I wouldn't call a boot thrown at the head of a driver at the wheel of any vehicle, much less a bus full of young children....endearing. Do you perhaps mean the bus drivers *demeanor* toward the children was endearing. It was also said there was yelling, demanding, and high pitched screeching. ~~Could Jack and Lilly have witnessed boots being hurled in anger toward another as somewhat normal behavior as an expression of impatience and anger? Often a young child will mimic what they see modeled at home.
I think the bus driver is meaning to relay some pertinent, maybe even vital, information about these kids' lives and doing so in as tactful, sympathetic, and kind way as possible. He may see their faces in his mind often and think "these kids didn't deserve this". Probably all of us who've worked in schools and social services can relate to some degree in the remembered faces of too many little faces.
I am jumping in on this and haven't read everything so I am sorry if already discussed!
The weather in Pictou, NS on May 2nd was a low of 34 according to Accuweather. That is really cold! It is hard to imagine a 4 and 6 yr old choosing that day to wander so deeply into thick woods that they vanish.
It was 10°c (50 °f) in the day. It was one of our first few real spring days, it seemed warm to us. But as you mentioned, the nights were cold (1 or 2°c, or 34°f). Hypothermia was one of the main concerns for them the first night. The next day was warmer, but the night temperature was about 5°c (41°f).
I think the same way some others believe—that they possibly tried to make their way to school and became hopelessly lost.
I wouldn't call a boot thrown at the head of a driver at the wheel of any vehicle, much less a bus full of young children....endearing. Do you perhaps mean the bus drivers *demeanor* toward the children was endearing.
yes thats what I meant, and youre right a boot in the head is not endearing. The bus driver didnt really get into describing how it was, rather It was more about how he talked about the kids.
It was also said there was yelling, demanding, and high pitched screeching. ~~Could Jack and Lilly have witnessed boots being hurled in anger toward another as somewhat normal behavior as an expression of impatience and anger? Often a young child will mimic what they see modeled at home.
I think the bus driver is meaning to relay some pertinent, maybe even vital, information about these kids' lives and doing so in as tactful, sympathetic, and kind way as possible. He may see their faces in his mind often and think "these kids didn't deserve this". Probably all of us who've worked in schools and social services can relate to some degree in the remembered faces of too many little faces.
Rail Line and Trails Directly Behind the Sullivan Residence
Yesterday, I realized there's another potential access route to the Sullivan backyard: the railway trail.
Not only that, but both the pipeline trail (used by hunters, hikers, etc.) and the railway corridor behind the home lead directly to Highway 289.
To clarify:
A rail track is a long, narrow path where trains travel—or used to. In this case, it looks like the track behind the Sullivan home is inactive. It’s surrounded by trees, unfenced, and appears walkable. Someone could move along it without being seen from nearby homes or roads.
A pipeline trail is a wide, cleared path through the woods used for underground pipelines or utility lines. These trails are usually made of packed dirt or gravel and are often used by ATVs, locals, hunters, or utility vehicles. They connect to highways or service roads, making them easy to walk or drive along.
Using Google Earth and AI, I located the exact coordinates of the residence, and spent hours analyzing the surroundings.
Here are three main theories based on terrain and logistics:
1. Abduction (planned or opportunistic)
2. An Internal Actor
3. Children wandered away
1. THE SCENE
To assess any theory—abduction, accident, or otherwise—we must start where the children were last reportedly seen: the backyard.
I tried to imagine:
How a perpetrator could’ve entered undetected
How someone could move two children (living or deceased)
How the timeline changes if the incident happened overnight
And how difficult the terrain would be if the kids wandered off on their own
2. THE RAIL LINE
》》The distance from the Sullivan backyard fence to the railway line as approximately 22 meters.
A narrow band of spruce (2–3 m tall) separates the property from the gravel rail grade, which is about 3 meters wide.
From the rail grade, the trailer roof is visible through the trees
From inside the trailer (e.g., kitchen window), someone disappears from view after two steps
The track is flat, firm, and leads to multiple exit points
》》 There’s no fence, ditch, or berm between the yard and the tracks. A child—or adult—could walk or drive directly onto it. Tire ruts suggest occasional maintenance or 4x4 traffic.
This may be the most discreet and accessible exit point for someone on foot or in a vehicle.
3. HIGHWAY 289
This utility corridor connects directly to Highway 289. There’s a slope leading to a bend in the road with a grassy shoulder and partial tree cover—ideal for briefly staging a vehicle.
》》Features:
Gravel access paths and utility clearings
Multiple side trails wide enough for 4x4s
Tire tracks visible on satellite imagery
Mixed terrain: brush, grass, seasonal wetland
》》Estimated travel times
Sullivan Residence to Hwy 289: 30–40 min for a child, 20 min for an adult
Pipeline Trail: Drivable, merges with Highway 289 at a bend
Drainage Strip: Seasonally wet but passable; lighter brush visible on 2024 imagery
》》Though remote, this area is walkable and discreet—especially for someone who knows it well.
4. THEORY REVIEW
This analysis isn’t meant to accuse. It’s an exploration of how each theory aligns with the terrain and logistics.
A. Organized Abduction
This scenario explores the possibility of an external offender—a stranger or peripheral acquaintance—who approached the property with intent or seized an opportunity. While purely speculative, this theory is considered due to the rural isolation of the home and the presence of evidence along a logical exit path.
Strengths
Rear corridors (rail line and trail) allow covert approach and escape
Physical evidence found in a logical direction of flight
Sliding door is silent; backyard was reportedly unsupervised for periods of time
Weaknesses
Unclear how an offender would know the children were home on a school day
Would require local knowledge and confidence in handling two young children
No vehicle or suspect has been publicly identified or described
No BOLO issued; rural setting reduces witness potential but also creates opportunity for isolation
B. Internal Actor Inside the Home
This scenario considers the possibility that an internal actor—someone with access to the home—may have played a role, whether intentionally or through a panic response. This does not accuse any specific individual.
Strengths
Complete control over timeline and narrative
School absence call placed at 6:17 a.m. — suggests prior knowledge the kids would not attend
Children reportedly seen on CCTV with parents the afternoon before
No missing persons call made until midday — creates a possible 12–16 hour window (evening, overnight, and morning) where actions could have occurred
Family led searchers directly to blanket site — could suggest foreknowledge or inside information
Weaknesses & Questions
Where is the physical evidence—disturbed ground, cleanup signs, or forensic traces?
If one adult was involved, was the other unaware—or later informed? Sustaining silence between two people over time is difficult.
A $150,000 reward and intense public pressure would typically lead to information surfacing. Has no one confided in anyone?
The home was searched with dogs and technology. While it’s possible for buried or concealed remains to be missed, the likelihood diminishes over time.
The parents have since separated. This could indicate emotional strain from trauma, or it could point to diverging accounts of events.
C. Wandered Off
This scenario considers the possibility that the children may have left the yard on their own, drawn by curiosity. The terrain behind the home offers immediate access to open space and utility paths.
Strengths
Immediate, unfenced access to open terrain directly behind the home
Utility trails and gravel lanes may have looked like paths or roads, possibly drawing the children toward distant activity or sound
Weaknesses
No consistent scent trail or item drop detected during searches
For two young children to cover 1.5 miles of uneven terrain without leaving more trace is unlikely
Presence of boot print and blanket could indicate staging, rather than genuine wandering
4. Movement
If the children—or someone with them—traveled from the Sullivan property to where the blanket and boot print were found (~1.4 to 1.8 miles away), here’s what stands out:
Terrain is navigable on foot, especially for someone familiar with it
Rail and pipeline trails create a direct, shielded corridor
Visibility from surrounding roads or homes is limited
Route is suitable for someone walking, carrying children, or pushing a cart/stroller
5. Motive
A. External Offender – Predatory Motive
Most stranger abductions are sexually driven
Often involve rapid harm and concealment
Usually require opportunity or surveillance
B. Internal Actor – Stress or Panic Response
Overwhelm, neglect, or emotional triggers can lead to poor decisions
Concealment may stem from panic, fear of charges, or coercion
No history of abuse charges—but absence of evidence ≠ evidence of absence
For me, this analysis isn’t about picking a single theory—it’s about exploring what could have happened, using geography, terrain, and known facts.
That said, many of the thoughtful responses to my initial overview have made me pause and reconsider certain assumptions.
What first felt like a very mysterious case may, in the end, have a more straightforward explanation.
Rail Line and Trails Directly Behind the Sullivan Residence
Yesterday, I realized there's another potential access route to the Sullivan backyard: the railway trail.
Not only that, but both the pipeline trail (used by hunters, hikers, etc.) and the railway corridor behind the home lead directly to Highway 289.
To clarify:
A rail track is a long, narrow path where trains travel—or used to. In this case, it looks like the track behind the Sullivan home is inactive. It’s surrounded by trees, unfenced, and appears walkable. Someone could move along it without being seen from nearby homes or roads.
A pipeline trail is a wide, cleared path through the woods used for underground pipelines or utility lines. These trails are usually made of packed dirt or gravel and are often used by ATVs, locals, hunters, or utility vehicles. They connect to highways or service roads, making them easy to walk or drive along.
Using Google Earth and AI, I located the exact coordinates of the residence, and spent hours analyzing the surroundings.
Here are three main theories based on terrain and logistics:
1. Abduction (planned or opportunistic)
2. An Internal Actor
3. Children wandered away
1. THE SCENE
To assess any theory—abduction, accident, or otherwise—we must start where the children were last reportedly seen: the backyard.
I tried to imagine:
How a perpetrator could’ve entered undetected
How someone could move two children (living or deceased)
How the timeline changes if the incident happened overnight
And how difficult the terrain would be if the kids wandered off on their own
2. THE RAIL LINE
》》The distance from the Sullivan backyard fence to the railway line as approximately 22 meters.
A narrow band of spruce (2–3 m tall) separates the property from the gravel rail grade, which is about 3 meters wide.
From the rail grade, the trailer roof is visible through the trees
From inside the trailer (e.g., kitchen window), someone disappears from view after two steps
The track is flat, firm, and leads to multiple exit points
》》 There’s no fence, ditch, or berm between the yard and the tracks. A child—or adult—could walk or drive directly onto it. Tire ruts suggest occasional maintenance or 4x4 traffic.
This may be the most discreet and accessible exit point for someone on foot or in a vehicle.
3. HIGHWAY 289
This utility corridor connects directly to Highway 289. There’s a slope leading to a bend in the road with a grassy shoulder and partial tree cover—ideal for briefly staging a vehicle.
》》Features:
Gravel access paths and utility clearings
Multiple side trails wide enough for 4x4s
Tire tracks visible on satellite imagery
Mixed terrain: brush, grass, seasonal wetland
》》Estimated travel times
Sullivan Residence to Hwy 289: 30–40 min for a child, 20 min for an adult
Pipeline Trail: Drivable, merges with Highway 289 at a bend
Drainage Strip: Seasonally wet but passable; lighter brush visible on 2024 imagery
》》Though remote, this area is walkable and discreet—especially for someone who knows it well.
4. THEORY REVIEW
This analysis isn’t meant to accuse. It’s an exploration of how each theory aligns with the terrain and logistics.
A. Organized Abduction
This scenario explores the possibility of an external offender—a stranger or peripheral acquaintance—who approached the property with intent or seized an opportunity. While purely speculative, this theory is considered due to the rural isolation of the home and the presence of evidence along a logical exit path.
Strengths
Rear corridors (rail line and trail) allow covert approach and escape
Physical evidence found in a logical direction of flight
Sliding door is silent; backyard was reportedly unsupervised for periods of time
Weaknesses
Unclear how an offender would know the children were home on a school day
Would require local knowledge and confidence in handling two young children
No vehicle or suspect has been publicly identified or described
No BOLO issued; rural setting reduces witness potential but also creates opportunity for isolation
B. Internal Actor Inside the Home
This scenario considers the possibility that an internal actor—someone with access to the home—may have played a role, whether intentionally or through a panic response. This does not accuse any specific individual.
Strengths
Complete control over timeline and narrative
School absence call placed at 6:17 a.m. — suggests prior knowledge the kids would not attend
Children reportedly seen on CCTV with parents the afternoon before
No missing persons call made until midday — creates a possible 12–16 hour window (evening, overnight, and morning) where actions could have occurred
Family led searchers directly to blanket site — could suggest foreknowledge or inside information
Weaknesses & Questions
Where is the physical evidence—disturbed ground, cleanup signs, or forensic traces?
If one adult was involved, was the other unaware—or later informed? Sustaining silence between two people over time is difficult.
A $150,000 reward and intense public pressure would typically lead to information surfacing. Has no one confided in anyone?
The home was searched with dogs and technology. While it’s possible for buried or concealed remains to be missed, the likelihood diminishes over time.
The parents have since separated. This could indicate emotional strain from trauma, or it could point to diverging accounts of events.
C. Wandered Off
This scenario considers the possibility that the children may have left the yard on their own, drawn by curiosity. The terrain behind the home offers immediate access to open space and utility paths.
Strengths
Immediate, unfenced access to open terrain directly behind the home
Utility trails and gravel lanes may have looked like paths or roads, possibly drawing the children toward distant activity or sound
Weaknesses
No consistent scent trail or item drop detected during searches
For two young children to cover 1.5 miles of uneven terrain without leaving more trace is unlikely
Presence of boot print and blanket could indicate staging, rather than genuine wandering
4. Movement
If the children—or someone with them—traveled from the Sullivan property to where the blanket and boot print were found (~1.4 to 1.8 miles away), here’s what stands out:
Terrain is navigable on foot, especially for someone familiar with it
Rail and pipeline trails create a direct, shielded corridor
Visibility from surrounding roads or homes is limited
Route is suitable for someone walking, carrying children, or pushing a cart/stroller
5. Motive
A. External Offender – Predatory Motive
Most stranger abductions are sexually driven
Often involve rapid harm and concealment
Usually require opportunity or surveillance
B. Internal Actor – Stress or Panic Response
Overwhelm, neglect, or emotional triggers can lead to poor decisions
Concealment may stem from panic, fear of charges, or coercion
No history of abuse charges—but absence of evidence ≠ evidence of absence
For me, this analysis isn’t about picking a single theory—it’s about exploring what could have happened, using geography, terrain, and known facts.
That said, many of the thoughtful responses to my initial overview have made me pause and reconsider certain assumptions.
What first felt like a very mysterious case may, in the end, have a more straightforward explanation.
Where did you read the family led them directly to where the blanket was found. I haven’t seen that anywhere yet so if that’s true that’s very interesting.
Yes, it looks like it is closer to 1000m from the home. Estimated from google maps, distance calculator, if walked directly back from the house. Still, it seems very doable.
I am jumping in on this and haven't read everything so I am sorry if already discussed!
The weather in Pictou, NS on May 2nd was a low of 34 according to Accuweather. That is really cold! It is hard to imagine a 4 and 6 yr old choosing that day to wander so deeply into thick woods that they vanish.
Actually, it was a lovely, mild spring morning of around 10C, which for those coming out of a Canadian winter, would mean the finally we could ditch the winter gear and just walk out the door with your inside clothing. That might seem cold for those who are not acclimatized to winter, but for most Canadians, that would be a balmy morning.
This article describes the challenges of autistic children in schools in N.S., especially informative for those of us without firsthand knowledges of autism. The boy in grade 3 is prone to “eloping” (taking off) and ‘wandered’ 3km from school property (almost 2 miles). After reading this it leaves me questioning that morning of May 2nd even more, especially the account by the parents suggesting they essentially ignored Lilly and Jack, while acknowledging both to be ‘possibly autistic’.
Where did you read the family led them directly to where the blanket was found. I haven’t seen that anywhere yet so if that’s true that’s very interesting.
yes thats what I meant, and youre right a boot in the head is not endearing. The bus driver didnt really get into describing how it was, rather It was more about how he talked about the kids.
At the time I didnt read that much into it, I just got the impression he was talking about them in a positive light.
I felt the driver was talking about the kids in the same manner in which relatives and friends speak about the dead , or in eulogies at funerals. They leave out the negative parts of the person's personality and practically put the person on a pedestal with a nomination for sainthood . We often look back at negative behaviours the person said or did with humour or endearment.
Examples being, the person was an alcoholic but its spoke about in different ways like , jaysus he was some man / woman for the drink sure he/ she would drain a brewery, great crack altogether even though the person may have been unkind and prehaps abusive to his wife and kids
I wouldn't read to much into the driver of the bus relaying stories about the kids behaviour on the bus . Those are just his experiences with the kids and when most likely asked he relayed what he knew of them . His tone about the incidents would be one of sadness and heartfelt endearment because they are missing. The same stories might have been relayed to his wife or the school in a different tone altogether such as their behaviour was totally out of hand .
The kids behaviour might have been beyond anyone's control . In some Autistic people the behavioral traits can include lashing out because they are overwhelmed after a long school day or they can't verbally express their needs . So please don't judge lilly and Jack's behaviour as them being naughty they may not have been
This article describes the challenges of autistic children in schools in N.S., especially informative for those of us without firsthand knowledges of autism. The boy in grade 3 is prone to “eloping” (taking off) and ‘wandered’ 3km from school property (almost 2 miles). After reading this it leaves me questioning that morning of May 2nd even more, especially the account by the parents suggesting they essentially ignored Lilly and Jack, while acknowledging both to be ‘possibly autistic’.
Exactly they could have been a flight risk as it is termed in the autistic community, prone to wandering or taking off . Prehaps this is why cps inspected the home and possibly deemed it unsafe and prehaps the children relayed stories from home such as mom and stepdad sleeping while they played at the edge of the woods and the teacher became alarmed and reported it to cps as neglectfulness towards the children's autism needs
My child has autism and my wants and needs are put on the back-burner. It is appointment after appointment, full engagement with the services and schools , daily routine and even mealtimes are tailored to their needs. I don't have a social life outside of the autism community ,sleep is severely and frequently disturbed. I have to be available 24/7 365 days a year for their needs . Even grocery shopping or the volume of a TV and furnishings in the home have to be tailored to create calm and inhibit meltdowns . Something simple as I want/ need to shower has to be planned around their routine . My child didn't sleep more than 2 hours for nearly 2 years , I was exhausted, I slept when they went to school .
Sleep regulation in children with autism is not the same as ours but as parents we have to get on with it . They didn't ask to be brought into this world ,we brought them here so our wants don't matter . Their needs come first to create as easy a life as possible with the circumstances given .
So 2 grown adults lying in bed in my opinion in these circumstances is a no no and while Daniel and Malehya might not have the awareness of their needs and thought it was OK as long as they could br heard . I have to say I do side with those who feel it was neglect .
BBM, and this is currently my theory. I keep coming back to MBM's interview, when she says "they'll talk to anyone in a store" and the fact they were last seen on surveillance footage from a store in New Glasgow. MOO that's when they were handed off to someone they know. Crazy how different this is from my original thoughts...
I am not sure where, or if DM and MBM were both involved but I'm sure they are not in the woods, I believe they are being cared for, I'm just not sure of the motive
Rail Line and Trails Directly Behind the Sullivan Residence
Yesterday, I realized there's another potential access route to the Sullivan backyard: the railway trail.
Not only that, but both the pipeline trail (used by hunters, hikers, etc.) and the railway corridor behind the home lead directly to Highway 289.
To clarify:
A rail track is a long, narrow path where trains travel—or used to. In this case, it looks like the track behind the Sullivan home is inactive. It’s surrounded by trees, unfenced, and appears walkable. Someone could move along it without being seen from nearby homes or roads.
A pipeline trail is a wide, cleared path through the woods used for underground pipelines or utility lines. These trails are usually made of packed dirt or gravel and are often used by ATVs, locals, hunters, or utility vehicles. They connect to highways or service roads, making them easy to walk or drive along.
Using Google Earth and AI, I located the exact coordinates of the residence, and spent hours analyzing the surroundings.
Here are three main theories based on terrain and logistics:
1. Abduction (planned or opportunistic)
2. An Internal Actor
3. Children wandered away
1. THE SCENE
To assess any theory—abduction, accident, or otherwise—we must start where the children were last reportedly seen: the backyard.
I tried to imagine:
How a perpetrator could’ve entered undetected
How someone could move two children (living or deceased)
How the timeline changes if the incident happened overnight
And how difficult the terrain would be if the kids wandered off on their own
2. THE RAIL LINE
》》The distance from the Sullivan backyard fence to the railway line as approximately 22 meters.
A narrow band of spruce (2–3 m tall) separates the property from the gravel rail grade, which is about 3 meters wide.
From the rail grade, the trailer roof is visible through the trees
From inside the trailer (e.g., kitchen window), someone disappears from view after two steps
The track is flat, firm, and leads to multiple exit points
》》 There’s no fence, ditch, or berm between the yard and the tracks. A child—or adult—could walk or drive directly onto it. Tire ruts suggest occasional maintenance or 4x4 traffic.
This may be the most discreet and accessible exit point for someone on foot or in a vehicle.
3. HIGHWAY 289
This utility corridor connects directly to Highway 289. There’s a slope leading to a bend in the road with a grassy shoulder and partial tree cover—ideal for briefly staging a vehicle.
》》Features:
Gravel access paths and utility clearings
Multiple side trails wide enough for 4x4s
Tire tracks visible on satellite imagery
Mixed terrain: brush, grass, seasonal wetland
》》Estimated travel times
Sullivan Residence to Hwy 289: 30–40 min for a child, 20 min for an adult
Pipeline Trail: Drivable, merges with Highway 289 at a bend
Drainage Strip: Seasonally wet but passable; lighter brush visible on 2024 imagery
》》Though remote, this area is walkable and discreet—especially for someone who knows it well.
4. THEORY REVIEW
This analysis isn’t meant to accuse. It’s an exploration of how each theory aligns with the terrain and logistics.
A. Organized Abduction
This scenario explores the possibility of an external offender—a stranger or peripheral acquaintance—who approached the property with intent or seized an opportunity. While purely speculative, this theory is considered due to the rural isolation of the home and the presence of evidence along a logical exit path.
Strengths
Rear corridors (rail line and trail) allow covert approach and escape
Physical evidence found in a logical direction of flight
Sliding door is silent; backyard was reportedly unsupervised for periods of time
Weaknesses
Unclear how an offender would know the children were home on a school day
Would require local knowledge and confidence in handling two young children
No vehicle or suspect has been publicly identified or described
No BOLO issued; rural setting reduces witness potential but also creates opportunity for isolation
B. Internal Actor Inside the Home
This scenario considers the possibility that an internal actor—someone with access to the home—may have played a role, whether intentionally or through a panic response. This does not accuse any specific individual.
Strengths
Complete control over timeline and narrative
School absence call placed at 6:17 a.m. — suggests prior knowledge the kids would not attend
Children reportedly seen on CCTV with parents the afternoon before
No missing persons call made until midday — creates a possible 12–16 hour window (evening, overnight, and morning) where actions could have occurred
Family led searchers directly to blanket site — could suggest foreknowledge or inside information
Weaknesses & Questions
Where is the physical evidence—disturbed ground, cleanup signs, or forensic traces?
If one adult was involved, was the other unaware—or later informed? Sustaining silence between two people over time is difficult.
A $150,000 reward and intense public pressure would typically lead to information surfacing. Has no one confided in anyone?
The home was searched with dogs and technology. While it’s possible for buried or concealed remains to be missed, the likelihood diminishes over time.
The parents have since separated. This could indicate emotional strain from trauma, or it could point to diverging accounts of events.
C. Wandered Off
This scenario considers the possibility that the children may have left the yard on their own, drawn by curiosity. The terrain behind the home offers immediate access to open space and utility paths.
Strengths
Immediate, unfenced access to open terrain directly behind the home
Utility trails and gravel lanes may have looked like paths or roads, possibly drawing the children toward distant activity or sound
Weaknesses
No consistent scent trail or item drop detected during searches
For two young children to cover 1.5 miles of uneven terrain without leaving more trace is unlikely
Presence of boot print and blanket could indicate staging, rather than genuine wandering
4. Movement
If the children—or someone with them—traveled from the Sullivan property to where the blanket and boot print were found (~1.4 to 1.8 miles away), here’s what stands out:
Terrain is navigable on foot, especially for someone familiar with it
Rail and pipeline trails create a direct, shielded corridor
Visibility from surrounding roads or homes is limited
Route is suitable for someone walking, carrying children, or pushing a cart/stroller
5. Motive
A. External Offender – Predatory Motive
Most stranger abductions are sexually driven
Often involve rapid harm and concealment
Usually require opportunity or surveillance
B. Internal Actor – Stress or Panic Response
Overwhelm, neglect, or emotional triggers can lead to poor decisions
Concealment may stem from panic, fear of charges, or coercion
No history of abuse charges—but absence of evidence ≠ evidence of absence
For me, this analysis isn’t about picking a single theory—it’s about exploring what could have happened, using geography, terrain, and known facts.
That said, many of the thoughtful responses to my initial overview have made me pause and reconsider certain assumptions.
What first felt like a very mysterious case may, in the end, have a more straightforward explanation.
This is an excellent summary! It would be interesting to have a map with neighbours trail cams marked, especially in relation to the rail and pipelines. I'm leaning towards an A/B scenario, internal actor or actors planned/assisted with an organized abduction. Just my $0.02
My thoughts on this have changed so dramatically from what I first thought that I don't know if I have a full theory yet, but here goes:
Per RCMP, L&J were "were observed in public with family members on the afternoon of May 1." I haven't seen confirmation of which family members these are, or if either MBM or DM were with them. MOO I think MBM gave L&J to her family members either during or after the New Glasgow trip (maybe even early in the morning of May 2). I believe MBM wanted to get away from DM. I believe DM was unaware of MBM's plan.
Rail Line and Trails Directly Behind the Sullivan Residence
Yesterday, I realized there's another potential access route to the Sullivan backyard: the railway trail.
Not only that, but both the pipeline trail (used by hunters, hikers, etc.) and the railway corridor behind the home lead directly to Highway 289.
To clarify:
A rail track is a long, narrow path where trains travel—or used to. In this case, it looks like the track behind the Sullivan home is inactive. It’s surrounded by trees, unfenced, and appears walkable. Someone could move along it without being seen from nearby homes or roads.
A pipeline trail is a wide, cleared path through the woods used for underground pipelines or utility lines. These trails are usually made of packed dirt or gravel and are often used by ATVs, locals, hunters, or utility vehicles. They connect to highways or service roads, making them easy to walk or drive along.
Using Google Earth and AI, I located the exact coordinates of the residence, and spent hours analyzing the surroundings.
Here are three main theories based on terrain and logistics:
1. Abduction (planned or opportunistic)
2. An Internal Actor
3. Children wandered away
1. THE SCENE
To assess any theory—abduction, accident, or otherwise—we must start where the children were last reportedly seen: the backyard.
I tried to imagine:
How a perpetrator could’ve entered undetected
How someone could move two children (living or deceased)
How the timeline changes if the incident happened overnight
And how difficult the terrain would be if the kids wandered off on their own
2. THE RAIL LINE
》》The distance from the Sullivan backyard fence to the railway line as approximately 22 meters.
A narrow band of spruce (2–3 m tall) separates the property from the gravel rail grade, which is about 3 meters wide.
From the rail grade, the trailer roof is visible through the trees
From inside the trailer (e.g., kitchen window), someone disappears from view after two steps
The track is flat, firm, and leads to multiple exit points
》》 There’s no fence, ditch, or berm between the yard and the tracks. A child—or adult—could walk or drive directly onto it. Tire ruts suggest occasional maintenance or 4x4 traffic.
This may be the most discreet and accessible exit point for someone on foot or in a vehicle.
3. HIGHWAY 289
This utility corridor connects directly to Highway 289. There’s a slope leading to a bend in the road with a grassy shoulder and partial tree cover—ideal for briefly staging a vehicle.
》》Features:
Gravel access paths and utility clearings
Multiple side trails wide enough for 4x4s
Tire tracks visible on satellite imagery
Mixed terrain: brush, grass, seasonal wetland
》》Estimated travel times
Sullivan Residence to Hwy 289: 30–40 min for a child, 20 min for an adult
Pipeline Trail: Drivable, merges with Highway 289 at a bend
Drainage Strip: Seasonally wet but passable; lighter brush visible on 2024 imagery
》》Though remote, this area is walkable and discreet—especially for someone who knows it well.
4. THEORY REVIEW
This analysis isn’t meant to accuse. It’s an exploration of how each theory aligns with the terrain and logistics.
A. Organized Abduction
This scenario explores the possibility of an external offender—a stranger or peripheral acquaintance—who approached the property with intent or seized an opportunity. While purely speculative, this theory is considered due to the rural isolation of the home and the presence of evidence along a logical exit path.
Strengths
Rear corridors (rail line and trail) allow covert approach and escape
Physical evidence found in a logical direction of flight
Sliding door is silent; backyard was reportedly unsupervised for periods of time
Weaknesses
Unclear how an offender would know the children were home on a school day
Would require local knowledge and confidence in handling two young children
No vehicle or suspect has been publicly identified or described
No BOLO issued; rural setting reduces witness potential but also creates opportunity for isolation
B. Internal Actor Inside the Home
This scenario considers the possibility that an internal actor—someone with access to the home—may have played a role, whether intentionally or through a panic response. This does not accuse any specific individual.
Strengths
Complete control over timeline and narrative
School absence call placed at 6:17 a.m. — suggests prior knowledge the kids would not attend
Children reportedly seen on CCTV with parents the afternoon before
No missing persons call made until midday — creates a possible 12–16 hour window (evening, overnight, and morning) where actions could have occurred
Family led searchers directly to blanket site — could suggest foreknowledge or inside information
Weaknesses & Questions
Where is the physical evidence—disturbed ground, cleanup signs, or forensic traces?
If one adult was involved, was the other unaware—or later informed? Sustaining silence between two people over time is difficult.
A $150,000 reward and intense public pressure would typically lead to information surfacing. Has no one confided in anyone?
The home was searched with dogs and technology. While it’s possible for buried or concealed remains to be missed, the likelihood diminishes over time.
The parents have since separated. This could indicate emotional strain from trauma, or it could point to diverging accounts of events.
C. Wandered Off
This scenario considers the possibility that the children may have left the yard on their own, drawn by curiosity. The terrain behind the home offers immediate access to open space and utility paths.
Strengths
Immediate, unfenced access to open terrain directly behind the home
Utility trails and gravel lanes may have looked like paths or roads, possibly drawing the children toward distant activity or sound
Weaknesses
No consistent scent trail or item drop detected during searches
For two young children to cover 1.5 miles of uneven terrain without leaving more trace is unlikely
Presence of boot print and blanket could indicate staging, rather than genuine wandering
4. Movement
If the children—or someone with them—traveled from the Sullivan property to where the blanket and boot print were found (~1.4 to 1.8 miles away), here’s what stands out:
Terrain is navigable on foot, especially for someone familiar with it
Rail and pipeline trails create a direct, shielded corridor
Visibility from surrounding roads or homes is limited
Route is suitable for someone walking, carrying children, or pushing a cart/stroller
5. Motive
A. External Offender – Predatory Motive
Most stranger abductions are sexually driven
Often involve rapid harm and concealment
Usually require opportunity or surveillance
B. Internal Actor – Stress or Panic Response
Overwhelm, neglect, or emotional triggers can lead to poor decisions
Concealment may stem from panic, fear of charges, or coercion
No history of abuse charges—but absence of evidence ≠ evidence of absence
For me, this analysis isn’t about picking a single theory—it’s about exploring what could have happened, using geography, terrain, and known facts.
That said, many of the thoughtful responses to my initial overview have made me pause and reconsider certain assumptions.
What first felt like a very mysterious case may, in the end, have a more straightforward explanation.
Thank you for your time and for sharing your work .
For me this gives a much better visual of the property and the surrounding area. Reading maps is not a skill I possess, so good to have a walk through.
I wasn't aware of the disused rail line and it hasn't been spoken about in msm .
My opinions on the case were always led by the question of how would a stranger or even someone casually associated with the children have spotted them in the back yard that morning and considering the road outside the home has dust and dirt on either side and down the driveway I felt it impossible for LE and searchers to have not found more evidence of this being a route of either escape or children going of their own accord .
The fact that the route exists to the rail line from the point of the Backyard, now opens the possibility of all of your hypothesis and theories to be valid explanations.
Something as simple as the children seeing a baby animal on the track leading to the rail line could have piqued their curiosity to explore further ,getting lost in the process
I sincerely hope LE have looked as far into this direction as they have toward the pipe line because I've not seen this mentioned .
One question, The place where we suspect Daniel repaired the fence lead onto the area were the rail line is ?
My thoughts on this have changed so dramatically from what I first thought that I don't know if I have a full theory yet, but here goes:
Per RCMP, L&J were "were observed in public with family members on the afternoon of May 1." I haven't seen confirmation of which family members these are, or if either MBM or DM were with them. MOO I think MBM gave L&J to her family members either during or after the New Glasgow trip (maybe even early in the morning of May 2). I believe MBM wanted to get away from DM. I believe DM was unaware of MBM's plan.
If DM was not aware of the plan, how is it he has reported seeing Lilly and hearing Jack on the morning of May 2?
What is your rationale for believing MBM gave the children to her family members?
My thoughts on this have changed so dramatically from what I first thought that I don't know if I have a full theory yet, but here goes:
Per RCMP, L&J were "were observed in public with family members on the afternoon of May 1." I haven't seen confirmation of which family members these are, or if either MBM or DM were with them. MOO I think MBM gave L&J to her family members either during or after the New Glasgow trip (maybe even early in the morning of May 2). I believe MBM wanted to get away from DM. I believe DM was unaware of MBM's plan.
I appreciate you sharing your thoughts on the theory.
From what I've read in MSM, the kids were with mom, DM and baby sister.
If the children's mom handed her kids off to family then called 911 and reported them missing, not only is she in a world of trouble, so will those family members be. I'm not sure what all the charges might be but they'd likely start with falsely reporting an emergency & interfering with a police investigation. There's been countless resources and expenses associated with this case and if it was all for nothing and the kids are fine, there will be dire, legal consequences for anyone involved.
As far as I can see, there's only 1 reason for speculation on a hand-off the early morning of May 2, and that is social media rumor we're not allowed to discuss here.
If mom wanted to get away from DM, she could have just done exactly what she did the day after the kids went missing.
If DM was unaware of this plan, it doesn't wash that he'd just go along with her story and lie to the media & likely also RCMP and tell them he saw Lilly that morning and heard Jack in the kitchen.
If DM was unaware of this plan, it doesn't wash that he'd just go along with her story and lie to the media & likely also RCMP and tell them he saw Lilly that morning and heard Jack in the kitchen.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
