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

[MistyWaters]

Interesting, if I recall very early on LE was looking through video footage of the last day the kids were seen. IMO they were specifically looking for a particular vehicle then. I also seem to recall the bio fathers family was in town around then as well.

So the question then becomes who is the 50-60 yr old woman with a short curl cut and does she (or anyone she is related to or friends with) drive the vehicle that the witness saw the kids walking to.

It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that the short curl cut woman is related to bio dads family.

Where is it stated this tip is known or even presumed to be an actual sighting of Lilly and Jack getting picked up in a vehicle?

 

[TMich6811]

Where is it stated this tip was an actual sighting of Lilly and Jack getting picked up in a vehicle?

I’m sorry I’m trying real hard here but I cannot figure out where anywhere in sapphires post do they say that

 

[Colleen Donnelly]

So in light of the new article what are the thoughts about what happened the kids .

My thoughts on what happened to those wee loves has not changed since May 2nd. I 100% believe both parents. I think after being up and wide awake they got bored stiff and went out to the yard and played on the swings. Maybe they were too loud for step grandma and maybe she yelled at them to be quiet. They possibly were frustrated and for whatever reason decided to have an adventure, walked up to the road and were then stolen.

I think it was just that simple. A crime of opportunity from someone who had been plotting and dreaming of just such an opportunity? Creepy thought.

A link to the entire CBC interview with the step grandma for a refresher.

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

Accept third party cookies

All jmo.

 

[iveyguy]

I'm 100% sure that the children sighted by the witness that morning were not Lily & Jack and that LE already knows exactly who they are. Their descriptions do not match*, and this information is far too critical to be withheld from the public if LE was not able to identify the driver or the car. Simply put, LE has already confirmed that this tip is unrelated to this case, and that's why the public was never informed.

* "She thought the girl was around 9 or 10-years-old and the boy five-years-old"... "The boy had dirty blond hair and was wearing shorts, while the girl had darkish hair in pigtails and was wearing a tank top with blue strings."

This doesn't sound like Lily and Jack.

 

[Firstsnow4]

Where is it stated this tip is known or even presumed to be an actual sighting of Lilly and Jack getting picked up in a vehicle?

It doesn’t say - in fact I think the tipster said the girl looked about 10 years old so completely wrong age.

 

[MistyWaters]

It doesn’t say - in fact I think the tipster said the girl looked about 10 years old so completely wrong age.

I agree, there’s a huge difference in height between a 10 year old and 6 year old. The information in this tip was likely mentioned to support a subpoena relating to vehicle traffic somewhere but it’d be presumptuous to conclude the RCMP believed it to be a true sighting of Lilly and Jack being picked up. This would be an example of ‘unproven information’ mentioned by the media. Helpful locals were asked to submit tips of any unusual happenings, then the RCMP are tasked with investigating the tips.
JMO

ETA Possible vehicle sightings and other information coming in from various tips would be required to obtain approval for a subpoena of video records such as this:

N.S. missing kids: Court documents provide details on Lilly and Jack Sullivan case | Globalnews.ca

Included in several documents are confirmation that investigators found a second piece of a pink blanket they say belonged to Lilly, in the trash.

globalnews.ca

“Among the numerous court orders sought by police, was one for the Cobequid Pass, a tolled section of highway in Nova Scotia. Specifically, the RCMP were looking for video records including closed circuit footage of all cameras of drivers leaving Nova Scotia between May 1, 2025, at 2:25 p.m. to May 3, 2025, at 3 a.m.”

 

[teeby]

I agree, there’s a huge difference in height between a 10 year old and 6 year old. The information in this tip was likely mentioned to support a subpoena relating to vehicle traffic somewhere but it’d be presumptuous to conclude the RCMP believed it to be a true sighting of Lilly and Jack being picked up. This would be an example of ‘unproven information’ mentioned by the media. Helpful locals were asked to submit tips of any unusual happenings, then the RCMP are tasked with investigating the tips.
JMO

Also a huge difference in behavior between a 10yo and a 6yo, especially where there is concern for developmental delays. You couldn't mix those up unless you really didn't know anything about children.

 

[MistyWaters]

I'm 100% sure that the children sighted by the witness that morning were not Lily & Jack and that LE already knows exactly who they are. Their descriptions do not match*, and this information is far too critical to be withheld from the public if LE was not able to identify the driver or the car. Simply put, LE has already confirmed that this tip is unrelated to this case, and that's why the public was never informed.

* "She thought the girl was around 9 or 10-years-old and the boy five-years-old"... "The boy had dirty blond hair and was wearing shorts, while the girl had darkish hair in pigtails and was wearing a tank top with blue strings."

This doesn't sound like Lily and Jack.

N.S. missing kids: Court documents provide details on Lilly and Jack Sullivan case | Globalnews.ca

Included in several documents are confirmation that investigators found a second piece of a pink blanket they say belonged to Lilly, in the trash.

globalnews.ca

The documents say that in early June, police met with the witness near the corner of Gairloch Road and Lansdowne Station Road, where she mentioned having seen the children walking north towards Westville, N.S., and that the vehicle appeared to be waiting for them.

Plus the sighting wasn’t within walking distance of the children’s home.

Article goes on to say :
“None of the tips so far have led to Jack and Lilly’s location or has any information that has been corroborated by the investigation,” a document notes.”

 

[TMich6811]

Does anyone else feel like it’s just a whole lot of bread crumbs released to show they are working the case but nothing to say much or anything

 

[MistyWaters]

Does anyone else mind if feel like it’s just a whole lot of bread crumbs released to show they are working the case but nothing to say much or anything

Yes indeed, I agree. However we don’t know if any of the subpoenas that were granted on the basis of these bread-crumb tips proved valuable in any way. If it didn’t, it’s a long road ahead.
“None of the tips so far have led to Jack and Lilly’s location or has any information that has been corroborated by the investigation,” a document notes.””

 

[FromGermany1]

My guess is, you're referring to Janie Mackenzie, DM's mother?
If so, her hair doesn't fit the "loose curl" cut description given.
It's short and straight, as we've all seen in her interviews.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/lilly-jack-sullivan-missing-janie-mackenzie-1.7293141

You are right: JM's hairstyle isn't, what I thought. I should have asked Google for it first.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Does anyone else feel like it’s just a whole lot of bread crumbs released to show they are working the case but nothing to say much or anything

In a way yes, and it almost feels like this is their response to the massive criticism of LE here (some warranted, but not all), especially when the case has any connection to an indigeneous person.

 

[Ontario Mom]

You are right: JM's hairstyle isn't, what I thought. I should have asked Google for it first.

I don't think whoever that woman saw, was Jack and Lilly anyway.

 

[teeby]

N.S. missing kids: Court documents provide details on Lilly and Jack Sullivan case | Globalnews.ca

Included in several documents are confirmation that investigators found a second piece of a pink blanket they say belonged to Lilly, in the trash.

globalnews.ca

The documents say that in early June, police met with the witness near the corner of Gairloch Road and Lansdowne Station Road, where she mentioned having seen the children walking north towards Westville, N.S., and that the vehicle appeared to be waiting for them.

Plus the sighting wasn’t within walking distance of the children’s home.

Article goes on to say :
“None of the tips so far have led to Jack and Lilly’s location or has any information that has been corroborated by the investigation,” a document notes.”

View attachment 610459

I interpreted this as meaning that she saw the children at that intersection, which is very close to Jack and Lilly's house, and that the reference to Westville only indicates the direction they were walking and not that they were actually close to Westville.

 

[MistyWaters]

I interpreted this as meaning that she saw the children at that intersection, which is very close to Jack and Lilly's house, and that the reference to Westville only indicates the direction they were walking and not that they were actually close to Westville.

I suppose it depends on the distance of ‘near’. But you do raise a good point. But still there’s another discrepancy that causes me to doubt it was Lilly and Jack whom she saw, aside from the difference description of ages and clothing. For the children to get to the intersection of Lansdowne Stn and Gairloch Rd (hwy 289) they’d have walked in a southerly direction down the hwy to get to the corner, but then turning around and walking north towards Westville on hwy 289 to be sighted getting into a car would route them past their home. That back and forth route does not seem logical for little feet, not to be seen by anyone else.

If this tip was believed to be a credible sighting, how could the RCMP possibly know it wasn’t an abduction, which they ruled out due to having no evidence of that several times already. I haven’t noticed what time in the morning was this sighting, had you?

I just don’t feel this tip is going to solve the case and I think the RCMP have already discounted it. As if typical, it appears all the important information was redacted from the document, which leaves us with not much of anything at all.

All my opinion,

 

[Slebby]

Does anyone else feel like it’s just a whole lot of bread crumbs released to show they are working the case but nothing to say much or anything

The documents weren’t released by the choice of LE but rather by the press (CTV, CBC, The Canadian Press and Global News, iirc) pursuing a court order for their release. So there would be no motive on the part of LE to offer “bread crumbs”. The info just is what it is.
IMO

 

[Slebby]

After rereading the Globe and Mail version of this information, here are a few extra tidbits not mentioned by other media sources:

In an interview, MBM said she heard the kids, they woke the baby, she took the baby into her bed and turned on the tv. This is the first I’ve heard of the tv being on. This changes the picture for me, as I had previously envisioned a house with the chatter of kids that then went silent. TV sound would obscure the chatter and the subsequent silence, imo.

She said the kids left the house between 8 am and 9:40 am. This is the largest window of opportunity for them to disappear that I’ve seen reported. It certainly opens up the possibility of the children wandering farther away than I had previously considered possible.

She reported that DM put a wrench on top of the door (front door) the night before and this is how they knew the kids went out the sliding door, the wrench hadn’t fallen. DM confirmed he did that most nights with the wrench because a bear used to hang around.

DM also said he thought he heard the children scream when he was searching the woods but when he stopped to listen couldn’t hear over the sound of helicopters.

IMHO

 

[MistyWaters]

The documents weren’t released by the choice of LE but rather by the press (CTV, CBC, The Canadian Press and Global News, iirc) pursuing a court order for their release. So there would be no motive on the part of LE to offer “bread crumbs”. The info just is what it is.
IMO

I think bread crumbs is a fair summary because the media can’t provide a full account of information contained in the documents because of redactions, information which the RCMP does not want released to the public.

This is very typical when the media obtains ITOs through the court. Investigators do not want every detail of their investigation released even though it’s used to convince a judge of the rational for approval of a subpoena. But they’re not so concerned about the unimportant stuff.

JMO

 

[TMich6811]

I think bread crumbs is a fair summary because the media can’t provide a full account of information contained in the documents because of redactions, information which the RCMP does not want released to the public.

This is very typical when the media obtains ITOs through the court. Investigators do not want every detail of their investigation released even though it’s used to convince a judge of the rational for approval of a subpoena. But they’re not so concerned about the unimportant stuff.

JMO

This is what I meant thank you

 

[su5ie]

“Malehya later reported to police that she thought Cody Sullivan, Lilly and Jack’s biological father, might have picked up them and taken them to New Brunswick.”

I thought this was interesting. When I first started reading I wondered if there was a custody dispute. I know she said bio dad wasn't involved, but sometimes that's not because they don't want to be. But then his mom said that he gave up his rights to the kids, so I assumed that wasn't the issue.

I wonder why she suggested it if he gave up his rights to the kids?

I wondered about this line in the article that you've bolded .

Why would Maleyha think cody took them , maybe it was her first thought idk . But seems a bit strange to think a father who gave up the fight for the children and the courts had awarded full custody to Maleyha.

Unless, even though Maleyha and Cody broke up more than 2 years ago that the finalising of the courts decision to award custody was only recent ?

The grandmother BG who has been very vocal , has she mentioned when full custody was awarded ?