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

[oceanverde]

The mother leaving does not sit right with me at all.

 

[ttjo]

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.

I hear you, and I am kind of being sarcastic maybe? when i say how can she be suspicious? either it happened the way she described or it didnt, if they were together as she describes, how could he be the one who did something? unless she believes they were abducted and he had something to do with that.
if thats the case she needs to say more about that to the police. ( maybe she is ) if she has a reason to suspect him then I am sure its not coming from nowhere.
Did they really go missing that morning?

 

[MistyWaters]

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.

I’d think some of the questions asked of the community and family members involves observations of how the parent/step deal with difficulties and whether it’s known to ever trigger out of control displays of anger and/or rage especially involving the children. Adult children often learn how to competently cope with strife from the ways of their parents and that these senior members were outrightly arguing in the yard is not role modelling it very well.
JMO

ETA Thinking of the bus drivers interview - Jack throwing things, Lilly squealing on the bus - is it possible to ignore/not pay attention to these children all morning?

 

[ttjo]

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.

I dont really think the facebook status is suspicious, to me the FB stuff is consistent with wanting to make a statement as opposed to announcing to the world that she was single. It makes more sense to me that it was a message for D.M. ( that she thinks he had something to do with it and its over)

 

[AnnieOakley123]

I hear you, and I am kind of being sarcastic maybe? when i say how can she be suspicious? either it happened the way she described or it didnt, if they were together as she describes, how could he be the one who did something? unless she believes they were abducted and he had something to do with that.
if thats the case she needs to say more about that to the police. ( maybe she is ) if she has a reason to suspect him then I am sure its not coming from nowhere.
Did they really go missing that morning?

Exactly! There is no evidence (that we know of) that the children went missing on the morning of May 2 prior to the 911 call. It may have happened any of the three days before. Both parents initial interviews used a lot of "we" implying MBM and DM were together at the time the children disappeared. Their stories use repetitive details and, to me, sounded scripted. If they do indeed have autism, I find it odd that DM moments after not hearing the children in the yard, jumped in his car and looked in culverts and then on his ATV, when I think the immediate thing parents would do is thoroughly look in the trailer then under the trailer and in around all the cars and stuff on the property and check in at the mom's trailer. A 4-year-old in a pull-up and rainboots is not going to get far in Nova Scotia weather in early May in that terrain: cold, wet, buggy, dense ground cover. Since the SAR crew and the police dogs found no scents or evidence, in my opinion they were driven off the property and not in any of the cars currently present, which forensics and the dogs would have searched. It is truly a bizarre case, and I am hopeful the RCMP is eventually able to provide their case to the public.

 

[AddyFinch]

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.

If mother was "asked" to leave the house by another person, she legally did not have to go. Unless she didn't know this, ( she was previously been married, so must know her legal rights as a partner), then she left for 1).fear of her life or toddler, 2).was in process of doing so anyway, 3).was in an argument and thought "I'm outta here". If toddler was DM's then he too would have parental rights. Was DM in agreement for her to take toddler and leave? Or did child services take toddler then she left?

I'm leaning to #3. Based solely on media interviews, use of FB. She acted reactionary. Did she think of comfort for toddler? Because it hasn't been established that she thought of needs of two young children, only her sleep. If Child services took toddler then she clearly left due to #3.

Don't want to do the blame game, but honestly both parents are clearly responsible for what happened. And I am sure there is much more to this story which put those three kids at risk.
The child trafficking scenario is always a strong possibility, and I guess motive would need to be established. But I find it hard to believe a mother would sell her kids vs abduction.

 

[AddyFinch]

Darn I wish the LE would address the other people living on property, and the Landsdowne Recreation area down the road. Have they searched that???? Or that dirt road running behind their house.

 

[ttjo]

If mother was "asked" to leave the house by another person, she legally did not have to go. Unless she didn't know this, ( she was previously been married, so must know her legal rights as a partner), then she left for 1).fear of her life or toddler, 2).was in process of doing so anyway, 3).was in an argument and thought "I'm outta here". If toddler was DM's then he too would have parental rights. Was DM in agreement for her to take toddler and leave? Or did child services take toddler then she left?

I'm leaning to #3. Based solely on media interviews, use of FB. She acted reactionary. Did she think of comfort for toddler? Because it hasn't been established that she thought of needs of two young children, only her sleep. If Child services took toddler then she clearly left due to #3.

Don't want to do the blame game, but honestly both parents are clearly responsible for what happened. And I am sure there is much more to this story which put those three kids at risk.
The child trafficking scenario is always a strong possibility, and I guess motive would need to be established. But I find it hard to believe a mother would sell her kids vs abduction.

I think we have no information, its like putting a puzzle together with half of the pieces missing, so for now, we guess at things, that's all.

 

[KSwizzle]

I know every kid is different but when my kid was 4 and 6 I couldn’t imagine them bundling up on their own and trekking through a wooded area, they’d be scared and also kids can’t really get too far a 4 year old would get tired fairly quickly, anyone who has raised a child knows this, the whining would start fairly quick ha

Moo

 

[jennytrevor]

Sadly I’m of the opinion the kids truly did wander off and they drowned somewhere and just haven’t been found yet. Not sure how many agree with that viewpoint.

 

[AIGT]

I dont really think the facebook status is suspicious, to me the FB stuff is consistent with wanting to make a statement as opposed to announcing to the world that she was single. It makes more sense to me that it was a message for D.M. ( that she thinks he had something to do with it and its over)

I am wondering if there is some people who think it’s weird that she took the time to change the status while there are others who are wondering if the status change was on purpose because that would mean the relationship was over and that part is weird.

I think some people may have missed it but it was discussed and linked in these threads multiple times that a globe reporter called MBM’s phone after she left the area and a “woman” who answered it told the reporter that she is no longer in a relationship with Martell. Again hopefully I’m okay with repeating that because it was linked and discussed in depth earlier.

I just want to save time for anyone who is trying to figure out if the Facebook status means the actual relationship is over because that was already stated to a reporter.

 

[KSwizzle]

Sadly I’m of the opinion the kids truly did wander off and they drowned somewhere and just haven’t been found yet. Not sure how many agree with that viewpoint.

I think if you subscribe to the theory the kids went off on their own this is probably most likely moo

 

[AddyFinch]

I think we have no information, its like putting a puzzle together with half of the pieces missing, so for now, we guess at things, that's all.

Exactly.
I wonder if there is still any activity at house ie search, LE etc? Last statement by RCMP was Sunday. So going forward, what now? You can only search so much and where? That's the problem. Presuming these parents are innocent, they are left just hanging for the rest of their lives. So cruel.
And if they aren't innocent...................someone needs to look in the mirror and recognize the face of guilt and confess.

 

[jennytrevor]

I know every kid is different but when my kid was 4 and 6 I couldn’t imagine them bundling up on their own and trekking through a wooded area, they’d be scared and also kids can’t really get too far a 4 year old would get tired fairly quickly, anyone who has raised a child knows this, the whining would start fairly quick ha

Moo

I grew up in a neighborhood where all of us kids would play outside every day. Including young kindergarten aged kids. We loved exploring the (3-5 inch deep) drainage creek that ran down behind our houses and spent many hours there. And most of the kids wore boots as their daily wear, better for muddy creek playing. To me, the idea these kids just wanted to play outside is so believable. I remember one time being so excited at their ages to go further down the creek than I had before, and feeling so adventurous.

And I’m not that old! I’m in my 20s!

 

[Skigh]

I know every kid is different but when my kid was 4 and 6 I couldn’t imagine them bundling up on their own and trekking through a wooded area, they’d be scared and also kids can’t really get too far a 4 year old would get tired fairly quickly, anyone who has raised a child knows this, the whining would start fairly quick ha

Moo

I agree especially with all the mosquitoes,flies and ticks. They were totally inadequately dressed to be able to navigate the forest.

 

[tlcya]

If mother was "asked" to leave the house by another person, she legally did not have to go. Unless she didn't know this, ( she was previously been married, so must know her legal rights as a partner), then she left for 1).fear of her life or toddler, 2).was in process of doing so anyway, 3).was in an argument and thought "I'm outta here". If toddler was DM's then he too would have parental rights. Was DM in agreement for her to take toddler and leave? Or did child services take toddler then she left?
[snipped for focus]

IF as reported DM's mother also resides on the property it is possible that she is the property owner and that she asked MBM's family to leave due to whatever disagreement caused MBM's family to suggest in some way he is responsible for the children being missing (per his own statements to press about that fight). And equally possible she asked MBM to leave if she did not take her son's side in that argument.

We just don't have enough info to know what caused MBM to leave. DM's subsequent statements to press about CPS and his lack of access to his daughter, M, would suggest some level of CPS involvement with this separation but we have no way of knowing if their involvement occurred prior to or after the parents parted ways.

So frustrating to still know so little about the background of much of this case. I sure hope RCMP is much farther along than their extended silence would seem to indicate. I've not really followed Canadian or Nova Scotian cases closely before. RCMP is said to keep things close to the vest and I believe if this case is any example that must be true.

I must say though, the lack of reporting that this "source inside or close to the investigation" says this or that is pretty darned refreshing.

 

[ttjo]

I am wondering if there is some people who think it’s weird that she took the time to change the status while there are others who are wondering if the status change was on purpose because that would mean the relationship was over and that part is weird.

I think some people may have missed it but it was discussed and linked in these threads multiple times that a globe reporter called MBM’s phone after she left the area and a “woman” who answered it told the reporter that she is no longer in a relationship with Martell. Again hopefully I’m okay with repeating that because it was linked and discussed in depth earlier.

I just want to save time for anyone who is trying to figure out if the Facebook status means the actual relationship is over because that was already stated to a reporter.

so are you saying that she didnt need to change the status to let Daniel know the relationship was over? I'd agree with that. So why bother making that effort? I'm just trying to understand what the point was. Its not that big of a deal guess, maybe the purpose was to just block him and while there she changed her status, and its been made a bigger deal than it is.

 

[TMich6811]

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.

I think it’s far too early to say that RCMP dropped the ball here and I think by some of their verbiage, they’ve been investigating other avenues since early on.

I also feel that they haven’t alerted the public because they haven’t fully wanted the parents to know what they have been investigating or what information they have or suspect.

I (unfortunately) think they’ve know since close to day 1 that this is a body search and used the search and rescue as a potential avenue to search for bodies in the forest.

 

[Lucy6226]

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

No, they didn't say they all were. But they are certainly not interviewing for a stranger abduction either.

This is what was stated 'As of May 15, investigators have identified 35 people for formal interviews, focusing on community members and others with direct ties to the siblings.

Police release new details as search for Jack and Lilly Sullivan continues

The search for missing young siblings Lilly and Jack Sullivan continues as authorities hunt down leads and follow up on interviews.

www.newsweek.com

 

[middy]

Stepfather of two children missing in rural N.S. worries they may have been abducted

This article has more information about what DM did after noticing the children were quiet, before going in his vehicle (edited - initially I thought it was an ATV)

"As soon as I noticed that I didn’t hear anything, I immediately jumped out of bed," he said in an interview outside the home. "I searched the bedrooms and looked in the backyard because they go looking for bugs and grass to feed the chickens …"