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

[Twistinginthewind]

I can think of several cases in which parents whose child disappeared in the forest, even decades ago, still sometimes go back to that forest, and I do agree that not continuing to search, at least sometimes for awhile, is not typical. Most families search at least for awhile, if they think the missing children might still be in the forest. The desire for an "answer" and just to find them usually overpowers other fears. But -- maybe not always.



In the Summer Wells case, he is her biological father. I agree, the cases have numerous similarities.

I agree most parents would be likely to continue to want to search for their children where they went missing. And thanks for reminding me Summer's father she was living with at the time she disappeared was her biological father.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

What do you think that means? Martell's indicated he was truthful, but Brooks-Murray's indicated she was truthful when answering specific questions? Does that mean she was only truthful part of the time? And Daniel was all of the time?

I think it means their mother was asked some questions that triggered a different physiological response than others, along the lines of (paraphrasing):

Hypothetical Question [Q}: Do you know what happened to them/were you involved in their disappearance?

Hypothetical Response [R]: No, I'm so torn up about it, and didn't do anything!

Hypothetical Q: Do you have any potential suspicions or relevant knowledge about who may have been involved in their disappearance?

Hypothetical R: No...., ummm, no...., I can't say because I don't know...

I did a deep dive into this (reasons why during polygraphs tests, people could respond differently to different types of questions asked) on a website which offered an "official" narrative about it, and it was pretty much this, so I decided not to post a link and get into it because it's "just an investigative tool" afterall.

Paraphrasing again, it suggested:

Straightforward questions related to specifics were often easily answered by the subject with no or an appropriate physio response recorded.

More general or overarching questions were less easily answered with a different or less appropriate physio response recorded. Perhaps due to the fact that the subject may have been still uncertain, still processing, still in a traumatic stress response, still trying to figure out what may have happened (and still wondering if they could have done something to prevent it happening, e.g., feelings of guilt or shame or culpability because they were not aware or able to prevent it at the time).

It's a bit of a rabbit hole to go down, I trust LE knows what they're doing, and am not questioning anyone's results or interpretation thereof, but pointing out some questions they asked Lilly and Jack's mom may have been triggering in different ways, as to why some of her physio responses to certain questions were redacted.

JMO

 

[Twistinginthewind]

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

Thank you for the detailed timeline on this aspect of the case!

Just thinking so much of the polygraph/interview results RCMP has had to share because of the FOIA requests from MSM are understandably "after the fact" in terms of timing.

Lilly and Jack did disappear on May 1 or 2, and all their family members who were polygraphed by LE, when they were able to get to it, were answering questions in that setting, uh, 1 plus to 2 weeks to 2 months later.

So who knows if they had had enough time to collect themselves and put a brave face on...

JMO

 

[LadyL]

Yes, I read that one. @LadyL said we heard about that scream in the woods previous to that article, but I can’t find anything.

oh wait, you said 'hearing of this now' so I didn't know that you were referring to an article from August 22nd
(I didn't click on the link you quoted
sorry for misunderstanding)
it does feel like it was longer ago than that though

 

[LadyL]

I forgot about DM saying he heard screaming, but now I'm vaguely recalling it. So much of what he said early on was in longish videos, and I didn't listen to all of them, and alot IIRC wasn't transcribed, so it didn't register very deep for me since I'm very text oriented.

I also may have been away from the thread when it was discussed.

I wonder if the location where the witness said they saw the 2 children walking along the road would be close enough for him to have heard screaming, IF it was them and the woman tried to get them to get into the car and they resisted.

JMO

[bbm]

oh that's a terrible thought

 

[TMich6811]

Or possibly it was just those random kids screaming.

Or possibly the screaming was to fit a narrative

Imo and jazz

 

[MistyWaters]

[bbm]

oh that's a terrible thought

If this were so, surely the person who tipped the RCMP would’ve noticed un-cooperative, screaming children being picked up and an Amber Alert/abduction would not have been ruled out so quickly.

Maybe he heard a searcher screaming/calling for the children. After two years he should’ve easily been able to identify a scream if it was the sound of his step-daughter squealing.

JMO

 

[seasideForest]

Maybe he heard a searcher screaming/calling for the children. After two years he should’ve easily been able to identify a scream if it was the sound of his step-daughter squealing.

He certainly ought to have been able to differentiate an adult screaming from a 6 yo screaming! There's a noticeable difference in voice pitch.

 

[MistyWaters]

He certainly ought to have been able to differentiate an adult screaming from a 6 yo screaming! There's a noticeable difference in voice pitch.

I agree. That’s an issue with such a non-descriptive statement. LE certainly had the opportunity to question him in far greater detail and weigh the merit of it. However we can only speculate, as we do.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

If this were so, surely the person who tipped the RCMP would’ve noticed un-cooperative, screaming children being picked up and an Amber Alert/abduction would not have been ruled out so quickly.

Maybe he heard a searcher screaming/calling for the children. After two years he should’ve easily been able to identify a scream if it was the sound of his step-daughter squealing.

JMO

Good point.

Since the timing -- minutes or even seconds between the person seeing them "walking along the road" and then "seeing the woman outside of the car they were approaching" -- is unknown, there still could have been a struggle upon them getting close enough to the car for Lilly (if it was them) to feel or see something was not right or safe if this person was offering them a ride.

Detecting stranger danger and subsequent fight, flee, or fawn responses wouldn't always be an instantaneous reaction, IMO.

So if it was Lilly & Jack, walking down the road to go to school or into town, and someone saw them and pulled over to offer them a ride, and if at first it seemed okay or even expected, there still could have been a scary moment when the woman was ushering them into the back seat of the car that made her scream.

Which the witness was no longer witnessing at the point of them coming closer to the car and having second thoughts about getting in.

Especially if there was something about the woman up close or what/whom was in the car and the "vibe" that set off alarm bells.

JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

Good point.

Since the timing -- minutes or even seconds between the person seeing them "walking along the road" and then "seeing the woman outside of the car they were approaching" -- is unknown, there still could have been a struggle upon them getting close enough to the car for Lilly (if it was them) to feel or see something was not right or safe if this person was offering them a ride.

Detecting stranger danger and subsequent fight, flee, or fawn responses wouldn't always be an instantaneous reaction, IMO.

So if it was Lilly & Jack, walking down the road to go to school or into town, and someone saw them and pulled over to offer them a ride, and if at first it seemed okay or even expected, there still could have been a scary moment when the woman was ushering them into the back seat of the car that made her scream.

Which the witness was no longer witnessing at the point of them coming closer to the car and having second thoughts about getting in.

Especially if there was something about the woman up close or what/whom was in the car and the "vibe" that set off alarm bells.

JMO

Okay but the women in the car incident did not become publicly known by a bulletin issued from the RCMP requesting further information because this tip was considered not only legitimate but highly crucial to the children’s disappearance. Had the media not obtained and published a summary of information that supported the 12 subpoena requests to the court, we wouldn’t know a thing about it. Isn’t that extremely odd nobody’s looking for this woman if this was believed to be a legitimate sighting of Jack and Lilly being abducted? What if after this tip was recieved, the RCMP asked around and sure enough, it didn’t take long for the woman in the gold car with her 10 and 5 year old biological children to be identified. That would be end of and the RCMP would have no reason to inform the public of something we weren’t asked to help with. This is why I think it’s not central to this case, therefore I can’t imagine how it involves the children at all.
JMO

 

[teeby]

Okay but the women in the car incident did not become publicly known by a bulletin issued from the RCMP requesting further information because this tip was considered not only legitimate but highly crucial to the children’s disappearance. Had the media not obtained and published a summary of information that supported the 12 subpoena requests to the court, we wouldn’t know a thing about it. Isn’t that extremely odd nobody’s looking for this woman if this was believed to be a legitimate sighting of Jack and Lilly being abducted? What if after this tip was recieved, the RCMP asked around and sure enough, it didn’t take long for the woman in the gold car with her 10 and 5 year old biological children to be identified. That would be end of and the RCMP would have no reason to inform the public of something we weren’t asked to help with. This is why I think it’s not central to this case, therefore I can’t imagine how it involves the children at all.
JMO

This is how I feel too -- they probably didn't redact it because it turned out to be a dead end.

 

[FromGermany1]

Good point.

Since the timing -- minutes or even seconds between the person seeing them "walking along the road" and then "seeing the woman outside of the car they were approaching" -- is unknown, there still could have been a struggle upon them getting close enough to the car for Lilly (if it was them) to feel or see something was not right or safe if this person was offering them a ride.

Detecting stranger danger and subsequent fight, flee, or fawn responses wouldn't always be an instantaneous reaction, IMO.

So if it was Lilly & Jack, walking down the road to go to school or into town, and someone saw them and pulled over to offer them a ride, and if at first it seemed okay or even expected, there still could have been a scary moment when the woman was ushering them into the back seat of the car that made her scream.

Which the witness was no longer witnessing at the point of them coming closer to the car and having second thoughts about getting in.

Especially if there was something about the woman up close or what/whom was in the car and the "vibe" that set off alarm bells.

JMO

When I'm hearing, the children slept in the same clothes, they were wearing the day before, and when I'm hearing, teachers sometimes had to take care of the children because of the inapprobiate Winter clothing, THEN I believe, these children were indeed Jack and Lilly, seen by the woman along the road. Wouldn't it be an odd coincidence, if two different little children were seen that morning along this road? Wearing far too little and too thin clothing?? Are there more parents in that area, who wouldn't take care of their girls or boys? And wouldn't accompanie them, if they are 6 and 4 years old?

Why DM is missing 2 sweatshirts, I am still thinking about. Why his shirts? Why not the mother's shirts? Are her sweatshirts in a bigger size? The children could have carried the shirts within their backpacks - but why should they have done it? Idk at the moment.

What might the day before at the mall have to do with the children and the sweatshirts (if at all)?

 

[OneLove]

When I'm hearing, the children slept in the same clothes, they were wearing the day before, and when I'm hearing, teachers sometimes had to take care of the children because of the inapprobiate Winter clothing, THEN I believe, these children were indeed Jack and Lilly, seen by the woman along the road. Wouldn't it be an odd coincidence, if two different little children were seen that morning along this road? Wearing far too little and too thin clothing?? Are there more parents in that area, who wouldn't take care of their girls or boys? And wouldn't accompanie them, if they are 6 and 4 years old?

Why DM is missing 2 sweatshirts, I am still thinking about. Why his shirts? Why not the mother's shirts? Are her sweatshirts in a bigger size? The children could have carried the shirts within their backpacks - but why should they have done it? Idk at the moment.

What might the day before at the mall have to do with the children and the sweatshirts (if at all)?

Just one possibility but the sweatshirts (or sweaters, I've seen both referenced) may have become contaminated by dna evidence and needed to disappear along with the kids. Hope that's not the case but we've seen lots of that kind of reality here at WS.

 

[seasideForest]

When I'm hearing, the children slept in the same clothes, they were wearing the day before, and when I'm hearing, teachers sometimes had to take care of the children because of the inapprobiate Winter clothing, THEN I believe, these children were indeed Jack and Lilly, seen by the woman along the road. Wouldn't it be an odd coincidence, if two different little children were seen that morning along this road? Wearing far too little and too thin clothing?? Are there more parents in that area, who wouldn't take care of their girls or boys? And wouldn't accompanie them, if they are 6 and 4 years old?

Why DM is missing 2 sweatshirts, I am still thinking about. Why his shirts? Why not the mother's shirts? Are her sweatshirts in a bigger size? The children could have carried the shirts within their backpacks - but why should they have done it? Idk at the moment.

What might the day before at the mall have to do with the children and the sweatshirts (if at all)?

Good point about how many children lived round there who would be underdressed for the weather!

I don't think it's likely that the children would have stuffed adult sweatshirts into their backpacks! Their backpacks are quite small at that age, unlike in Germany, so not that easy to get adult clothing in and then do up the zip without some clothing hanging out... JMO
There must be some other reason for the clothing to be missing.

 

[Serononin]

Just one possibility but the sweatshirts (or sweaters, I've seen both referenced) may have become contaminated by dna evidence and needed to disappear along with the kids. Hope that's not the case but we've seen lots of that kind of reality here at WS.

It's definitely possible, although it seems odd to me that DM would draw attention to the sweaters being missing if that were the case. Not that much of anything about this case makes sense, of course

 

[OneLove]

It's definitely possible, although it seems odd to me that DM would draw attention to the sweaters being missing if that were the case. Not that much of anything about this case makes sense, of course

Maybe he mentioned it "just in case" the sweatshirts were found with or near the kids, or with any of their secretions/dna on them. ~~When my kids were littles and we got caught out later (and colder) than expected, we sometimes pulled our own sweaters/sweatshirts over their clothes for warmth, even if we were freezing. Maybe DM's sweatshirts went over the kids clothes for warmth since they were out late.

 

[su5ie]

Thank you for the detailed timeline on this aspect of the case!

Just thinking so much of the polygraph/interview results RCMP has had to share because of the FOIA requests from MSM are understandably "after the fact" in terms of timing.

Lilly and Jack did disappear on May 1 or 2, and all their family members who were polygraphed by LE, when they were able to get to it, were answering questions in that setting, uh, 1 plus to 2 weeks to 2 months later.

So who knows if they had had enough time to collect themselves and put a brave face on...

JMO

I know RCMP's were still able to gain access to MBM's textplus app used for WiFi calling but my hinky meter goes up when I hear of people deleting stuff soon after kids go missing and mbm seemed to want to erase a lot of stuff very early on for a grieving mom . Maybe not important and although access was still gotten I wonder if anything was deleted permanently

 

[su5ie]

Can anyone do a map showing DMs property, pipeline trail and woman seen with gold car . I'm no good with maps and would love a visual

 

[Lexiintoronto]

Can anyone do a map showing DMs property, pipeline trail and woman seen with gold car . I'm no good with maps and would love a visual

The Globe simply said it was close to their home—did anyone find an exact location?

Google map image.

Pipeline trail highlighted in purple, train tracks in yellow.

The custom when driving here is to quickly slow down and make a wide pass when you see pedestrians or stopped cars on rural roads.

@FromGermany1 made a good point about the children the witness spotted being underdressed. She noted that someone from their school had made the same complaint about Lilly and Jack— Although my guess is that it’s not Lilly and Jack or else we would have heard more about it.

I’m wondering if seeing the train going by possibly drew Lilly and Jack. It passes by once a day, sounding its horn. They found some rags along with Lilly’s blanket. Maybe the idea was to wave at it?