CANADA Canada - Jack, 4 & Lilly Sullivan, 6, Vulnerable, wandered from home 10am, Gairloch Rd, Landsdowne Station, Pictou County, NS, 2 May 2025 #7

[MistyWaters]

Would LE consider the 1st of May as date last seen as in missing because as far as has been reported no independant sighting of the children can be verified beyond reasonable doubt other than carpark cctv on that date

According to what’s reported, the last seen date by the RCMP is definitely May 2nd. May 1st is the last date seen by others.

Missing children: Help the RCMP find Lilly Sullivan and Jack Sullivan | Royal Canadian Mounted Police

“Pictou County District RCMP is asking for the public's assistance in locating six-year-old Lilly Sullivan and four-year-old Jack Sullivan. They were last seen this morning, May 2, on Gairloch Rd. in Lansdown Station, Pictou County.”

 

[tlcya]

a link to a statement given by RCMP on their page dated May 2nd doesn't tell us what they now believe or term as the date last seen tho does it?

 

[MistyWaters]

a link to a statement given by RCMP on their page dated May 2nd doesn't tell us what they now believe or term as the date last seen tho does it?

My question is why can’t we believe what they’ve stated they believe? Police would not lie in a document requesting a Judge to approve a subpoena or search warrant. We may not like it and we might even disagree, but we can’t just ignore what they’ve said.

As for what they believe, recently released by MSM this:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/extensive-rcmp-scrutiny-of-missing-children-s-mother-stepfather-suggests-no-criminal-involvement-1.7615551

RCMP scrutiny of missing N.S. children’s mother, stepfather suggests no criminal involvement
“The redacted records, which were released at the request of CBC News, the Globe and Mail and the Canadian Press, include 12 record-access orders filed by RCMP and reveal that as of July 16 investigators did not believe the case was criminal in nature.”….

…….”Logs such as call logs, chat logs, email logs will show investigators who Malehya and Daniel were in contact with prior to Jack and Lilly going missing and verify the information they have provided to police."

 

[OneLove]

My question is why can’t we believe what they’ve stated they believe? Police would not lie in a document requesting a Judge to approve a subpoena or search warrant. We may not like it and we might even disagree, but we can’t just ignore what they’ve said.

As for what they believe, recently released by MSM this:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/extensive-rcmp-scrutiny-of-missing-children-s-mother-stepfather-suggests-no-criminal-involvement-1.7615551

RCMP scrutiny of missing N.S. children’s mother, stepfather suggests no criminal involvement
“The redacted records, which were released at the request of CBC News, the Globe and Mail and the Canadian Press, include 12 record-access orders filed by RCMP and reveal that as of July 16 investigators did not believe the case was criminal in nature.”….

…….”Logs such as call logs, chat logs, email logs will show investigators who Malehya and Daniel were in contact with prior to Jack and Lilly going missing and verify the information they have provided to

Investigative methods do allow law enforcement officers to lie in order to collect information gained by secretive intelligence surveillance. This can happen over a long period of time as "suspects" relax their guards due to the appearance of *not* being suspects. Such intelligence operations often are able to get information leading to solving cases, even long after crimes are committed. Things are *often* not as they seem on the surface. ((And I really have reservations about stating this publicly for very obvious reasons)

 

[Lalalacasbah]

For it to be this quiet I strongly suspect LE has advised all involved to not talk to media or social media.

If this was a stranger abduction or children still lost close by in the wilderness I feel - there would be more requests to the public to keep eyes open, phone in tips, etc. MOO

I am hoping LE are digging into digital forensics, paper trails, CCTV and surveilling - and asked family/associates to not talk to jeopardize an investigation or potential trial.

This is BIG wishful thinking on my part and MOO but I am trying to think of other missing persons cases that went quiet or were similar... Shannon Burgess in Alberta?

There was a media plea from family at beginning, home searched then went spookily quiet IIRC. I believe an arrest was made many months after the fact and a bit of a surprise as it was quiet for awhile.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

I need to apologize for misstating Lilly and Jack's ages in my posts for awhile now, they are 6 and 4 years old, not 5 and 2!!

Their actual ages, I misremembered, do make the witness's statement to LE that she saw an older girl holding the hand of a younger boy walking on the side of the road whose hair & skin color matched theirs IIRC, who estimated they may have been 8 and 10 years old makes more sense to me now, especially if they may be taller than average for their ages.

 

[MistyWaters]

Investigative methods do allow law enforcement officers to lie in order to collect information gained by secretive intelligence surveillance. This can happen over a long period of time as "suspects" relax their guards due to the appearance of *not* being suspects. Such intelligence operations often are able to get information leading to solving cases, even long after crimes are committed. Things are *often* not as they seem on the surface. ((And I really have reservations about stating this publicly for very obvious reasons)

In Canada, yes the RCMP are allowed to lie involving interactions with suspects but that is definitely not a broad permission to lie. In Canada ‘Mr Big’ operations are well known, when police pose as undercover attempting to get a confession. But can you imagine the implications to the court, if police could lie during a trial? Or make up false information to present to a Judge in order to request a Subpoena to search or obtain documents, I don’t think that would be okay even in a third world country. I’d surely hope not as that’s the definition of corruption which can easily result in wrongful convictions.

 

[TMich6811]

I don’t understand why we are assuming they are lying or not lying (the police)?

They can “believe” there is no criminal intent on paper but BELIEVE there is in investigation

I think there’s been an awful lot of assumptions made off of documents we will not see, at least any time soon, and which likely have redactions and if fully released could impact their investigation

 

[Slebby]

Lalalacasbah, you made me curious to go read up on that Burgess case. Sad.

I think what this reminds us, the view held by LE seems to be, we don’t owe you an insider view on our investigation. I happen to agree with this view. A just resolution is more important than my craving for news. In the Burgess case, there was a just resolution. In this case, who knows?

What we are left with, imo, is this: we can only conclude that the disappearance of J and L is not criminal, until, and only if, LE reports otherwise.

If not criminal, we are left with accident, misadventure, 2 kids lost and perished somewhere near their home. That’s all we can conclude, until further notice. No one hid them away, no one abducted them, no one murdered them. It’s maddening, because the fate of these children may never be fully known, and they might never be found.

IMHO

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Lalalacasbah, you made me curious to go read up on that Burgess case. Sad.

I think what this reminds us, the view held by LE seems to be, we don’t owe you an insider view on our investigation. I happen to agree with this view. A just resolution is more important than my craving for news. In the Burgess case, there was a just resolution. In this case, who knows?

What we are left with, imo, is this: we can only conclude that the disappearance of J and L is not criminal, until, and only if, LE reports otherwise.

If not criminal, we are left with accident, misadventure, 2 kids lost and perished somewhere near their home. That’s all we can conclude, until further notice. No one hid them away, no one abducted them, no one murdered them. It’s maddening, because the fate of these children may never be fully known, and they might never be found.

IMHO

I had to refresh as well, it was 7 months after Shannon Burgess was reported missing that an arrest was made. And it seemed to only transition from missing person to homicide a week before the arrest because of new info... this is interesting as I wondered if no new info would the husband had gotten away with it?!

Back to this case, if it took 7 months for an arrest for SB that shows there may be hope here for these two kids. I think there are other cases where Canadian police take awhile for an arrest, so I will keep hoping here if they are not in wilderness of course. MOO

 

[IloveAaronEckhart4Ever]

Maybe Lily and Jack went to live with their grandmother

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Maybe Lily and Jack went to live with their grandmother

May be, but it being kept secret from all for 4 months while LE is actively investigating would be unusual or un-something or otherwise.

I wonder how many grandmothers they have, and if LE has spoken to all of them & if so, if they're hiding them well, and they are well, then well....yay????....at least they could be safe.

JMO

 

[Simply Caustic]

My question is why can’t we believe what they’ve stated they believe? Police would not lie in a document requesting a Judge to approve a subpoena or search warrant. We may not like it and we might even disagree, but we can’t just ignore what they’ve said.

As for what they believe, recently released by MSM this:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/extensive-rcmp-scrutiny-of-missing-children-s-mother-stepfather-suggests-no-criminal-involvement-1.7615551

RCMP scrutiny of missing N.S. children’s mother, stepfather suggests no criminal involvement
“The redacted records, which were released at the request of CBC News, the Globe and Mail and the Canadian Press, include 12 record-access orders filed by RCMP and reveal that as of July 16 investigators did not believe the case was criminal in nature.”….

…….”Logs such as call logs, chat logs, email logs will show investigators who Malehya and Daniel were in contact with prior to Jack and Lilly going missing and verify the information they have provided to police."

IMO, and JMO, but July 16th - referenced above - was still early days, relative to the expanding investigation. I say that because of the following occurrences in June and July, from the article you shared:

“RCMP also accessed Brooks-Murray's TextPlus account, a phone app she used for Wi-Fi calling. By the time police sought the records in early July, the court records said Brooks-Murray had "deleted the app because she doesn't need it anymore." Regardless, RCMP were able to access her account.”
“The documents also show Janie MacKenzie, Martell's mother, did a polygraph test on June 10. Her "physiology" was "not suitable for analysis" and no opinion was rendered.”
“On June 12, Cody Sullivan, the children's biological father, also did a polygraph and was determined to be truthful.”
“Cyndy Brooks-Murray, the children's maternal grandmother, and her boyfriend, Wade Paris, both passed polygraph tests on July 2.”
An investigator's comment states in a July 16 document that "because Lilly's boot print was confirmed to be a size 11, it is consistent with the boot print located on the pipeline trail in the search area."

I have no idea what the current prevailing theory is by LE, but I do think that the above quotes suggest they delved deeper into everything as time went on. JMO

 

[su5ie]

IMO, and JMO, but July 16th - referenced above - was still early days, relative to the expanding investigation. I say that because of the following occurrences in June and July, from the article you shared:

“RCMP also accessed Brooks-Murray's TextPlus account, a phone app she used for Wi-Fi calling. By the time police sought the records in early July, the court records said Brooks-Murray had "deleted the app because she doesn't need it anymore." Regardless, RCMP were able to access her account.”
“The documents also show Janie MacKenzie, Martell's mother, did a polygraph test on June 10. Her "physiology" was "not suitable for analysis" and no opinion was rendered.”
“On June 12, Cody Sullivan, the children's biological father, also did a polygraph and was determined to be truthful.”
“Cyndy Brooks-Murray, the children's maternal grandmother, and her boyfriend, Wade Paris, both passed polygraph tests on July 2.”
An investigator's comment states in a July 16 document that "because Lilly's boot print was confirmed to be a size 11, it is consistent with the boot print located on the pipeline trail in the search area."

I have no idea what the current prevailing theory is by LE, but I do think that the above quotes suggest they delved deeper into everything as time went on. JMO

I do think the wording is carefully chosen , it does say there is no criminality involved, it states as of the 16th of July. 'As of" means still working on it or up until now . If they only retrieved and accessed MBM'S account would from early July to 16th be enough to fully investigate every detail in her phone ?

If no criminality, no abduction, no murder or any other scenario besides a wandering, I fully believe the kids are in and around the property and they were missed . And most likely extremely close . With not one but two missing and not even a small item belonging to either found ,suggests to me they hid . If they didn't it is probably more likely that even one child would have been found a distance from the other .

I've said this before it takes me 15 minutes to walk at a good pace 1.5 km walking even ground and on footpaths / sidewalks how far could kids travel in difficult terrain realistically , between around 8.48am ( janie hearing them ) and around 9.15/20 am ( Daniel searching and calling the kids ) . Would they cover more distance than a 5 foot 6 " adult in roughly the same timeframe

 

[Serononin]

I thought I'd spend a bit of time weighing up some of the information that supports or doesn't support (what I think are) the two most likely scenarios, mostly just to help me get my own head around it:

Scenario 1: Wandered into the woods


For:

- They had the opportunity to wander off, given the lack of supervision and the apparently unlocked sliding door.

- Although she didn't actually see them, JM says she heard the children outside that morning, and the timelines she, DM and MBM reported publicly are pretty consistent.

- The partial blanket found in the search is confirmed to be Lilly's, and the boot print on the pipeline trail is consistent with her shoe size.

- The density of the woods, the number of fallen trees, etc. mean both that the children could easily have become lost, and that they feasibly could have been missed by searchers.

- Lilly's backpack being missing could suggest she left of her own accord, and their missing boots look like the type of shoes that both children could have put on by themselves fairly easily.


Against:

- Given the tight timeline, the rough terrain, and the kids possibly not being dressed appropriately for the weather, it seems unlikely that the children could or would have gone very far, which at least in theory makes it more likely that they would have been found.

- For all we know, the blanket and boot print could have been there since before the children disappeared, and no other trace of them (like items of clothing, the backpack, or anything that might have been in it) has been found.

- MBM leaving the area on day 2 is very odd, as is her family's apparently immediate suspicion of DM.

- Tracking dogs couldn't follow their scent beyond the driveway (although I'd note that that also happened in Asha Degree's case, even though multiple witnesses saw her walking along the highway).


Scenario 2: Homicide by one or both parents


For:

- The prior CPS involvement and reported background information (although this is pretty limited) suggest that all was not well in the home for some time. The children's apparent autism and/or behavioural issues are also statistically a risk factor. Purely statistically speaking, Lilly and Jack fit the profile of at-risk children in quite a few ways.

- There are no (publicly) confirmed sightings of the children by anyone other than their parents after about 2:30pm the day before they were reported missing.

- Again, MBM abruptly leaving the area and cutting off all contact with DM at a time where there should have been every reason to hope that the children would be found alive does give the impression that she knows something that the public doesn't.


Against:

- RCMP saying that they don't have evidence at this of a crime having been committed is obviously a big one.

- Both parents passed polygraphs.

- It would be surprising for both parents to have stuck to their stories and RCMP not have found any inconsistencies after this long (thinking about other recent cases like Jayden Spicer and Melina Frattolin, their parents' stories started unravelling very quickly).


Overall, I don't know what to think. There isn't really any conclusive evidence in favour of either scenario (or if there is, it hasn't been made public). I just hope that the RCMP knows a lot more than we do, and that there'll eventually be a resolution in this case.

 

[su5ie]

I took another read of the G&M article and I don't remember seeing this line ( amazing what I don't see first time round ) DM stated he thought he heard lilly and jack scream but when he stopped to listen a helicopter drown out every other sound

I wonder at what time this was and asking for opinions, when I hear a scream or people talking loudly I can generally hear what direction it's coming from . Even if the sound was drowned out within a few minutes would DM not have been able to judge direction in that split second ? And for reference I'm deaf medically in my left ear and I can still hear direction. Can others tell if this is true for them ?

https://archive.is/APDov

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Going back to some of the details and subtleties, to refresh my memory, in this MSM article on August 22, updated the next day:

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

• It says (Bolded and/or Underlined by me):

"According to one document, sworn by Cpl. Charlene Jordan Curl of the RCMPs Northeast Nova Scotia major crime unit, the children were first reported missing on 10:01 a.m. on May 2 from their home in rural Lansdowne Station, N.S., by their mother Malehya Brooks-Murray..

Brooks-Murray told police she believed the two children had wandered away from home, but the exact time she said she thought they went missing was redacted. Police were on the scene at 10:27 a.m.
....
RCMP conducted at least four polygraphs during their investigation — the first two were on May 12 with the children’s parents.... Martell’s polygraph “indicated he was truthful,” as did the test for Brooks-Murray that found she was truthful when answering specific questions, although the list of questions is redacted in the document.
....
An unidentified investigator’s comment included at the end of a section on the results of both of those polygraphs says, “At this point in the investigation Jack and Lilly’s disappearance is not believed to be criminal in nature.”

• That it was an unidentified investigator's comment included at the end of the section on the documented results of their polygraphs only, seems to be just an opinion in a comment on polygraph results which are not evidentiary, and not LE saying they believe this to be true, unless they took it and ran with it repeating it in MSM. IMO, it just seems kind of weak, the comment by an unknown polygrapher, being made into a statement by LE over which there has been so much discussion, if this ^^^^ is the only origin for that statement.

"Martell told The Canadian Press on May 28 that he had passed a polygraph test, but the RCMP declined at the time to confirm or deny his claim"

• Therefore, DM claimed something in MSM that RCMP declined at the time to confirm or deny.

....
Meanwhile, on June 10, the children’s stepgrandmother, Janie MacKenzie, underwent a polygraph examination but another document notes that her “physiology was not suitable for analysis and an opinion on the polygraph examination was not rendered.”
....
Results from polygraphs.... are not admissible in Canadian courts, but the machines are considered an investigative tool."

• Since I've wondered what "physiology was not suitable for analysis" meant, I looked it up and it says here:

Exclusion Criteria for Conducting Polygraph Tests – European Polygraph Association

Introduction Evaluating the credibility of testimony is a highly complex task that continually challenges the boundaries of psychology and forensic technology. Despite significant scientific advances in the field of forensic psychophysiology, polygraph tests, one of the best-known tools for...

europolygraph.org

"Exclusion Criteria
Age: Individuals under the age of 12 will not be considered suitable for the polygraph test due to the cognitive and emotional immaturity that may affect the reliability of their responses during the examination.
Physical Health Conditions: Individuals suffering from medical conditions that may interfere with their ability to respond consistently during the test or that may jeopardize their health during the process. This includes, but is not limited to:
Acute Respiratory Conditions...Significant acute or chronic respiratory diseases can profoundly affect a subject’s ability to undergo a polygraph test.
Severe Cardiovascular Diseases...Severe cardiovascular conditions such as the use of pacemakers, history of heart attacks, and severe hypertension can compromise an individual’s ability to safely and effectively undergo a polygraph test.
Neurological Issues Affecting Comprehension and Communication...Neurological disorders that compromise cognitive, comprehension, or communication abilities can render an individual unfit for polygraph tests, as these conditions can significantly affect the ability to interpret and respond to questions coherently and accurately. Specific disorders include: Schizophrenia... Delusional Disorder (Paranoid Type)...Schizophreniform Disorder:...Schizoaffective Disorder: ...Impact of Neurological Problems on the Polygraph Test
Influence of Psychoactive Substances on Polygraph Test Results...The consumption of psychoactive substances significantly affects the reliability of polygraph tests. Substances such as alcohol and illicit drugs alter the body’s physiological responses, which are precisely what the polygraph measures to assess the veracity of an individual’s responses. Individuals under the effects of alcohol or drugs are not considered suitable for testing..... Alcohol: Stimulant Drugs (such as cocaine and amphetamines): ...Crack (a form of smoked cocaine)...MDMA (Ecstasy)... Cannabis: ...Opiates (such as heroin and morphine)
Identification of Substances in the Body Through Urine Testing...To ensure the integrity and accuracy of a polygraph test, it is crucial to determine if a subject has consumed substances that could alter their physiological responses. An effective way to do this is through the use of urine tests, which can detect the presence of drugs and alcohol in the body.
Informed Consent for Conducting Polygraph Tests...Individuals who do not provide written consent cannot undergo a polygraph test. Informed consent is a fundamental pillar in the administration of polygraph tests, ensuring that all participants are fully informed about the nature, procedures, potential risks, and consequences of the test before it is conducted."

• Because LE said she "underwent" a polygraph examination, that presumes the last factor doesn't apply as she apparently consented.
• So one or more of the other "exclusion criteria" should apply ^^^^, which leads me to believe DM's mother Janie who lived nearby enough to Lilly and Jack's home to say that she "heard them playing that morning" or whatever else LE asked her, could not be verified during a polygraph test, for whatever reason(s), an investigative tool LE wanted to use on her, which could have given them "some backup" for lack of a better term, for them to vet her statement(s).
• ETA: So here we have 3 of the adults on the property the morning they disappeared who made statements about what they heard, and none of which when you look at the details (e.g., DM's responses appeared to be truthful but LE would not confirm he had "passed", MBM appeared to be truthful except possibly when asked specific questions which LE redacted, and stepgrandmother Janie, who consented and presumably answered their questions, but had some other issue(s) that prevented LE from drawing any "investigative tool" conclusions from her testimony.
• So each of the polygraph results for the 3 of them there that morning seem to have subtleties or caveats, and none "passed with flying colors" for lack of a better term, IMO reading this, and LE only can take this into consideration during their investigation, which could be why it's taking so long, they're just not sure if what any of them said was 100% true or not based on polygraph results and presumably other evidence they're still running down, IMO.

MOO

 

[lastkiss]

I took another read of the G&M article and I don't remember seeing this line ( amazing what I don't see first time round ) DM stated he thought he heard lilly and jack scream but when he stopped to listen a helicopter drown out every other sound

I wonder at what time this was and asking for opinions, when I hear a scream or people talking loudly I can generally hear what direction it's coming from . Even if the sound was drowned out within a few minutes would DM not have been able to judge direction in that split second ? And for reference I'm deaf medically in my left ear and I can still hear direction. Can others tell if this is true for them ?

https://archive.is/APDov

View attachment 613972

Not true for me. I can never tell which direction a noise is coming from. It’s discombobulating

I’ve thought for a while now that the wee ones are sadly in the woods, having been overlooked by the search parties. However a thought has struck me. DM’s mum has a dog. I’m guessing the dog will go into the woods at least sometimes for exercise, whether on or off lead (I remember she has a fence to keep it in so it may be on lead).

Regardless, and this isn’t a nice thought so apologies. Decomposition is a very strong smell. Surely if the dog goes in there at all it would smell it and display behaviour that would alert whoever was walking it. Or if it was off-lead it would head to the smell and maybe return with something that they recognise am I on the wrong track here? It was just a thought. Moo.

 

[seasideForest]

@lastkiss
It's a good thought.
I remember reading on these threads that for a good while in the summer no one was allowed in the woods in Nova Scotia due to risk of forest fire. That was believed to have an impact on further searches for Jack and Lilly, as in not allowed. So maybe no dog walks either? MOO

 

[lastkiss]

@lastkiss
It's a good thought.
I remember reading on these threads that for a good while in the summer no one was allowed in the woods in Nova Scotia due to risk of forest fire. That was believed to have an impact on further searches for Jack and Lilly, as in not allowed. So maybe no dog walks either? MOO

Ah very good point @seasideForest, I had forgotten about that. Thanks for the reminder.