Sorry I’m a little confused.
When was Shannon declared a suspect?
Police have not declared ( ie named) the suspect. Moo there are likely, protocol, legal and operational reasons for that. There's been no official declaration or naming.
From transcript of Feb 5 presser (thank you
@linge).
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...
Supt Fielke answered a question re the suspect:
"The person who has withdrawn their cooperation, uh, is now considered a suspect in the disappearance of Gus.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."
ETA the suspect has to have " withdrawn their cooperation" from police sometime prior to Feb 5th.
Trying to read between the lines of the q&a section of the transcript, I think that would have been sometime after Jan 15th, but hard to tell really. Anyways moo it seems to have coincided with police follow up with family members on the discrepancies/ inconsistencies in statements that were uncovered after a review (which is implied to have taken place in Dec and/or Jan?).
Though Fielke also says (or suggests) during the q&a that additional inconsistencies were identified as late as Jan 15th connected to the ongoing search and expanding field of the investigation. He's trying to explain the fluidity and dynamic quality of the investigation Imo.