there when police were there initially?

DARREN FIELKE: Um, possibly. Police were on scene quite quickly - uh, well, s - quickly when they were advised that Gus was missing. Um, yes, there was some time in - in between, but it is possible.

QUESTION: Do you believe that the timeline of when he was last seen still stands?

DARREN FIELKE: We're still working on that timeline. Yes.

QUESTION: Can you tell us what items you seized?

DARREN FIELKE: Uh, we seized -

QUESTION: From the house [ph]?

DARREN FIELKE: Um, we seized - seized a vehicle, a motorcycle, and some electronic devices.

QUESTION: In terms of the difference - and this is much different to [indecipherable] in terms of the remoteness of this, is it hard to confirm discrepancies, timelines when you are in such a remote area? What's the difference between that and that in the city?

DARREN FIELKE: Yes, it is. This - and the - one of the biggest challenges we've had in this investigation is the location of where - where it's occurred. Um, so in a metropolitan area, we - we can often rely on CCTV. We can rely on traffic camera, um, footage, for example. E - there's a lot more witnesses that we can get accounts from. Um, that's what makes this challenging, um, in terms of the amount of people that, uh, are in - involved, um, as - as family members who are providing us the information, and then coupled with who we've been able to discount out of this. That's what - that's what makes it harder. Um, and anything that happens remotely like that, um, challenges us from what our traditional ways of doing investigations can be. So.

QUESTION: Have you - given that you've obviously done a pretty extensive search, is - do you believe the only way you're going to find Gus is if somebody gives you the information as to where he is?

DARREN FIELKE: Uh, we would love for that to happen. Um, but we won't stop, um, pulling all the levers we can, uh, to find him. So that might mean, uh, we do do more searching with new information. Um, but it is a possibility that one of the ways that we - clearly that we will find him if someone comes forward and tells us what has happened and where he is.

QUESTION: Just on the AI technology that you showed with like the sheep and [indecipherable] human there [ph], how reliable is that and confident now [ph] that he's not in that space that was searched?

DARREN FIELKE: Highly confident.

QUESTION: Yes.

DARREN FIELKE: Highly confident.

QUESTION: So he's been removed or could potentially [ph] -

DARREN FIELKE: We don't think he's in that search area. We don't think he's in the 5.74 km. Um, we're highly confident of the detail of that search, and yes, we're talking about, uh, aerial AI imagery, but you've seen how clear that is. Um, we're highly confident he's not in that area.

QUESTION: What can you tell us about the significance of the vehicle and the motorbike that you've seized?

DARREN FIELKE: I won't go into it too much, but we know that they were vehicles that have been used on the property. Um, they are of interest to us. Uh, they will undergo forensic examination and we'll see what comes from that.

QUESTION: You also mentioned electronical devices. Can you elaborate on what they are?

DARREN FIELKE: Phones, computers, iPads.

QUESTION: Do you suspect that perhaps Gus could have been moved in one of those vehicles?

DARREN FIELKE: Um, I'm not going to speculate, um, on what, uh, we think might have happened. We are following, um, some investigational lines of inquiry, um, around those vehicles and, um, the electronic devices, et cetera. But I won't speculate on that at this point.

QUESTION: How long will it take for that to come back, the forensics?

DARREN FIELKE: Uh, I - I- I - I don't know, but we don't expect it to be too long.

QUESTION: In relation to the suspect, have police identified any potential motives?

DARREN FIELKE: No.

QUESTION: How was the family when you tell them this news?

DARREN FIELKE: Um, shocked, um, would be - would be one. Um, they - they want to find, um, a solution to this just as we do. So, um, we're working closely with them. We're supporting them. We speak to them regularly. Um, so I think they would have been shocked to think, um, what our next move has been in relation to the investigation. Yeah.

QUESTION: And are they [ph] still communicating, or-

DARREN FIELKE: Yes.

QUESTION: [indecipherable]

DARREN FIELKE: No, they're still talking.

UNKNOWN: Last question, please?

DARREN FIELKE: Good.

QUESTION: Yeah, would you mind just pointing to the screen for us please [indecipherable]?

[IMAGES SHOWN]

DARREN FIELKE: Sure. You happy with that picture?

QUESTION: Maybe just a couple of different photos.

UNKNOWN: When you're ready it’s -- yeah.

DARREN FIELKE: So, that's the AI imagery. As I've said, um, got someone riding a motorbike and, um, and animals on the property. This is some of the AI imagery that we've seen that comes back that shows, um, different animals and livestock on the property.

05-feb-gus-lamont-release-2.webp


As I’ve said earlier, we’ve searched out to 15 kilometres from Oak Park Station. The homestead's basically where the ‘P’ is. That's 706 square kilometres, uh, significant, uh, amount of - of country that's been subjected to search.

[IMAGE SHOWN] That’s those mine shafts.

05-feb-gus-lamont-release-3.webp


So you'll see up - that's the immediate Oak Park Station homestead, which is there. It's a series of outbuildings, um, around the station, the shearing shed, um, over there. So again, all of these buildings have been searched multiple times.

QUESTION: [indecipherable] the suspect, is that person biologically related to Gus?

DARREN FIELKE: I'm not going to make any more comment in a [ph] - about the suspect. Okay [ph].

UNKNOWN: Thanks everyone.

END


Link to the video again, for reference: SAPOL Presser

Link to the SAPOL page accompanying the presser, including some additional photos (including the ones I embedded here): Disappearance of Gus Lamont declared a major crime
 
Last edited:
  • #4,597
What is your point in mentioning these outliers?
The discussion was around temper outbursts. These 2 recent Australia cases proves how normal people can have temper outbursts if pushed too far by media.
 
  • #4,598
The discussion was around temper outbursts. These 2 recent Australia cases proves how normal people can have temper outbursts if pushed too far by media.

I don't think that's in question, but also think take away the gun and just have Josie furiously shouting at an intrusive, inconsiderate journalist to go away while not holding a deadly weapon and we wouldn't be having this same conversation. Brandishing a gun fundamentally changes the nature of the confrontation. And it's beyond what a normal person would do in response to anything short of an active, immediate threat to your safety, which is not what this obnoxious reporter was. You lose your temper, you put the gun down. If you don't have the self control to do that, you have no business owning/handling firearms. Because you're going to end up killing someone.
 
  • #4,599
Looking over old media reports…..




29 September, 2025

He was wearing a grey sun hat, a cobalt blue t-shirt with a yellow minion from the movie Despicable Me on the front, light grey long pants and boots.


His family have declined to release an image of him.”




 
  • #4,600
DBM - because we were asked by a mod not to speak (any more) about the subject matter.
 
Last edited:

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
264
Guests online
4,038
Total visitors
4,302

Forum statistics

Threads
640,554
Messages
18,761,643
Members
244,687
Latest member
ghostyy_17
Back
Top