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

[Kemug]

Perhaps this message and the photos which Gus's parents have just released signifies that they are united again (didn't we hear that they split up? Sorry if I'm wrong!) I'm very happy if that is the case, and the 3 of them will start to build a new life which Gus will definitely still be a part of.

 

[SouthAussie]

Perhaps this message and the photos which Gus's parents have just released signifies that they are united again (didn't we hear that they split up? Sorry if I'm wrong!) I'm very happy if that is the case, and the 3 of them will start to build a new life which Gus will definitely still be a part of.

It is hard to tell. They are "united in their grief" ... and "united in their search for answers".

I am not sure what that means (relationship-wise). If they were fully aligned, I would have expected "we grieve for Gus" and "we are searching for answers" - with no need to mention the united part.

Either they have heard the rumours, and want to emphasise that they are united/together.
Or they are not together, but they are on the same page as far as Gus is concerned.

I think that a major crisis is difficult for any couple to navigate through, but either way they are united for Gus.

imo

 

[Athena Holmes]

I think the boy died by a violent and criminal act by one grandparent and both grandparents have gone to such an extent to cover this up because there is so much at stake financially. The family is sitting on millions. I think it also possible that the boy's father was not deemed a suitable or good enough match for the Murray family's privately educated daughter (the Murray family on both sides going back at least one generation were held in high social esteem). Resentment towards the father may have been projected onto any offspring with their daughter, whom also presumably one day would stand to inherit the grandparent's considerable wealth (I understand ownership of Oak Park Station was transferred to Jose at some point). In the picture and video released Gus looks to me like a very loved little boy. Jess may have been staying with her parents more through necessity, after separating from her partner, than 100 percent through choice.

 

[Lemony]

A newly released video of missing four‑year‑old August “Gus” Lamont has revealed a crucial detail that could help find answers in the missing child case.

7NEWS understands the wide‑brimmed grey felt hat he is seen wearing in the footage is the same hat he was wearing when he disappeared 150 days ago.

Clue in outback disappearance of Gus Lamont

A newly released video may hold a crucial detail to help find answers in what happened to the four-year-old.

7news.com.au

 

[Lemony]

New video from the ABC. It gives a summary of the case so far and there is a short interview with former neighbour Fleur Tiver.

Where is Gus Lamont?

Sarah Ferguson presents Australia's premier daily current affairs program, delivering agenda-setting public affairs journalism and interviews that hold the powerful to account. Plus political analysis from Laura Tingle.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Miss-e]

is the statement really by both of them or just by Josh and aimed at trying to get Jess to speak up?

 

[zesszesszess]

Why? We know zilch about her.

Your level-headed approach to this case is seriously refreshing. Many people flatly refuse to admit that Shannon is, logically speaking, more likely to be the suspect based on all available information released through official channels (SAPOL).

[mod snip: characterizes other members’ motives rather than addressing the topic itself]

 

[imstilla.grandma]

 

[FromGermany1]

I would like to think, that little Gus is still alive and unharmed. But where could he be and why should anyone have disappeared him to an unknown region?

 

[Old Soul]

A newly released video of missing four‑year‑old August “Gus” Lamont has revealed a crucial detail that could help find answers in the missing child case.

7NEWS understands the wide‑brimmed grey felt hat he is seen wearing in the footage is the same hat he was wearing when he disappeared 150 days ago.

Clue in outback disappearance of Gus Lamont

A newly released video may hold a crucial detail to help find answers in what happened to the four-year-old.

7news.com.au

I’m not quite sure how the hat Gus was wearing would be crucial to the public helping solve this case?

Has it ever been reported if grandma Shannon (or anyone else) took Gus into a public place, had visitors or visited others during the day he went missing?

I’m quite perplexed by the idea that members of the public can help.
Maybe someone saw the hat in the house, in a vehicle or being worn by someone else after Gus went missing???
It does look to be an adult or older child sized hat IMO.

 

[Athena Holmes]

Your level-headed approach to this case is seriously refreshing. Many people flatly refuse to admit that Shannon is, logically speaking, more likely to be the suspect based on all available information released through official channels (SAPOL).

To believe otherwise is to admit that the Daily Mail's ragebait worked on you - or that you're just prejudiced.

The police have reported that there are discrepancies in the official story/timeline and therefore as to whether logically speaking Shannon is more likely to be the suspect is highly quesionable.

The second sentence is in itself prejudiced.

 

[AmoryK]

Your level-headed approach to this case is seriously refreshing. Many people flatly refuse to admit that Shannon is, logically speaking, more likely to be the suspect based on all available information released through official channels (SAPOL).

To believe otherwise is to admit that the Daily Mail's ragebait worked on you - or that you're just prejudiced.

I agree. MOO, but I wonder if an accident happened while Gus was in Shannon’s care - an accident caused by negligence. Shannon then contacts Josie who arranges the concealment of the body. Again all speculation by me - but maybe Shannon has wrestled with guilt and wanted to say something or pretend to ‘find’ Gus, but she’s tied into a mutually dependent pact with Josie. She can’t say where Gus is because that will get Josie in trouble for concealing it, and then Josie might be forced to reveal how the death happened, or the police might work it out.

I know appearances can be deceptive, but in every picture or video of the two of them Shannon looks the most wracked with guilt, and Josie looks stern and defensive, keeping control of the situation and emotions.

Not related, but I also keep thinking back to the very first reports when Josie was the one said to be looking after the children at home. This was soon changed to Shannon, and I assumed it was a mistake, but maybe it was true? Then Jess and Shannon were persuaded to say it was Shannon at home because if people knew it was Josie they might automatically blame Josie <modsnip>. Swapping the two grandmothers around would seem an innocuous thing to do if Gus had just wandered off of his own accord. I wonder if this is one of the discrepancies that were later revealed.

 

[Dotta]

Re Discrepancies

Memory can be fickle.
If they were questioned again after nearly 5 months
I wouldn't be surprised if the details were mixed.

But, on the other hand,
if lying
one must have good memory,
to maintain consistency and prevent tripping oneself on a detail.

The truth is simpler to remember
because it is reality.

The lie is "alternate reality"
and it can be mentally exhausting to remember all artificial details.

JMO

 

[libraryg]

AMAZING.

Beautiful boy. Looks just like his dad

Those curls!

 

[linge]

Your level-headed approach to this case is seriously refreshing. Many people flatly refuse to admit that Shannon is, logically speaking, more likely to be the suspect based on all available information released through official channels (SAPOL).

Given that SAPOL have gone on to publicly discredit the narrative that was originally released of the day that Gus went without specifying how, and in response to further questioning expressed some uncertainty that that was even the day he disappeared, I believe this is an overstatement. Logic only works when based on good data, known truths. 'J and JM were out working about 10km away on the station all day while SM watched GL and RL at the homestead, last saw GL plopped on a pile of sand playing at 5:00 pm, checked on him at 5:30 pm and he was nowhere to be found, family searched for 3 hours, found nothing, and called police' isn't to be considered fact at this point, per SAPOL. Basically, we know that police were called 27th of September, at approximately 8:30 pm, were able to get there some time later, and searched for a reported missing child. That's our official narrative, the rest is suspect. And we have the documentation of the search/investigation from there.

What I consider to be relevant facts of the case at this point are the snippets of information we have regarding how they've proceeded in their interactions with the grandparents in the aftermath of declaring it a major crime, and how the grandparents have reportedly responded. From what we've been officially told most recently, we simply don't have enough to come to a logical conclusion of who is the suspect beyond that it's either JM or SM, as an Oak Park Station resident who isn't one of Gus's parents. But there's a lot of information to interpret. Personally, I've been focused on trying to puzzle out who was considered to be being 'cooperative' and 'non-cooperative,' as that was the distinction made by SAPOL between the non-suspect and suspect, respectively, before the time when the second grandparent reportedly stopped cooperating.

Meanwhile the accusation of being mindlessly manipulated by the media or a bigot if we don't agree with your assessment of this case in which so few things are genuinely known for certain, including what you're basing your personal theory on, is just tiresome.

 

[AmoryK]

Perhaps SAPOL had suspicions from the start? In other missing children cases the timings are usually released early on, eg “X had lunch with A and B, then played by themselves for a while until at around 2pm they decided to walk the 5 minutes to their friend’s house. The last sighting of them was in Acacia Avenue shortly after 2pm”, etc. With this case, we don’t know anything about that day - when did Jess and Josie leave? Did Jess see Gus before she left? Did they return for lunch? Did Shannon ‘discover Gus was missing’ while they were out? What time did they return? etc.

So maybe no such timetable for the day was released because SAPOL had reason to doubt it would be anywhere near accurate so might mislead.

 

[linge]

Perhaps SAPOL had suspicions from the start? In other missing children cases the timings are usually released early on, eg “X had lunch with A and B, then played by themselves for a while until at around 2pm they decided to walk the 5 minutes to their friend’s house. The last sighting of them was in Acacia Avenue shortly after 2pm”, etc. With this case, we don’t know anything about that day - when did Jess and Josie leave? Did Jess see Gus before she left? Did they return for lunch? Did Shannon ‘discover Gus was missing’ while they were out? What time did they return? etc.

So maybe no such timetable for the day was released because SAPOL had reason to doubt it would be anywhere near accurate so might mislead.

It does sound like they started quietly investigating alternative possibilities early. When they were publicly saying he couldn't have been abducted, they were looking up and tracking down every known pattern offender in the area and tracking movements of a wide range of people on that day. So imagine it isn't a stretch when they were publicly saying that no foul play was suspected, they were still discretely looking into foul play, IMO.

We don't know what evidence they may have found or what they may have heard that shaped their thinking on this, but I imagine it's significantly more than we've been made privy to, for them to not only announce that they think it was a major crime, not an accident, and have a suspect (as well as people they don't suspect).

But also just...they've been working closely with the family. They've been holding their hands through this (figuratively if not literally). And after months of that personal experience with them, they came away from it suspecting one of them did it and brought in cadaver dogs to search, among other places, under the freshly poured cement floor of an outhouse where they believe one of those family members they've been supporting may have hidden their dead (killed) 4-year-old grandson. Their assessment after getting to know them a bit is a specific one of them is capable of doing something that callous to that beautiful little boy. They could of course be wrong about all of it and their suspect is actually innocent. But it speaks to their (personal, fallible) evaluation of that person as a human being. JMO.

 

[essareem]

Your level-headed approach to this case is seriously refreshing. Many people flatly refuse to admit that Shannon is, logically speaking, more likely to be the suspect based on all available information released through official channels (SAPOL).

[mod snip: characterizes other members’ motives rather than addressing the topic itself]

ABC news article from February 5th 2026 about the SAPOL press conference on the same day (quoting Detective Superintendent Darren Fielke):

He said police began to focus on the suspect after they identified "a number of inconsistencies and discrepancies" with information "as it relates to timelines and the version of events provided to us by the family members".

So, from what information we do have from SAPOL - what exactly makes Shannon more likely to be the suspect?

The timeline that is now in question?

Or something else? Struggling to understand what you could have meant here.