I want to own something I’ve been short sighted on.
I’ve seen the reporting that Jess and Josie were about 10km away doing station work when Gus went missing. I didn’t give it much weight for two reasons.
First, I’ve always disliked the initial timeline, especially the three hour gap before police were called. Because that gap never sat right with me, anything tied to it got discounted as well.
Second, that 10km detail initially seemed to come from one outlet only. It felt like a leak, and I treated it like an unconfirmed media detail rather than something to build a full scenario around.
For the purpose of this post, I’m doing the opposite. I’m giving that 10km detail full weight and pressure testing what the case looks like if it’s true.
Assumptions
Assumption 1
Jess and Josie really were away from the homestead area around the time Gus was last seen and then noticed missing.
Assumption 2
They may have been away working for a large part of the day, not just for one moment. Meaning the “gap” is potentially bigger than the three hours everyone fixates on.
Assumption 3
Police are now effectively ruling out wandered off and ruling out stranger abduction, and are focusing on someone known to him, with timeline discrepancies central to that.
If those assumptions hold, this pulls a lot together.
The three hour gap no longer needs to be interpreted as the mother choosing not to call police. It can be interpreted as the call being made when the away pair returned and insisted on escalating, while the person at the homestead was the one making the initial decisions and setting the initial narrative.
And this is the part I think I’ve underweighted the whole time.
If only one adult was physically present for the critical window, then everyone else is downstream of that person’s account. The baseline story becomes whatever that person says happened, and the others are reacting to it, searching within it, and repeating it, even if doubts form later. That also explains why discrepancies and inconsistencies can become such a big deal months later. Because if the foundation account is wrong, everything built on top of it is wrong, and it takes time and objective checking to expose that.
It also means the “cleanest” structure is not complicated. It’s a single point of truth problem. One person has the fullest information about what happened in the critical window, and everyone else has fragments and assumptions.
If the 10km away detail is wrong, this whole framework collapses. If it’s right, it explains why the early narrative could hold for as long as it did, and why police are now talking about timeline discrepancies as the driver for suspect focus.
That’s my updated thinking.
Interested in how others interpret the 10km detail and whether they think it changes the three hour gap the way it does for me.