CANADA Canada - Jack, 4 & Lilly Sullivan, 6, Vulnerable, wandered from home 10am, Gairloch Rd, Landsdowne Station, Pictou County, NS, 2 May 2025 #2

[Diddian]

This link won’t open for me. Is this news report really stating these two were last seen on the road past their home at about 10am Friday?? If so, that’s major news.

I'm thinking the "last seen on Gairloch Rd around 10 am" is referring to the information given authorities in the 911 call made by the children's parent.

 

[MistyWaters]

I take it to mean at their home by the adults in the house not that the children were seen by a third party out of the home.

Oh yeah, good point, I think you’re right, thank you and pardon my temporary excitement

 

[nitsirk]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova...-in-search-for-missing-n-s-children-1.7533679

 

[Skigh]

Oh yeah, good point, I think you’re right, thank you and pardon my temporary excitement

No need to apologise ,I did a double take when I first read it.

 

[Andromeda]

With that being said - I have a hard time understanding the possibility of the mother having some sort of foul play, believing the stepdad when he says he saw Lilly before the silence - and they both where in bed with each other until they realized they where gone.
So my mind wanders to who could have abducted these two children while the parents are at home, without there being a confrontation between the kids and a possible abductor. And without any other traces than the people actually living there.

Hmm.
MOO

If the truth of the matter is, the parents were on a break before the kids went missing, and DM in fact did not sleep in the home Thursday night, but that he arrived i.e., around 9:30/10am to visit his daughter, what the stepdad says could be true. If he walked in and did not see the kids, he would automatically assume they were at school because it was a school day (no backpack, no boots at the back door to the yard). If he didn’t see anyone and so went to the bedroom, he would not be surprised to see her in bed “drifting in and out” with the baby in bed with her. If yes, he might have crawled into bed with them, waking her up. They could have been talking (for 20 minutes?) and then…being awake and conscience realizing she couldn’t hear the kids (silence) that’s when things would have gotten “immediate”. So, for him to say he saw Lilly before the silence (not that morning a different morning) is true. If I’m right about DM “couch surfing”, and if for example Thursday was one of the few shifts he was able to work, then his lying might be in the name of love/disbelief she could be guilty of anything “untoward”. But if he lied to protect her, (obstruction) that is a huge problem with dire consequences. JMO/MOO

 

[Skigh]

If the truth of the matter is, the parents were on a break before the kids went missing, and DM in fact did not sleep in the home Thursday night, but that he arrived i.e., around 9:30/10am to visit his daughter, what the stepdad says could be true. If he walked in and did not see the kids, he would automatically assume they were at school because it was a school day (no backpack, no boots at the back door to the yard). If he didn’t see anyone and so went to the bedroom, he would not be surprised to see her in bed “drifting in and out” with the baby in bed with her. If yes, he might have crawled into bed with them, waking her up. They could have been talking (for 20 minutes?) and then…being awake and conscience realizing she couldn’t hear the kids (silence) that’s when things would have gotten “immediate”. So, for him to say he saw Lilly before the silence (not that morning a different morning) is true. If I’m right about DM “couch surfing”, and if for example Thursday was one of the few shifts he was able to work, then his lying might be in the name of love/disbelief she could be guilty of anything “untoward”. But if he lied to protect her, (obstruction) that is a huge problem with dire consequences. JMO/MOO

If he is lying to protect her it makes no sense that she left him and changed her Facebook status to single.

 

[Lucy6226]

If the truth of the matter is, the parents were on a break before the kids went missing, and DM in fact did not sleep in the home Thursday night, but that he arrived i.e., around 9:30/10am to visit his daughter, what the stepdad says could be true. If he walked in and did not see the kids, he would automatically assume they were at school because it was a school day (no backpack, no boots at the back door to the yard). If he didn’t see anyone and so went to the bedroom, he would not be surprised to see her in bed “drifting in and out” with the baby in bed with her. If yes, he might have crawled into bed with them, waking her up. They could have been talking (for 20 minutes?) and then…being awake and conscience realizing she couldn’t hear the kids (silence) that’s when things would have gotten “immediate”. So, for him to say he saw Lilly before the silence (not that morning a different morning) is true. If I’m right about DM “couch surfing”, and if for example Thursday was one of the few shifts he was able to work, then his lying might be in the name of love/disbelief she could be guilty of anything “untoward”. But if he lied to protect her, (obstruction) that is a huge problem with dire consequences. JMO/MOO

Surely if he hadn't been home that would prove his innocence and any involvement or neglect regarding them going missing. Because it would be more believable that one parent didn't hear or see the children leave than two parents not doing so. Moo

 

[Ontario Mom]

If the truth of the matter is, the parents were on a break before the kids went missing, and DM in fact did not sleep in the home Thursday night, but that he arrived i.e., around 9:30/10am to visit his daughter, what the stepdad says could be true. If he walked in and did not see the kids, he would automatically assume they were at school because it was a school day (no backpack, no boots at the back door to the yard). If he didn’t see anyone and so went to the bedroom, he would not be surprised to see her in bed “drifting in and out” with the baby in bed with her. If yes, he might have crawled into bed with them, waking her up. They could have been talking (for 20 minutes?) and then…being awake and conscience realizing she couldn’t hear the kids (silence) that’s when things would have gotten “immediate”. So, for him to say he saw Lilly before the silence (not that morning a different morning) is true. If I’m right about DM “couch surfing”, and if for example Thursday was one of the few shifts he was able to work, then his lying might be in the name of love/disbelief she could be guilty of anything “untoward”. But if he lied to protect her, (obstruction) that is a huge problem with dire consequences. JMO/MOO

This is unreal. Where is the source of all of this information? Link? LE statement? Step-dad lying?

 

[MistyWaters]

So 35 people for formal interviews! This is great news!
That's a LOT of people who may know more!
IMO JMO
The fact that so many people can perhaps give information leads ME PERSONALLY to think it's not just the mother and step father who knows what has happened to these children!

Go RCMP go!

Back to the news update. I bet the majority of these people who have come forward have information relating to shoddy child care in general of Lilly and Jack. That’s how people in a close community are in my experience, they might not say or do anything at the time but from then on they’re extremely alert, aware and watchful. They know everything.

I think this is a long pattern because there’s no way competent parents would outrightly declare they were lying in bed, failing to pay any attention to the 4 and 6 year old children who were already up, without any regret aside from than the fact the children went missing.

JMO

 

[MarcieM]

A part of me hopes both are involved because then I think it less likely the children are dead and more likely that the two adults gave the children away or sold them as some kind of informal private adoption... and that they are alive. Or possibly, one is dead due to some kind of incident (drug overdose, physical abuse), and the other given away or sold/adopted out because that child witnessed something about the incident that the parents didn't want revealed to authorities. (ETA: I think this less likely because I would imagine that, even going through underground channels, it would take awhile to put together giving children away or selling them, so wouldn't happen quickly on the heels of an incident involving one child.)

I keep thinking how odd it is that they seem to know what Lilly was likely wearing (and doesn't it sound like a cute outfit with backpack that a child might be delivered to adoptive parents in?...), but seem to have no idea what Jack was wearing, other than a pull-up and his rain boots. But then, where is he? Searchers found no signs of either child other than supposed boot prints near the house (one set or two?).

If something happened 2 days earlier than the children were reported missing, that would give the holder of the children (or child) time to get out of the country before authorities started looking.

Really hoping a deep dive into phone and other electronic forensics leads to recovery of two alive children.

I think he said that Lily was wearing a pink shirt and he thought pink pants? I know everyone pictures the backpack like it was her school backpack but I always thought it was something more like this. A little purse/backpack that she used at home to keep all of her special girl things in.

 

[Fruit]

If he is lying to protect her it makes no sense that she left him and changed her Facebook status to single.

Yes! Ugh - this case makes me go back and forth with my own opinions. I just cannot believe his behavior was theatrical. And that complicates everything for me.

 

[Fabled Automatic]

If the truth of the matter is, the parents were on a break before the kids went missing, and DM in fact did not sleep in the home Thursday night, but that he arrived i.e., around 9:30/10am to visit his daughter, what the stepdad says could be true.

This would be a bombshell. Where are you getting this info, or are you just speculating?

 

[tlcya]

Back to the news update. I bet the majority of these people who have come forward have information relating to shoddy child care in general of Lilly and Jack. That’s how people in a close community are in my experience, they might not say or do anything at the time but from then on they’re extremely alert, aware and watchful. They know everything.

I think this is a long pattern because there’s no way competent parents would outrightly declare they were lying in bed, failing to pay any attention to the 4 and 6 year old children who were already up, without any regret aside from than the fact the children went missing.

JMO

I just hope half those tips aren't internet trolls or armchair detectives phoning in tips about aliens, or psychic visions, or something not helpful that simply sucks resources from legitimate tips.

 

[Skigh]

This would be a bombshell. Where are you getting this info, or are you just speculating?

I think it is pretty obvious that this is speculation !!

 

[iamafiusny]

This would be a bombshell. Where are you getting this info, or are you just speculating?

It says IF true and jmo at the end

Just one theory I'm sure.

 

[Snoop Sister]

I just hope half those tips aren't internet trolls or armchair detectives phoning in tips about aliens, or psychic visions, or something not helpful that simply sucks resources from legitimate tips.

I am sure the RCMP have scrutinized all tips before making the decision of whom to interview. Let’s go RCMP

 

[Skigh]

I just hope half those tips aren't internet trolls or armchair detectives phoning in tips about aliens, or psychic visions, or something not helpful that simply sucks resources from legitimate tips.

I imagine that at least half probably much more are from people who have read about the case online,but I do think they probably have received some very genuine and useful information from local people.

 

[MarcieM]

If the truth of the matter is, the parents were on a break before the kids went missing, and DM in fact did not sleep in the home Thursday night, but that he arrived i.e., around 9:30/10am to visit his daughter, what the stepdad says could be true. If he walked in and did not see the kids, he would automatically assume they were at school because it was a school day (no backpack, no boots at the back door to the yard). If he didn’t see anyone and so went to the bedroom, he would not be surprised to see her in bed “drifting in and out” with the baby in bed with her. If yes, he might have crawled into bed with them, waking her up. They could have been talking (for 20 minutes?) and then…being awake and conscience realizing she couldn’t hear the kids (silence) that’s when things would have gotten “immediate”. So, for him to say he saw Lilly before the silence (not that morning a different morning) is true. If I’m right about DM “couch surfing”, and if for example Thursday was one of the few shifts he was able to work, then his lying might be in the name of love/disbelief she could be guilty of anything “untoward”. But if he lied to protect her, (obstruction) that is a huge problem with dire consequences. JMO/MOO

Why do you think he may not have slept in the home on Thursday night? Couch surfing?? If any of this is true, this would totally change things!

 

[Skigh]

I am sure the RCMP have scrutinized all tips before making the decision of whom to interview. Let’s go RCMP

I wonder if the police have managed to find out who was in the vicinity of the house during the days since the children were last at school by tracing mobile phone information.

 

[MistyWaters]

I just hope half those tips aren't internet trolls or armchair detectives phoning in tips about aliens, or psychic visions, or something not helpful that simply sucks resources from legitimate tips.

I hope not too, or the typical search tips - “make sure you search (any where children might hide that’s been noted in the photos), plus that RV”.