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

[whinewiththegravy]

I am actively wondering why--like several other WSers and in light of the very opaque timeline LE have given in the impeccably transcripted presser--Grandma J is assumed to be the non-parental resident who has "withdrawn" their "cooperation" and whose "timeline" is now questionable.

Firstly, lawyers for both grandmothers have affirmatively pledged their continuing cooperation and have otherwise refused to offer further public comment. Burden of proof is on LE characterizing one grandparent as non-cooperative and making that non-cooperation* or expression of basic rights seem suspect and suggestive of guilt is prejudicial.

Further, I'm surprised authorities in Australia would fudge their timelines in a fashion that obfuscates the probative, substantive relevance of their heretofore untested "AI" imaging. To wit: we're told "only as recently as the 14th and 15th of January when we attended there did we get more information" about possible purported discrepancies in timelines from Gus's mother and both grandparents. But there is no narrative as to how these "discrepancies" were determined and on what grounds, other than that they appeared to occur after investigators were convinced their "AI"-assisted imagery ruled out Gus wandering away and perishing undetected on the property.

If investigators assumed their tech was fool-proof, any testimony by Jess or both grandmothers consistent with their original statements could be viewed as faulty or lies. Pushed to "admit" to erring, any or all of the women could be harried into hedging or altering their testimony to fit this new "AI" data. Thus, discrepancies are born.

It's extremely concerning to me that 14/15 January marks the culmination of the "imaging" and the beginning of the three women either spontaneously revealing "discrepancies" or being interrogated with "findings" that have never been tested in an Australian court but concern a size and kind of geography, a span of time, and a type of vulnerable human that goes missing multiple times per year with no human intervention necessary and whose remains almost invariably remain missing but for sheer luck. Investigators decided the images can't lie, and battered the women until they supposedly diverged or broke down. Why re-interview key witnesses in this order? Why would phone or other vehicle data only come into play after your "AI" imaging creates new opportunities to blindly poke holes into the original reports? Is the law so strict it wouldn't warrant examination of a simple set of alibis before this but simultaneously so lax that novel experiments without guardrails warrant throwing them out?

The lay explanation we were given about the "detection" of different movements per animal, vehicle, human, is all about odds, pixels, and the flagging of a human to validate the results. Will they quantify those odds against the known ones concerning how humans actually going missing? For all the science patter, the real world pattern again goes unsaid.

*per both attorneys, non-cooperation appears to be dsputing an alternative timeline LE have invented and asked bystanders to agree to, or addressing supposed discrepancies they have previously acknowledged/denied

 

[jepop]

If it were to turn out Gus' mama didn't see him that morning, I would completely understand, assuming she didn't want to risk waking him by going into his bedroom, and she knew a relative was home to take care of him when he woke up. Some kids aren't deep enough sleepers to risk waking them by going into the room (at least I can't open and close our bedroom doors 100% silently). IMO.

For sure, although Imo it does need to be said it's just speculation that JL/JM took off at the crack of dawn to commence whatever it was they were doing on the station that day.

I think that for those who tend towards believing the basics represented in the police timeline back then are still considered to be solid by police now ( I lean that way at present), then all we can assume is that SM was alone with the children at the time she told police Gus went missing, and that JM/JL were out on the station.

For all anyone knows, JM could have gone out early and JL joined them after breakfast, or they both may have left after Gus was up. We don't have that level of detail available to us.

But if police are still working off the same time line that Gus disappeared that day ( ie not the day before for eg), then I think they must be quite certain that he was alive and well at the homestead that morning. If so, then Imo this will be because JL saw him before she left (whatever time that may have been,) and Police believe her. Jmo

Bouncing off to speculation as to what timeline police are working from * now*, below is something I picked up from the presser last week ( I made a post a ways back about it).

At about time stamp 32:36 the Supt. is asked:

"Does the time line from when he was last seen still stand?"

He replies "We are still working on that time line, yes".

 

[Dotta]

As I understand it
if Jess is not considered to have anything with the disappearance of Gus
then the timeline she provided to Police is true, no?

And it was the original one.
I mean,
what time she left,
what time she returned,
who she was with,
where,
was she left alone there?
If yes, for how long?
Etc, etc....

Because,
why would she lie?
She had nothing to hide.
No reason.

Otherwise,
she would be suspected of cover up.
And she is not.

JMO