• #5,361
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5,362
Thanks, unfortunately it's paywalled.

Ahh sorry, I should have said, but I can vouch that it was taken from the article.
 
  • #5,363
  • #5,364
Ahh sorry, I should have said, but I can vouch that it was taken from the article.
Thanks @Marg944, I don't doubt it was taken from the article. What it means is open to interpretation though and context (within the article) may help with that.

I could pose all sorts of questions and go down a DM parsing rabbit hole speculating what a context-less quote might signify about JM but no time for it. Will only note by Oct 10th the search was deemed a recovery operation on OaK Park and being dealt with by Police and Task Force professionals. It's not clear what help a daily mail reporter or paper could offer that would be of any value to that. If I had to guess without context, JM is refusing the DM's help not help in general and not the help of professionals and the police. And I'll leave it there. Jmo of course.

ETA I believe Police returned to Oak Park a few days after this report was published to carry out a second intensive foot search, expanding out the perimeter to approx 5.5km (which in the Feb 5 presser was said to cover 94 square KMS)

DM article was 10th Oct, Expanded foot search Oct 14th to 16th.

 
Last edited:
  • #5,365
  • #5,366
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5,367
The “very private”” family mentioned back in early October is mentioned again in this recent article.



Police have said the family is “very private”, people who, according to Superintendent Mark Syrus, “like the isolation” of their rural homestead life.

They’re a very private family, and they don’t get many visitors up here,” he said on October 1.

“It’s very tough for them. They like the isolation, and over the last six days, they’ve had over 100 people in the area being part of their lives.

“We gave them space because that’s what they needed, just a bit of time to rationalise what has happened and to come to terms with it.”





 
  • #5,368
<snipped for focus>

Police have said the family is “very private” [..........]

“We gave them space because that’s what they needed, just a bit of time to rationalise what has happened and to come to terms with it.”






I'm a little tweaked by the quote being that the family has to rationalize and come to terms with what has happened, rather than rationalize and come to terms with what is unknown.

MOO
 
  • #5,369
It just occurred to me that maybe any body was moved more than once. For example, an initial place close by, then removal further afield (outside search area and/or Oak Park, and possibly again as a final place after consideration or simply to further conceal it after being privy to police ideas and plans.

Just speculation. JMO.
 
  • #5,370


Perhaps what Mark Aldridge said about access to an area being blocked is true.

It possibly could be the reason why there are now two uncooperative family members 🤔
 
  • #5,371
It just occurred to me that maybe any body was moved more than once. For example, an initial place close by, then removal further afield (outside search area and/or Oak Park, and possibly again as a final place after consideration or simply to further conceal it after being privy to police ideas and plans.

Just speculation. JMO.

It's possible, but I would expect a scent trail would be found in any vehicle that might have been used.
 
  • #5,372
Murray was charged with one count of possession of a sound moderator, which is an 'aggravated offence as the moderator fits a firearm in their possession'.

Acting Officer in Charge of Major Crime Investigation Branch, Detective Inspector Andrew Macrae, said that the charge is not connected to the disappearance of the four-year-old or an incident with a journalist on the property in October.

Detectives recently revealed that a person known to Gus was now considered a suspect in his disappearance and suspected death. However, they stressed that Gus's mother and father, Jessica Murray and Joshua Lamont, were not suspects.
 
  • #5,373
Does anybody know when the gun silencer was found by police?

I’m curious to know if it was the same day Josie was charged with possession of it or whether it was noted in a previous search.
If it’s a delayed charge I find that very odd.

From footage I saw there was a helicopter used in the last search to take police to an area and I’m wondering if that may be because Josie really did block access (there’s earth moving machinery on the property ) which angered police and led them to charging her.

Just speculating and trying to make sense of this bizarre situation ….
 
  • #5,374
Does anybody know when the gun silencer was found by police?

I’m curious to know if it was the same day Josie was charged with possession of it or whether it was noted in a previous search.
If it’s a delayed charge I find that very odd.

From footage I saw there was a helicopter used in the last search to take police to an area and I’m wondering if that may be because Josie really did block access (there’s earth moving machinery on the property ) which angered police and led them to charging her.

Just speculating and trying to make sense of this bizarre situation ….

Hmmm....

Not a lot makes sense in this case.
I asked the same question ❓ many posts ago.

Maybe Police kept this knowledge for some time
and struck JM when it suited them?
Like something strategic to put pressure.

But really,
who knows??? 🤔

Certainly, not us.

JMO
 
  • #5,375
Hmmm....

Not a lot makes sense in this case.
I asked the same question ❓ many posts ago.

Maybe Police kept this knowledge for some time
and struck JM when it suited them?
Like something strategic to put pressure.

But really,
who knows??? 🤔

Certainly, not us.

JMO
Perhaps when Josie stopped cooperating?

If I remember correctly, the day after the moderator charge, it was reported that the second person had stopped cooperating. Who knows what order that actually happened in.
 
  • #5,376
Perhaps when Josie stopped cooperating?

If I remember correctly, the day after the moderator charge, it was reported that the second person had stopped cooperating. Who knows what order that actually happened in.

Media reports say Josie Murray was charged following a previous search - which could have been the search we have been informed of which was 14 & 15 January 2026.


February 5 2026

SA Police reveal suspect and declare disappearance of Gus a major crime

“SA Police said a person living at Oak Park Station is now a suspect in the case of missing four-year-old Gus Lamont, who vanished from a remote station in the state’s Mid North in September last year.”




ARREST

February 17 2026

“As a result of a previous search at Oak Park Station, Task Force Horizon detectives have today arrested a 75-year-old from Grampus and charged them with firearm offences,” they said.”











So IMO, the timeline could be…..


14 & 15 January 2026 - Police search Oak Park & several items seized.


5 February 2026 - Police declare they have a suspect and declare Gus’s disappearance as a major crime. Police declare that person has withdrawn their support for the Police and is no longer co-operating with them.


17 February 2026 - Josie Rachelle Murray is arrested and charged with possession of illegal gun silencer and bailed to appear in Peterborough court on 6 May, 2026.


IMO
 
  • #5,377
It just occurred to me that maybe any body was moved more than once. For example, an initial place close by, then removal further afield (outside search area and/or Oak Park, and possibly again as a final place after consideration or simply to further conceal it after being privy to police ideas and plans.

Just speculation. JMO.
It would be a ballsy move to place little Gus somewhere on the property temporarily before the police report was made knowing that a team of investigators would be on the scene searching for hours. Unless of course it was a location that aligned with the story of "wandering off". i.e. mine shaft close by. In my opinion it comes down to that window of opportunity that I summise was between Jess leaving in the morning and returning that afternoon. Possibly a 12 hour window. Plenty of time to move the little guy somewhere off the property. Still the potential to relocate at a later date. I don't believe anything nefarious happened to Gus the night before as Jess would have been home and potentially would have checked on him that night. Bub is obviously not breast fed as the time she is away would negate this but I would assume she would still check on both children before leaving in the morning. Possibly not if she didn't want to wake them but I hold firm in the belief that whatever happened took place on the day of his disappearance.
 
Last edited:
  • #5,378
It would be a ballsy move to place little Gus somewhere on the property temporarily before the police report was made knowing that a team of investigators would be on the scene searching for hours. Unless of course it was a location that aligned with the story of "wandering off". i.e. mine shaft close by. In my opinion it comes down to that window of opportunity that I summise was between Jess leaving in the morning and returning that afternoon. Possibly a 12 hour window. Plenty of time to move the little guy somewhere off the property. Still the potential to relocate at a later date. I don't believe anything nefarious happened to Gus the night before as Jess would have been home and potentially would have checked on him that night. Bub is obviously not breast fed as the time she is away would negate this but I would assume she would still check on both children before leaving in the morning. Possibly not if she didn't want to wake them but I hold firm in the belief that whatever happened took place on the day of his disappearance.
Furthermore to my previous post 6 months old bubs would still generally require a feed during the night so Jess would have had to attend to him and be up and about during the night as well as early in the morning. That would make it less likely that anything happened to Gus the night before.
 
  • #5,379
dbm
 
  • #5,380
Media reports say Josie Murray was charged following a previous search - which could have been the search we have been informed of which was 14 & 15 January 2026.


February 5 2026

SA Police reveal suspect and declare disappearance of Gus a major crime

“SA Police said a person living at Oak Park Station is now a suspect in the case of missing four-year-old Gus Lamont, who vanished from a remote station in the state’s Mid North in September last year.”




ARREST

February 17 2026

“As a result of a previous search at Oak Park Station, Task Force Horizon detectives have today arrested a 75-year-old from Grampus and charged them with firearm offences,” they said.”











So IMO, the timeline could be…..


14 & 15 January 2026 - Police search Oak Park & several items seized.


5 February 2026 - Police declare they have a suspect and declare Gus’s disappearance as a major crime. Police declare that person has withdrawn their support for the Police and is no longer co-operating with them.


17 February 2026 - Josie Rachelle Murray is arrested and charged with possession of illegal gun silencer and bailed to appear in Peterborough court on 6 May, 2026.


IMO
Thankyou, it’s so good to see the dates listed in order…..
What date was it announced Josie was not cooperating ?
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
5,287
Total visitors
5,418

Forum statistics

Threads
643,506
Messages
18,799,582
Members
245,167
Latest member
nixl
Top