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

[Snoop Sister]

Public funded testing in Canada is free. There is also a fund parents can enact for specialty programs. Private testing is costly, but probably faster and might be covered by private medical insurance programs. Don't know if Jordan's Principle would apply, I think child has to live on reserve, but if it does, they might be able to enact it for speech therapy. Maybe mother goes back to reserve yearly for some time, then it might apply. Of course this is all circumspect in light that these kids might never return.
I wonder if LE lays charges against mother and father for endangerment, etc it will help extract a confession or reveal some evidence

BBM
The children would be covered under Jordon’s Principle if they are First Nations. Children do not have to live on the reserve to be eligible for support through Jordon’s Principle. However, due to the huge number of applications, it may take awhile for requests to be approved except in the case of emergency.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

It is odd but social media can be a good comfort or even distraction in times of stress. She may not be able to focus on much other than baby and phone. A lot of younger people prefer to communicate through social media and get their news from social media. There is also the obvious social aspect of it- group chats, private groups/ pages, where she could be getting support from friends and family. Social media is also highly addictive. Extreme stress can exacerbate addictive behaviors. I can view a lot of stuff these parents have said and done in a negative way, but updating seemingly irrelevant stuff on social media is not surprising to me. Just something to consider.

Has she used her FB account to ask for help finding her missing children?

 

[BlaiseFinlay]

Re: the social media change referenced above —

MOO it is not consistent with the version of events where they were in the room together listening to the children then stopped hearing them. So I think it does point towards her knowing or suspecting him.

Does anyone know what the profile picture change was? I think that’s significant. Did she have DM in her old profile picture? Did she put a new profile picture up or revert to an older one? What is the nature of the new profile picture?

Erasing your connection to someone you believe is responsible for you losing your children (intentionally or unintentionally) seems like a natural emotional reaction. If her profile picture change is consistent with that, then I don’t think these actions are suspicious.

And honestly, what else would be keeping her busy right now other than her baby? She is not working. She can’t go searching. She has to stay available to police so she can’t just get out of town. That does leave a lot of time to be online.

It is of course possible for her to blame DM and for DM to still be innocent. In her version, she was in and out of consciousness. I think it’s odd for DM to say she blocked him if he did something, since that points to her suspecting him. But some people do really like to just talk.

I’m not a parent, but I can’t imagine having to talk or plead with the press for the return of my child, unless I was sedated with very, very strong meds. And then I’m sure if that happened, people would say I wasn’t emotional enough. I can only see doing it if the police recommended it, or if the case was not getting enough attention — which is certainly not the case.

I’m sure we’re not going to find this out, but I’m curious why LE seems confident it’s not an abduction.

Other than thinking they didn’t wander off into the woods, I really have no theories.

 

[ttjo]

Re: the social media change referenced above —

MOO it is not consistent with the version of events where they were in the room together listening to the children then stopped hearing them. So I think it does point towards her knowing or suspecting him.

the problem with that is, they both had the same story in the beginning, both were laying in the bed, she was in and out of sleep ( not consciousness), they heard the kids playing and after about 20 min they didnt hear them anymore. "they" got up .... you know the rest.
what does she suspect him of? if the kids went missing while they (her and DM) were both together. She cant change her story now unless she admits that the first story was a lie.
The only thng I can think of is maybe he was supposed to be up with them and he wasn't or he didn't fix the fence fast enough and they got out? maybe she blames him for something,? ,How can she suspect him if he was with her the whole time? oh right if they are lying about how this played out.
and needing to admit that 180 searchers were sent on a wild goose chase,

Erasing your connection to someone you believe is responsible for you losing your children (intentionally or unintentionally) seems like a natural emotional reaction.

allegedly on Day 2 she updated it to single ? whatever her reason was , that was bad timing and it invited a lot of scrutiny. She should have had a lawyer advise her that changing her relationship status on day 2 to "single" was going to raise a lot of eyebrows and open the door for social media to go wild.

If her profile picture change is consistent with that, then I don’t think these actions are suspicious.

I dont know what the profile pic was, I think its her kids now?? maybe someone else knows for sure

And honestly, what else would be keeping her busy right now other than her baby? She is not working. She can’t go searching. She has to stay available to police so she can’t just get out of town. That does leave a lot of time to be online.

to adjust your facebook 3 weeks later, fair enough, I dont hink anyone cares about now, it was about Day 2 , not judging just saying why would someone do that?
I just dont see the point of updating your relationship status the day after your kids go missing, unless she was trying to make a statement.

It is of course possible for her to blame DM and for DM to still be innocent. In her version, she was in and out of consciousness. I think it’s odd for DM to say she blocked him if he did something, since that points to her suspecting him. But some people do really like to just talk.

I’m not a parent, but I can’t imagine having to talk or plead with the press for the return of my child,

Maybe she cant imagine it either because she is not pleading to the press . she has not spoken to the press or plead for the return of her children other than that first brief statement she made in the beginning saying she wants her kids back home, and has said she will not be speaking to press again as she has been advised not to.

unless I was sedated with very, very strong meds. And then I’m sure if that happened, people would say I wasn’t emotional enough. I can only see doing it if the police recommended it, or if the case was not getting enough attention — which is certainly not the case.

I’m sure we’re not going to find this out, but I’m curious why LE seems confident it’s not an abduction.

and in all fairness LE didnt say its not an abduction, they said they have no evidence of an abduction. hence no amber alert , no vehicle description, no witnesses as far as we know.

Other than thinking they didn’t wander off into the woods, I really have no theories.

 

[Sillybilly]

“Ms. Brooks-Murray, a member of Sipekne’katik First Nation, previously told reporters her children were both diagnosed with autism and struggled in school.”

“Possible autism” or “diagnosed autism”. There is not two different versions of the truth.

Could be the parents believe the children are possibly autistic because someone in authority (perhaps a school special ed employee, family doctor, psychologist, etc) told them it is likely. The kids apparently struggled in school, so perhaps it was strongly suggested they were autistic. I can see a young parent thinking that information coming from any professional might be a diagnosis but at other times saying it is possible.

This young couple wasn't sitting in a crime discussion forum drilling down to such a degree of perfection in communication.

I don't know either, but IMO it's not necessarily a lie but possibly two different versions of understanding and being unsure of which term to use consistently.

 

[Lucy6226]

Could be the parents believe the children are possibly autistic because someone in authority (perhaps a school special ed employee, family doctor, psychologist, etc) told them it is likely. The kids apparently struggled in school, so perhaps it was strongly suggested they were autistic. I can see a young parent thinking that information coming from any professional might be a diagnosis but at other times saying it is possible.

This young couple wasn't sitting in a crime discussion forum drilling down to such a degree of perfection in communication.

I don't know either, but IMO it's not necessarily a lie but possibly two different versions of understanding and being unsure of which term to use consistently.

Agreed. I'm in the UK so perhaps different, but I was told my son was likely autistic at 18mths. By aged 3 everyone involved in his care supported him as if had an ASD diagnosis, although we didn't get that diagnosis until he was 4.

So it's perfectly reasonable to refer to the children as 'likely' autistic or actually autistic imo.

Also being autistic does not automatically mean being pre-verbal as some posters and media have suggested. I also believe it would be unlikely they would respond to strangers shouting their names when called and I would be extremely interested in checking water sources near by....if they actually wandered off!

 

[MistyWaters]

Autism & Wandering

Children with autism go missing under a variety of circumstances. They may seek out small or enclosed spaces. They may wander toward places of special interest to them. Or they may try to escape overwhelming stimuli such as sights, sounds, surroundings or activities of others.

www.missingkids.org

“According to data published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, nearly half of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) go missing from their environment, with a substantial number at risk for bodily harm or drowning. Children on the autism spectrum may seek out small or enclosed spaces, head toward water or places of special interest to them, or they may try to escape overwhelming stimuli such as sights, sounds, surroundings, or activities of others.”

 

[AnnieOakley123]

Autism & Wandering

Children with autism go missing under a variety of circumstances. They may seek out small or enclosed spaces. They may wander toward places of special interest to them. Or they may try to escape overwhelming stimuli such as sights, sounds, surroundings or activities of others.

www.missingkids.org

“According to data published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, nearly half of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) go missing from their environment, with a substantial number at risk for bodily harm or drowning. Children on the autism spectrum may seek out small or enclosed spaces, head toward water or places of special interest to them, or they may try to escape overwhelming stimuli such as sights, sounds, surroundings, or activities of others.”

Listen to the interview/statement of MBM the day after the children were reported missing. You will hear her mention their 'undiagnosed autism' while suggesting they will talk to anyone and pushing the abduction theory. Daniel M's first interviews followed the same storyline (they'll take water, food, candy from anyone and go with anyone) and also seemed to push the abduction theory. I'm not debating whether the children are/are not autistic; it is how the mother and stepfather labeled them as 'undiagnosed autistic' as a way to suggest they were more vulnerable to abduction. Neither parent has said anything about previous autistic tendencies, such as hiding or wandering off.

 

[seasideForest]

Has she used her FB account to ask for help finding her missing children?

Probably not, (MOO) tho I haven't checked, I'm not on FB.

If your question really means Why hasn't she used FB account for...?, the response is probably that using her FB account for that is neither distracting nor comforting. That is, instead of scrolling around on social media for comfort, anybody in a really stressful and desperate situation could be chain-smoking or gorging themselves on chocolate (I'd be on the latter), none of which would bring the children back but the world wouldn't know about it to give opinions or discuss it ad nauseam on forums/social media. MOO

A long form of saying - also JMO - maybe give the family some slack.

 

[seasideForest]

This young couple wasn't sitting in a crime discussion forum drilling down to such a degree of perfection in communication.

Thank you for stating that! I think it's really important to keep that in mind. MOO

 

[MistyWaters]

<snipped for reply>

I don't know either, but IMO it's not necessarily a lie but possibly two different versions of understanding and being unsure of which term to use consistently.

Yes indeed, that could be true but on the other hand it would’ve been the very same day when she stated both versions. Yet we tend to take her account of that Friday morning very literally however if she’s prone to wavering her details one way or another it might indicate there’s also another version the public isn’t aware of.
JMO

 

[Sunflower55]

It is odd but social media can be a good comfort or even distraction in times of stress. She may not be able to focus on much other than baby and phone. A lot of younger people prefer to communicate through social media and get their news from social media. There is also the obvious social aspect of it- group chats, private groups/ pages, where she could be getting support from friends and family. Social media is also highly addictive. Extreme stress can exacerbate addictive behaviors. I can view a lot of stuff these parents have said and done in a negative way, but updating seemingly irrelevant stuff on social media is not surprising to me. Just something to consider.

Re: the social media change referenced above —

MOO it is not consistent with the version of events where they were in the room together listening to the children then stopped hearing them. So I think it does point towards her knowing or suspecting him.

Does anyone know what the profile picture change was? I think that’s significant. Did she have DM in her old profile picture? Did she put a new profile picture up or revert to an older one? What is the nature of the new profile picture?

Erasing your connection to someone you believe is responsible for you losing your children (intentionally or unintentionally) seems like a natural emotional reaction. If her profile picture change is consistent with that, then I don’t think these actions are suspicious.

And honestly, what else would be keeping her busy right now other than her baby? She is not working. She can’t go searching. She has to stay available to police so she can’t just get out of town. That does leave a lot of time to be online.

It is of course possible for her to blame DM and for DM to still be innocent. In her version, she was in and out of consciousness. I think it’s odd for DM to say she blocked him if he did something, since that points to her suspecting him. But some people do really like to just talk.

I’m not a parent, but I can’t imagine having to talk or plead with the press for the return of my child, unless I was sedated with very, very strong meds. And then I’m sure if that happened, people would say I wasn’t emotional enough. I can only see doing it if the police recommended it, or if the case was not getting enough attention — which is certainly not the case.

I’m sure we’re not going to find this out, but I’m curious why LE seems confident it’s not an abduction.

Other than thinking they didn’t wander off into the woods, I really have no theories.

I think the RCMP dropped the ball in this investigation. It was reported the children had wandered off, and the RCMP stuck to that narrative. I surmise the step father was suppose to watch the kids and fell asleep, or was indisposed. The kids went to catch the school bus, walked down the drive and the perpetrator was there. Probably someone in the community, if not an acquaintance of the family who knew the kids were at home. Pictou county has a few convicted sexual predators and there are undoubtedly more that haven't acted out or been caught to date. I think that's why the parents pushed the abduction scenario, bc they knew the kids had left long before the parents awoke. These are financially poor people - they need the CCTB and provincial financial support having these kids alive, provides. They're quite young, and seem stunned. Honestly, I'm guessing the RCMP are interviewing anyone on the National Sexual Offender's Registry residing in NS, but don't want to alarm the public. I think that's a grievous error on their part as is not communicating with the public. They haven't said to the public to be watchful, monitor their children, or that they've made an arrest, or the public is safe.

 

[tlcya]

MBM said both children were diagnosed, that’s my confirmation as she ought to know.

“They’re both really happy-go-lucky children. They’re so sweet. They talk to anyone. They’ll talk your ear off. They will speak to anyone in a store, everyone. They’re just extremely sweet kids,” said Brooks-Murray.

“They do have possible autism, but it’s not extreme autism. It’s just they have issues with school and they don’t catch up with the other kids.”
‘We just want them home’: Mother of missing children in Nova Scotia’s Pictou County pleads for safe return

Actually, she did not confirm diagnosis. She said the above direct quote.

ETA I am going to go by her direct quote rather than the band which paraphrases what she actually said. JMO

 

[iveyguy]

allegedly on Day 2 she updated it to single ? whatever her reason was , that was bad timing and it invited a lot of scrutiny. She should have had a lawyer advise her that changing her relationship status on day 2 to "single" was going to raise a lot of eyebrows and open the door for social media to go wild.

Here is a quick recap of what happened on Day 2 around this same time:
1. During a police briefing in the morning, the Mother left to sit in the back of an ambulance.
2. The Maternal Grandmother accused DM of being involved and was told to leave by DM's mother.
3. The Mother left her children's house (~24 hours after reported missing) and has not spoken publicly since.
4. Alleged FB stuff...

To me, any FB stuff is far less suspicious than the first three things. I think her actions are consistent with what a person would do if they strongly suspected that their partner was involved in their children's disappearance - and remember, her own mother had just accused him publicly of it. Absolutely, her FB actions have invited scrutiny, but fingers had already been pointed at DM before any of that happened.

 

[Lucy6226]

I think the RCMP dropped the ball in this investigation. It was reported the children had wandered off, and the RCMP stuck to that narrative. I surmise the step father was suppose to watch the kids and fell asleep, or was indisposed. The kids went to catch the school bus, walked down the drive and the perpetrator was there. Probably someone in the community, if not an acquaintance of the family who knew the kids were at home. Pictou county has a few convicted sexual predators and there are undoubtedly more that haven't acted out or been caught to date. I think that's why the parents pushed the abduction scenario, bc they knew the kids had left long before the parents awoke. These are financially poor people - they need the CCTB and provincial financial support having these kids alive, provides. They're quite young, and seem stunned. Honestly, I'm guessing the RCMP are interviewing anyone on the National Sexual Offender's Registry residing in NS, but don't want to alarm the public. I think that's a grievous error on their part as is not communicating with the public. They haven't said to the public to be watchful, monitor their children, or that they've made an arrest, or the public is safe.

Yet the 35 people formally interviewed were said to be family and close community members.

I think if abduction by a sexual offender was really an option they were pursuing then the public would be aware of that and warned. To not warn parents could be a grave error. Moo

 

[tlcya]

DBM

 

[Fabled Automatic]

Here is a quick recap of what happened on Day 2 around this same time:
1. During a police briefing in the morning, the Mother left to sit in the back of an ambulance.
2. The Maternal Grandmother accused DM of being involved and was told to leave by DM's mother.
3. The Mother left her children's house (~24 hours after reported missing) and has not spoken publicly since.
4. Alleged FB stuff...

To me, any FB stuff is far less suspicious than the first three things. I think her actions are consistent with what a person would do if they strongly suspected that their partner was involved in their children's disappearance - and remember, her own mother had just accused him publicly of it. Absolutely, her FB actions have invited scrutiny, but fingers had already been pointed at DM before any of that happened.

Is there a source for the argument (or whatever it was) between the grandmother and DM? Or has it only come from DM himself?

According to Martell, Brooks-Murray ceased communication with him after leaving with the grandmother.

Timeline of the disappearance, continued search for Sullivan children in Pictou County

I'm curious because I haven't come across the grandmother making any disparaging comments about DM. I could only really find this, so far:

"We're just hoping and praying for the best — that's it — for our babies to come home," Cyndy Murray said in a brief phone interview, adding that police have advised the family against speaking with the public.

Grandmother of missing kids, aged 4 and 6, speaks out

 

[MistyWaters]

Listen to the interview/statement of MBM the day after the children were reported missing. You will hear her mention their 'undiagnosed autism' while suggesting they will talk to anyone and pushing the abduction theory. Daniel M's first interviews followed the same storyline (they'll take water, food, candy from anyone and go with anyone) and also seemed to push the abduction theory. I'm not debating whether the children are/are not autistic; it is how the mother and stepfather labeled them as 'undiagnosed autistic' as a way to suggest they were more vulnerable to abduction. Neither parent has said anything about previous autistic tendencies, such as hiding or wandering off.

Yes that’s true, neither parent said they thought the children had wandered off into the wilderness. But it’s impossible for us to know if media comments mirrored exactly what was told to the RCMP. Publicly alleging an abduction could also be a form of saving face as it places little or no blame on the parents whereas not being observant of one’s children (in the way they described) borders on possible negligence.

I can’t quite believe the two adults were lounging in bed with the 16 month old, paying no attention to the 4 and 6 year old who apparently was too sick to go to school. Given MBM moved out the very next day it seems the relationship was already falling apart, so a yelling and screaming match between the two would explain why the eldest children were being ignored, why neither parent noticed they left the house. That would be a better reason for the RCMP to organize such a thorough search in the forest rather than just assuming they wandered off. But this is my speculation only.
JMO

 

[Snoop Sister]

Yet the 35 people formally interviewed were said to be family and close community members.

I think if abduction by a sexual offender was really an option they were pursuing then the public would be aware of that and warned. To not warn parents could be a grave error. Moo

It is my understanding that not all 35 people interviewed were family or close community members.

 

[tlcya]

The children's stepfather tells CBC News that after their disappearance, the children's mother left the area to be with her family in another part of the province and blocked him on social media.

He said there was an argument between the two families out in the yard of the home that day.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/missing-children-lilly-jack-sullivan-timeline-1.7535707

Martell said that after the disappearance, the children's mother left to be with her family in another part of the province and has blocked him on social media.
Family keeping hope as search continues for missing boy and girl in rural N.S.