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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #681
I don't follow this case on social media so I can say without a doubt, that specific comment was in the video on one of the Canadian MSM sites.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Above is video from ctv news where Daniel states leave Malehya alone

<modsnip: Removed non approved source>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #682
Thanks, @su5ie !
A cousin of the maternal grandmother.
I'll admit I'm a bit curious why the RCMP would brush off his information ??
Odd.
In some cases I've caved into, "the family knows nothing", but in Jack and Lilly's case I can't seem to shake it, that someone knows something .......
Not sure why.
Still hoping for answers.
Omo.
Your welcome
 
  • #683
Not necessarily asking you specifically, @AddyFinch , but regarding what you were talking about re "frustrated with the editing" of the video interviews, does anyone know how that kind of editing might usually come about? On whose say-so? Would you expect it to be because LE asked or ordered it be done to help or not hinder their investigation? Or might it usually be something the interviewee herself asked to be done perhaps? Or just the station that did the interview, and if so, for what reason, I wonder? Maybe it's just as simple as the station realizing after the fact that something wasn't verifiable or even that they just wanted to cut some parts to make it shorter. Just wondering... seems if we knew who wanted certain parts cut out, it could be a possible clue to help us understand things better.
Could even just be a metrics thing, i.e. if the analytics show that lots of viewers are clicking off the video at a certain point, they might cut some stuff out to try and bring up the viewer retention stats
 
  • #684
Not necessarily asking you specifically, @AddyFinch , but regarding what you were talking about re "frustrated with the editing" of the video interviews, does anyone know how that kind of editing might usually come about? On whose say-so? Would you expect it to be because LE asked or ordered it be done to help or not hinder their investigation? Or might it usually be something the interviewee herself asked to be done perhaps? Or just the station that did the interview, and if so, for what reason, I wonder? Maybe it's just as simple as the station realizing after the fact that something wasn't verifiable or even that they just wanted to cut some parts to make it shorter. Just wondering... seems if we knew who wanted certain parts cut out, it could be a possible clue to help us understand things better.
Lol, I’d say all of the above. I often think it’s to shorten, improve, etc. in the old days it was …. Bandwidth…..
I do think certain individuals have the ability to edit on special request, whether it be LE or individuals hinting of litigation. Anyone can change wiki.
 
  • #685
also @Ontario Mom

That rings a bell with me too, but I have no idea where I read / or heard it, except to say that I am very rarely off MSM in this case. But not on Globe&Mail because I don't subscribe to it. On CBC seems most likely for me.
JMO
I stayed away from sm, but this past week have had a more in-depth look. Tons of garbage, feel like a voyeur reading all the cat fights and name calling. It’s like an episode of the Kards, or Osbornes (rip Ozzie). And all counter productive. Can’t imagine RCMP having to drill thru this stuff daily then decipher if it needs further investigation. Sometimes there’s an interesting line of thought re the kids, but only sometimes.
 
  • #686
I am looking to reexamine the drone footage of the search but I cant seem to find it. Can anyone help please?

Justice for Jack and Lilly,

Salty
 
  • #687
Curious @AddyFinch why do you think they were on the property on the evening of May 1? And why do you think they went missing on the morning of May 2? What do you think happened?
Seriously why do you think they weren’t there Thursday evening? Do you think something happened to them preventing their return from outing, or at trailer after the outing? Is this based on the dogs lost scent at end of driveway? I wonder if Janie saw them return? Rumours were, she wasn’t supposed to be there that night. Do you think someone else assisted them either at outing or during that night?
 
  • #688
Seriously why do you think they weren’t there Thursday evening? Do you think something happened to them preventing their return from outing, or at trailer after the outing? Is this based on the dogs lost scent at end of driveway? I wonder if Janie saw them return? Rumours were, she wasn’t supposed to be there that night. Do you think someone else assisted them either at outing or during that night?

Regarding your last question (which wasn't directed at me 😉), here's something that occurred to me reading here yesterday. One of their neighbors claimed there was a party there that night which DM denied. IF this was the nosy neighbor with the drone, maybe they did see a lot of cars there, and maybe it wasn't a party. What if it was people who came to help... in the aftermath of whatever happened?

All conjecture of course, and the more people involved, the more likely someone would have talked by now. Just something that occurred to me.

(Also, apologies if that exact thing has already been mentioned, I haven't had the chance to follow this thread closely these last few days.)
 
  • #689
Regarding your last question (which wasn't directed at me 😉), here's something that occurred to me reading here yesterday. One of their neighbors claimed there was a party there that night which DM denied. IF this was the nosy neighbor with the drone, maybe they did see a lot of cars there, and maybe it wasn't a party. What if it was people who came to help... in the aftermath of whatever happened?

All conjecture of course, and the more people involved, the more likely someone would have talked by now. Just something that occurred to me.

(Also, apologies if that exact thing has already been mentioned, I haven't had the chance to follow this thread closely these last few days.)
I’m guessing more of a gathering despite Daniel’s denial. I’ve also wondered if this individual provided drone footage to the police and theyve used that to aid in their interviews
 
  • #690
I am looking to reexamine the drone footage of the search but I cant seem to find it. Can anyone help please?

Justice for Jack and Lilly,

Salty


The above link contains drone video



To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Just an article dump from my copied links .

That's me over and out unless new information is released on msm
 
  • #691
Re wild animals, cougars would be the most likely to not leave a trace because they grab their prey and run away with them.
They don’t consume clothing or boots or backpacks

The Barry Morphew mistake
 
  • #692
I'm concerned this case will turn cold like Summer Wells and Lisa Irwin. :(

jmo
 
  • #693
I'm concerned this case will turn cold like Summer Wells and Lisa Irwin. :(

jmo
I'm afraid you're right. The only thing is, I've doubted from the beginning that any of these people involved are bright enough to outsmart the RCMP. Maybe I underestimated them.
 
  • #694
I'm concerned this case will turn cold like Summer Wells and Lisa Irwin. :(

jmo
I’m hopeful there is still a lot going on that we have no clue about.
 
  • #695
I'm afraid you're right. The only thing is, I've doubted from the beginning that any of these people involved are bright enough to outsmart the RCMP. Maybe I underestimated them.
I don’t think the RCMP are going to be outsmarted on this. I think they are dotting i and crossing t. I think they’re giving these folks enough rope to hang themselves. I have always believed DM and MBM have not been fully truthful. I lean towards the likelihood the children are dead, but I hope I am wrong.
I believe the truth will come out.
IMO
 
  • #696
This may be nothing, but there was a sawmill that burnt down just about 30 mins drive from Pictou Country. See the map/link. I don't know if it's abadoned/semi-operated at the moment?
Or other abandoned sawmills nearby, only locals know about?
Screenshot_20250725-102309.webp


Pictou County, Nova Scotia Sawmill Remains in Business After Recent Fire - Dust Safety Science
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20250725-102309.webp
    Screenshot_20250725-102309.webp
    63.3 KB · Views: 7
  • #697
DM works at a sawmill? Am I remembering correctly? Are there many in the area I wonder
 
  • #698
This may be nothing, but there was a sawmill that burnt down just about 30 mins drive from Pictou Country. See the map/link. I don't know if it's abadoned/semi-operated at the moment?
Or other abandoned sawmills nearby, only locals know about? View attachment 603900

Pictou County, Nova Scotia Sawmill Remains in Business After Recent Fire - Dust Safety Science
This sawmill was damaged in a dust fire in 2018 . I wonder is that where DM worked part time or is there another sawmill close by ? I wonder did work dry up over the years since the fire as the premises no longer had the capacity to be as productive as before ?
 
  • #699
Thread is closed for review.

Check back later folks.
 
  • #700
ADMIN NOTE:


This has been posted before and will not be posted again.

from The Rules:

VICTIM FRIENDLY

Websleuths is a victim friendly forum. Attacking or bashing a victim is not allowed. Discussing known victim behavior, good or bad is fine, but do so in a civil and constructive way, and only when such behavior is known to be relevant to the case.

The "victim friendly" rule extends to family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, or others who have not been officially designated by law enforcement or in mainstream media as a Person of Interest or suspect is not allowed (i.e. Sleuthing out this type of information, and publicly posting their social media, personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public is not allowed and such posts will be removed, along with any posts that encourage such sleuthing).

This does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media.
Members may reasonably discuss what is said in MSM by them or about them, but do not make random accusations, insinuations, suggest their involvement, trash, bash or attack them, or speculate negatively about them.


Those who have not bothered to pay attention to our Terms of Service will simply find themselves temporarily or permanently without posting privileges.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
1,733
Total visitors
1,845

Forum statistics

Threads
632,785
Messages
18,631,718
Members
243,291
Latest member
suspicious sims
Back
Top