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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #541
I hate to even say this but does anyone remember Maddie Soto? Do we know the children were alive in the sighting on May 1? If they were captured on CCTV but clearly deceased, that would explain why the RCMP still want video from the days before. :(
I think if they were seen clearly deceased in a car the driver would have been arrested by now.
 
  • #542
I think if they were seen clearly deceased in a car the driver would have been arrested by now.
Oh that's a good point, that's reassuring. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
  • #543
I think if they were seen clearly deceased in a car the driver would have been arrested by now.
and in public. I take that as being out of the vehicle also.
 
  • #544
I hate to even say this but does anyone remember Maddie Soto? Do we know the children were alive in the sighting on May 1? If they were captured on CCTV but clearly deceased, that would explain why the RCMP still want video from the days before. :(
Bbm.
Yes, curious about that !
Why does the RCMP want security footage from the days before May 1st ?

The RCMP are not acting as if the kids wandered off, although they haven't stated definitively that they do not think it could've happened.
Everything is still on the table for LE, except I think -- a kidnapping (hence no Amber Alert)

I was thinking they were seen in a vehicle on security cameras, but both were asleep ?
So, a sighting doesn't mean they were sitting up or out walking around.
Imo.
 
  • #545
and in public. I take that as being out of the vehicle also.
I think that still has been left quite ambiguous. They could have been in a car or on foot somewhere outside of their home.
 
  • #546
I think that still think that has been left quite ambiguous. They could have been in a car or on foot somewhere outside of their home.
I know, I find a lot of things open for interpretation. Thats all we get I guess
 
  • #547
There was a case in Alberta where a little boy went missing with his grandparents. They went missing on a day they had an estate sale in their home. You know how many people went through there?
They released no information, It felt like it would never get solved, and then when they made an arrest it showed all they had done.
video surveilance , and the person who did it, and all his history, wow

 
Last edited:
  • #548
They said Family member(s) maybe there was another family member ( that doesnt live there) with them, and they're looking for footage to confirm when they arrived ? or who would have brought them there?
What would they be looking for otherwise?
What would have evidentiary value?
This is exactly what I'm thinking. Maybe the children were spotted with a person who was not present on the day they went missing, and RCMP are trying to find out more.

Do the school buses have cameras?
 
  • #549
They
This is exactly what I'm thinking. Maybe the children were spotted with a person who was not present on the day they went missing, and RCMP are trying to find out more.

Do the school buses have cameras?
They do where I'm from.
 
  • #550
  • #551

Not sure if this is allowed, it’s written by someone from the Truro & Colchester Code 1 Coverage Facebook Page

If not allowed, please delete. Thank you
 
  • #552
Welcome to Websleuhs, Jasmina !!
 
  • #553
Bbm.
Yes, curious about that !
Why does the RCMP want security footage from the days before May 1st ?

The RCMP are not acting as if the kids wandered off, although they haven't stated definitively that they do not think it could've happened.
Everything is still on the table for LE, except I think -- a kidnapping (hence no Amber Alert)

I was thinking they were seen in a vehicle on security cameras, but both were asleep ?
So, a sighting doesn't mean they were sitting up or out walking around.
Imo.

The criteria for an Amber Alert wasn’t met because there was no evidence of an abduction. No Amber Alert is not proof an abduction didn’t occur if evidence is discovered later. The criteria of the Alert is quite strict in Canada. Everything means everything is on the table IMO.

 
  • #554
Martell appears to be indicating he took and passed a polygraph test. He also appears to throw shade towards MBM for not speaking to the media.

Edit: Not posting to say that he did pass or that polygraph are accurate just that it’s an interesting update.
 
  • #555
I hate to even say this but does anyone remember Maddie Soto? Do we know the children were alive in the sighting on May 1? If they were captured on CCTV but clearly deceased, that would explain why the RCMP still want video from the days before. :(
This is along the lines of what I've been thinking. If the children were seen 'sleeping' (like in their car seats or something) they might want verification of an earlier sighting where they were up and moving around.
 
  • #556
Martell appears to be indicating he took and passed a polygraph test. He also appears to throw shade towards MBM for not speaking to the media.

Edit: Not posting to say that he did pass or that polygraph are accurate just that it’s an interesting update.
Interesting that he said a liaison officer is keeping them both updated. I wonder how that works now they are separated, as presumably he doesn't have parental responsibility?
 
  • #557
Interesting that he said a liaison officer is keeping them both updated. I wonder how that works now they are separated, as presumably he doesn't have parental responsibility?
Good point. He doesn't have legal rights to any more information than we do, aside from baby Meadow.
 
  • #558
Martell appears to be indicating he took and passed a polygraph test. He also appears to throw shade towards MBM for not speaking to the media.

Edit: Not posting to say that he did pass or that polygraph are accurate just that it’s an interesting update.


A couple other points in Global’s report that I thought were worthy of mention -

BBM
Police said they’re “committed to exploring all possibilities” when it comes to this case.

In a Wednesday update, RCMP said they’ve confirmed the two were “observed in public with family members on the afternoon of May 1” based on details they’ve gathered. They later clarified that confirmation was made by both video evidence and eyewitness accounts.
 
  • #559
Interesting that he said a liaison officer is keeping them both updated. I wonder how that works now they are separated, as presumably he doesn't have parental responsibility?
“Need to know basis” for both parents I’m sure. What they’re telling him doesn’t have to be all the facts or even true. It wouldn’t help them to just cut him off. MO
 
  • #560
From Global News article posted above:

In a Wednesday update, RCMP said they’ve confirmed the two were “observed in public with family members on the afternoon of May 1” based on details they’ve gathered. They later clarified that confirmation was made by both video evidence and eyewitness accounts.

Someone earlier mentioned a store. That would fit with having video and eyewitness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
60
Guests online
1,972
Total visitors
2,032

Forum statistics

Threads
638,746
Messages
18,732,799
Members
244,527
Latest member
CuriousKay
Back
Top