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

[AIGT]

Is there something to them specifying "formal" interview?

It seems like statements from some of those people would have been gathered by now and not need anything more extensive than that.

Moo

In my experience this likely encompasses anything from them just seeking out someone who may have info or who contacts them with potential info and taking a statement all the way to sitting down with someone who could be involved, advising them of their rights and conducting a 4 hour, on camera interview.

 

[AcerPacer]

Yeah I'm not familiar with RCMP procedures either. I was thinking along the lines of formal interviews that are recorded to be submitted as evidence. Rather than informal conversations to gather general information. For example, school, friends or family might have raised concerns about individual/s that now need to be recorded formally given the children have not been found having wandered off. Or to recorded conversations they've had with the parents regarding their timeline. All moo, based on experience in the UK.

Is there anyone familiar with RCMP that can confirm when formal interviews might be used?

Goodness me, 3 of us, all with exactly the same point and questions regarding the formal interviews!
We are all on thinking the same here!

 

[Belly]

My thoughts too on this word "formal"

Please can any of our Canadian sleuthers advise on RCMP usual protocol and wording?

Now that we are 14 days "missing", would statements and interviews not have been taken from anyone who had regular contact with the children (teachers, bus driver, neighbours, shopkeeper etc) very soon into the investigation and that information collated to further piece together the timeline?
Would 35 "formal" interviewees not be people who RCMP feel have more insightful information to give and the word formal perhaps mean they are not possibly giving this information willingly already?

I don't know!

JMO MOO IMO etc

Sorry I just replied above and I’m catching up on the forum. Using the word formal means to me, the police are giving a message. Either to the public or the suspects. There is no formal vs informal in Canada. It’s just different procedures (read my reply above). I would say informal is finding information out and the officer writes it on their notebook. It’s to either find something out quickly that needs to be acted on or to see what you know and they may circle back to you.

Formal, from my experience, is a recorded interview that may have prepared questions. The recording device is the difference vs informal. It’s essentially the same as providing a statement, in USA law.

I think the rcmp using the word formal is a tactic or they are trying to get a message out. Our police are not allowed to mislead suspects (like setting up a prostitution sting etc - you’re not allowed to do that in Canada). So they must be doing sit down, recorded interviews. That’s true. But stating it publicly is to do some type of influence. Either to tell the public we have something and we’re following up. We’re acting on the case. Or even as a way to put the person of interest on notice, discreetly. Moo

 

[MistyWaters]

I’ve been interviewed a few times. Very similar to US. For formal they state time, location and have you spell your name for the tape and then they ask you questions. They write in a notebook at the same time as they record you. I was audio recorded in a car, they have it that mobile now. Informal is same idea, only difference is they write it in their notebook and do not record you. They also have the option of you writing out a hand written statement that they may follow up with questions for. But the hand written I’ve only encountered for car accidents I witnessed.

This is what I think is the difference also - a ‘formal’ face-to-face recorded interview, as opposed to asking to be provided with a handwritten statement, might followup later.
JMO

 

[Snoop Sister]

This is what I think is the difference also - a ‘formal’ face-to-face recorded interview, as opposed to asking to be provided with a handwritten statement, might followup later.
JMO

Exactly.

 

[AcerPacer]

Sorry I just replied above and I’m catching up on the forum. Using the word formal means to me, the police are giving a message. Either to the public or the suspects. There is no formal vs informal in Canada. It’s just different procedures (read my reply above). I would say informal is finding information out and the officer writes it on their notebook. It’s to either find something out quickly that needs to be acted on or to see what you know and they may circle back to you.

Formal, from my experience, is a recorded interview that may have prepared questions. The recording device is the difference vs informal. It’s essentially the same as providing a statement, in USA law.

I think the rcmp using the word formal is a tactic or they are trying to get a message out. Our police are not allowed to mislead suspects (like setting up a prostitution sting etc - you’re not allowed to do that in Canada). So they must be doing sit down, recorded interviews. That’s true. But stating it publicly is to do some type of influence. Either to tell the public we have something and we’re following up. We’re acting on the case. Or even as a way to put the person of interest on notice, discreetly. Moo

Perfect response and answers .. thank you
So it's great that these are going to be "formal" .. hopefully some key information from some key people very soon!

 

[Skigh]

Sorry I just replied above and I’m catching up on the forum. Using the word formal means to me, the police are giving a message. Either to the public or the suspects. There is no formal vs informal in Canada. It’s just different procedures (read my reply above). I would say informal is finding information out and the officer writes it on their notebook. It’s to either find something out quickly that needs to be acted on or to see what you know and they may circle back to you.

Formal, from my experience, is a recorded interview that may have prepared questions. The recording device is the difference vs informal. It’s essentially the same as providing a statement, in USA law.

I think the rcmp using the word formal is a tactic or they are trying to get a message out. Our police are not allowed to mislead suspects (like setting up a prostitution sting etc - you’re not allowed to do that in Canada). So they must be doing sit down, recorded interviews. That’s true. But stating it publicly is to do some type of influence. Either to tell the public we have something and we’re following up. We’re acting on the case. Or even as a way to put the person of interest on notice, discreetly. Moo

Would ,for example,Jack and Lilly's teachers be asked to do a formal interview ?

 

[MistyWaters]

<snipped to reply>
I think the rcmp using the word formal is a tactic or they are trying to get a message out. Our police are not allowed to mislead suspects (like setting up a prostitution sting etc - you’re not allowed to do that in Canada). So they must be doing sit down, recorded interviews. That’s true. But stating it publicly is to do some type of influence. Either to tell the public we have something and we’re following up. We’re acting on the case. Or even as a way to put the person of interest on notice, discreetly. Moo

In Canada police are legally allowed to mislead suspects, even outright lie. If you are Canadian you’ve surely heard of contentious Mr Big sting operations?

Mr. Big (police procedure) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Belly]

In Canada police are legally allowed to mislead suspects, even outright lie. If you are Canadian you’ve surely heard of contentious Mr Big sting operations?

Mr. Big (police procedure) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That’s true. I forgot about our Montreal mob tactics too

 

[Andromeda]

My thoughts too on this word "formal"

Please can any of our Canadian sleuthers advise on RCMP usual protocol and wording?

Now that we are 14 days "missing", would statements and interviews not have been taken from anyone who had regular contact with the children (teachers, bus driver, neighbours, shopkeeper etc) very soon into the investigation and that information collated to further piece together the timeline?
Would 35 "formal" interviewees not be people who RCMP feel have more insightful information to give and the word formal perhaps mean they are not possibly giving this information willingly already?

I don't know!

JMO MOO IMO etc

“I Am Part of an Investigation What Happens Now"
I am Part of an Investigation. What Happens Now? - Canada.ca

 

[Nikynoo]

Yes I agree - 35 formal interviews suggests there were several people in close contact with the children over the period of interest. A house gathering maybe? JMO.

Could it not be the results of phone data? Eg the pings of phones in close proximity of the house in the morning that the children went missing ( or a period of time eg Tuesday evening to Friday morning).

 

[GypsySoulAL]

I know we've seen aerial views but I wish I could see a more looked out version to get a feel for how isolated they are - nearest neighbors besides the relatives in the camper, nearest main road, corner store nearby or no, etc.

 

[Tricia]

PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS MODERATION.
Our rule is simple. If you post a video it must come from a mainstream media source or law enforcement. There have been cases of YouTube creators making up videos. That's why we require it be an approved source. Most YouTube creators are fine but there is no way we can evaluate all of them to make sure they are accurate.
If there is a video of the Sullivan children that is posted on an unapproved source please send it to me at websleuthsvideos@gmail.com or you can send me a direct message with the link. This way I can check it out and see if we can allow it.
Again, do not discuss posts being removed. You are here to discuss the Sullivan case. Not moderation. It is about Jack and Lily.
Contact us if you have any questions by direct message or email.
Tricia

 

[AcerPacer]

In Canada police are legally allowed to mislead suspects, even outright lie. If you are Canadian you’ve surely heard of contentious Mr Big sting operations?

Mr. Big (police procedure) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This is incredible!
Outright lie? Legally? Wow!

I really hope one of you can help us non Canadians decipher what information the RCMP offer up as a lie to glean the truth here!

This is absolutely fascinating!

 

[Belly]

Would ,for example,Jack and Lilly's teachers be asked to do a formal interview ?

I definitely think so. They will want to know about the interactions of the parents with the school, schools opinion on their care of the children. Especially with one living child. Police being accountable to Nova Scotia Children’s aid with a duty to protect and sharing any info for the safety of that child. They will also need to confirm timelines and anything the kids may have disclosed with their teachers.

Kids have a tendency to blurt things out. I was volunteering through children’s aid at an outreach program/club they were hosting at a school with a high number of kids in care. Lots of kids in rough situations were selected to do an afterschool relief program. The idea being the foster parents could get a few extra hours off and we entertain, feed the kids dinner with a healthy meal. I had literally just met this little girl and was playing play doh with her. She blurted right out that she lived with grandma, 7 siblings and her mom used drugs and she wasn’t supposed to tell anyone but her grandma snuck a visit with mom the night before.

 

[MistyWaters]

That’s true. I forgot about our Montreal mob tactics too

Yes police in Canada have a fair amount of latitude when interrogating suspects, at least as much as in the US if not more.
JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

This is incredible!
Outright lie? Legally? Wow!

I really hope one of you can help us non Canadians decipher what information the RCMP offer up as a lie to glean the truth here!

This is absolutely fascinating!

Read the link in my post. It surprises me it’s not a known fact that police are legally allowed to lie. During an interview they might say “you were observed to be at such-and-such place (near the scene if a crime). Why were you there?” When in fact you were not observed to be near, they’re just looking for you to admit you were.

Also

Top Ten Mistakes When Investigated, Arrested or Charged

Call Mulligan Defence Lawyers to avoid making one of these costly mistakes when being investigated, charged or arrested.

mtplaw.com

“Once you are a suspect, the police have a job to do, and it is not to assist you. It is to collect evidence against you. Unfortunately, the law in Canada allows the police to lie to you to further their investigation, so do not ask the police what you should do or rely on their advice.”

 

[Lucy6226]

I definitely think so. They will want to know about the interactions of the parents with the school, schools opinion on their care of the children. Especially with one living child. Police being accountable to Nova Scotia Children’s aid with a duty to protect and sharing any info for the safety of that child. They will also need to confirm timelines and anything the kids may have disclosed with their teachers.

Kids have a tendency to blurt things out. I was volunteering through children’s aid at an outreach program/club they were hosting at a school with a high number of kids in care. Lots of kids in rough situations were selected to do an afterschool relief program. The idea being the foster parents could get a few extra hours off and we entertain, feed the kids dinner with a healthy meal. I had literally just met this little girl and was playing play doh with her. She blurted right out that she lived with grandma, 7 siblings and her mom used drugs and she wasn’t supposed to tell anyone but her grandma snuck a visit with mom the night before.

Definitely.

Also sometimes things will be said that at the time seem quite innocent...but now they are missing become more sinister imo

 

[Skigh]

I definitely think so. They will want to know about the interactions of the parents with the school, schools opinion on their care of the children. Especially with one living child. Police being accountable to Nova Scotia Children’s aid with a duty to protect and sharing any info for the safety of that child. They will also need to confirm timelines and anything the kids may have disclosed with their teachers.

Kids have a tendency to blurt things out. I was volunteering through children’s aid at an outreach program/club they were hosting at a school with a high number of kids in care. Lots of kids in rough situations were selected to do an afterschool relief program. The idea being the foster parents could get a few extra hours off and we entertain, feed the kids dinner with a healthy meal. I had literally just met this little girl and was playing play doh with her. She blurted right out that she lived with grandma, 7 siblings and her mom used drugs and she wasn’t supposed to tell anyone but her grandma snuck a visit with mom the night before.

Thanks. I knew the police would want to speak to the staff ,I was not sure it would be under the heading of a formal interview. I am a retired teacher so know how much information they would know about the children.

 

[Belly]

This is what I think is the difference also - a ‘formal’ face-to-face recorded interview, as opposed to asking to be provided with a handwritten statement, might followup later.
JMO

I was involved in a manslaughter case, and I just provided recorded audio. The detectives need the information from you fast. The last interaction, last time you saw them etc so I actually gave my recording in the detectives wife’s car. It was 4am when they found her (it was my sister), and he recorded me on a tape recorded in the car. They collected physical evidence I had (cell phone etc). But I don’t recall a handwritten statement. But at the same time, it was a complete blur. They may have given me something to sign and I signed it and just blatantly don’t remember. I was a bit out of it for a few weeks, to be honest, so I could have had something to sign and I just don’t remember. They called me after to do a second interview in the station, again audio recording but they would’ve had cameras up all over the station and in the room I was in.