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

[Lalalacasbah]

The clumps of child sized boot prints on the pipeline through the woods seems very promising. Could that mean they really did just get lost while out playing?


That first sighting doesn't sound as promising---I don't think Lily looks 9 or 10. I think both look kind of young and small for their ages actually. So IDK?

Yeah I'm still hoping they wandered off as it's the best outcome if there is a best outcome in all this. Would rather accidental vs homicide.

If adults can wander off less than 1 kilometre from a trail, not be found by searchers and succumb to the elements (there is a case of an older woman this happened to but can't remember details) - I think fair to say these children possibly got lost, tried to find shelter and haven't been found (yet).

 

[su5ie]

Likewise on your posts!

I agree about the age estimates of the witness, and we don't even know if she said she was sure or if only when pressed, etc.

I've thought it's not beyond the realm of possibility all along that this sighting was Lilly and Jack. It has always seemed way too much of a coincidence to me, the sighting of 2 kids fitting their descriptions overall IMO, on the very day and around the very time on the very road by the property they disappeared from, to be "a nothingburger".

As far as the woman the witness said she saw standing next to the open back door of a goldish car as the girl & boy were approaching it IIRC, that's another kettle of fish, IMO.

There isn't any additional info on LE's pursuit of that potential lead thus far. However, at the point the witness gave their statement it was several weeks later, and their statement about the woman and car could still be being looked into by LE. So perhaps why no Amber Alert type of public warning BOTLOF for such a vehicle in response to an OP or two asking 'why not?'.
It was likely unvetted by LE at the time "it came out", it didn't "come out" willingly by LE AFAIK, it was from a FOIA request by media, so may never have come out if they were still unable to verify it and/or this type of vehicle wasn't seen on CCTV they're reviewed leaving the area. Even though that doesn't mean the goldish car if it had Lilly and Jack in it, couldn't have taken back roads even leading to a hiding spot in an old barn out in the middle of nowhere, etc. IMO.... so it may have gone nowhere.

As far as the clothing the witness said she saw them wearing (the girl in a blue tank top with ties/straps, the boy in shorts, IIRC), these outfits would appear to be (a) not what their parents said they were last seen wearing/had slept in, and (b) sounds like they were underdressed for temperatures around 45 degrees Fahrenheit that morning:

Charlottetown, Canada Weather History | Weather Underground

If it was Lilly and Jack dressed that way, it could indicate they decided to get dressed for school and sneak out and walk towards town or get a ride there because they didn't want to stay home with sleepy parents another day and were bored and weren't that sick/their coughs were better, which has always seemed like a possibility as well, IMO, from the beginning. As far as being underdressed, IIRC their school said this had happened before, and if they were dressing for it getting warmer later in the day on a Spring day that didn't seem that cold to them, they could have been dressed like that.

I hope some more evidence will come to light soon on which way it is leaning for LE, if it is, if they were picked up by someone walking along the road (known or unknown to them) and it is just a matter of time for the to be found.

MOO

Thank you for your reply,

I do feel this could be key to unlocking the conundrum over whether they wandered or not . With how quick the search was executed I find it difficult to comprehend how they were not found . Daniel was hot on the trail and rcmp from the timeline given were out looking within just a little over an hour . With the terrain being painted as difficult for expierenced adults and jack in particular being viewed as finding walking within that area difficult. Coupled with no scent picked up from dogs I find it strange particularly with jack in a pull up and it was soiled by him . The kids were up from early as they were heard chatting in the home ,so he had to have soiled it at some stage since he went to bed at around 9.30pm or 10pm

There is no mention of any interaction with the kids that morning such as getting breakfast or changing pull-up .so I'm assuming if he needed the pull up there were accidents.


I wonder if any information was redacted from the witness statement.
Like whether she seen the boots or a girl carrying a back pack

I wonder did she see the kids from behind as it would seem by giving a guesstimate of the older woman's age she may have got a closer look at her face . And by not having a better view of lillys face couldn't give a proper age .
From photos lilly doesn't look much taller than jack but from stats lilly is 0.5 foot taller than Jack. Would this give an appearance of being older from behind ?

From behind it is harder to judge age so direction the witness seen from is crucial as a nine or ten year old facial structure will look different than a 6 year old but with such variation in height , ones own familiarity will play a part in what you judge

My not long gone 4 year old grandson is a a little tall for his age and stocky he is in play school / montessori ,he also carrys himself well as he has older siblings so you could mistake him for 5, and is no different from the kids starting school this September.


Maleyha was out doing laundry at her aunts or grandma's I had wondered did she arrange something there without the need for a" paper " trail of phone history but I guess that's the wish we all have .

Never needed an update as much as I do in this case with info so scant and caregivers voices so quite . It leaves so much room for filling in your own imaginative gaps imo

 

[CalliopeMuse]

If adults can wander off less than 1 kilometre from a trail, not be found by searchers and succumb to the elements (there is a case of an older woman this happened to but can't remember details) - I think fair to say these children possibly got lost, tried to find shelter and haven't been found (yet).

Her name was Shirley Obert. She fell into an unsecured, abandoned water well shaft, and fell 30 feet to her death. While her broken down car was found soon after she was reported missing, she wasn't found until the next day. The well was all of 3 feet past the road shoulder. It apparently was connected with the ruins of a house back in the trees.

The websleuth thread is here:

Found Deceased Post in thread 'GA - Shirley Obert, 67, involved in single car accident, Monroe County, 29 March 2025'

Mar 30, 2025

Cody Alcorn

3/30 UPDATE from Monroe County Sheriff's Office, Georgia | The Monroe County Sheriff's Office has located Mrs. Shirley Obert. It is not the outcome that we were hoping for. She was found...

www.facebook.com

https://twitter.com/x/status/1906137228776194195

• mlhenn

• 

There's a discussion of the well situation here:

Missing woman found dead in well in Monroe County. But hidden wells are more common than you may think

Freeman said the well was dry, but approximately 30 feet deep. He believes she died from her injuries from the fall.

www.13wmaz.com

I've wondered if something similar happened with these kids from the beginning. The vegetation and human settlement in that area have changed so much over the years that the presence of undocumented shafts wouldn't surprise me. While it was indicated early-on that they had checked abandoned mines and shafts, those were ones that were documented. [moo]

 

[FromGermany1]

Thank you for your reply,

I do feel this could be key to unlocking the conundrum over whether they wandered or not . With how quick the search was executed I find it difficult to comprehend how they were not found . Daniel was hot on the trail and rcmp from the timeline given were out looking within just a little over an hour . With the terrain being painted as difficult for expierenced adults and jack in particular being viewed as finding walking within that area difficult. Coupled with no scent picked up from dogs I find it strange particularly with jack in a pull up and it was soiled by him . The kids were up from early as they were heard chatting in the home ,so he had to have soiled it at some stage since he went to bed at around 9.30pm or 10pm

There is no mention of any interaction with the kids that morning such as getting breakfast or changing pull-up .so I'm assuming if he needed the pull up there were accidents.


I wonder if any information was redacted from the witness statement.
Like whether she seen the boots or a girl carrying a back pack. She can't have overseen these things, IMO. Agree.

I wonder did she see the kids from behind as it would seem by giving a guesstimate of the older woman's age she may have got a closer look at her face . And by not having a better view of lillys face couldn't give a proper age .
From photos lilly doesn't look much taller than jack but from stats lilly is 0.5 foot taller than Jack. Would this give an appearance of being older from behind ? My thoughts also!

From behind it is harder to judge age so direction the witness seen from is crucial as a nine or ten year old facial structure will look different than a 6 year old but with such variation in height , ones own familiarity will play a part in what you judge

My not long gone 4 year old grandson is a a little tall for his age and stocky he is in play school / montessori ,he also carrys himself well as he has older siblings so you could mistake him for 5, and is no different from the kids starting school this September.


Maleyha was out doing laundry at her aunts or grandma's I had wondered did she arrange something there without the need for a" paper " trail of phone history but I guess that's the wish we all have . I had thought, that Daniel's mother was the one, who did the laundry until late evening.

Never needed an update as much as I do in this case with info so scant and caregivers voices so quite . It leaves so much room for filling in your own imaginative gaps imo

bbm and my answers in red.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Her name was Shirley Obert. She fell into an unsecured, abandoned water well shaft, and fell 30 feet to her death. While her broken down car was found soon after she was reported missing, she wasn't found until the next day. The well was all of 3 feet past the road shoulder. It apparently was connected with the ruins of a house back in the trees.

The websleuth thread is here:

Found Deceased Post in thread 'GA - Shirley Obert, 67, involved in single car accident, Monroe County, 29 March 2025'

Mar 30, 2025

Cody Alcorn

3/30 UPDATE from Monroe County Sheriff's Office, Georgia | The Monroe County Sheriff's Office has located Mrs. Shirley Obert. It is not the outcome that we were hoping for. She was found...

www.facebook.com

https://twitter.com/x/status/1906137228776194195

• mlhenn

• 

There's a discussion of the well situation here:

Missing woman found dead in well in Monroe County. But hidden wells are more common than you may think

Freeman said the well was dry, but approximately 30 feet deep. He believes she died from her injuries from the fall.

www.13wmaz.com

I've wondered if something similar happened with these kids from the beginning. The vegetation and human settlement in that area have changed so much over the years that the presence of undocumented shafts wouldn't surprise me. While it was indicated early-on that they had checked abandoned mines and shafts, those were ones that were documented. [moo]

Oh didn't hear of that one! I was thinking of this one - where she went of trail to go to the bathroom and just like that was lost but close to trail

Lost Hiker Was Two Miles From Appalachian Trail When She Died​

Hiker found two years after she got lost in the Maine woods.

Investigators said Largay’s cellphone revealed she got lost in the dense woods after she left the trail to use the bathroom. Right away, she texted her husband for help.

Soon they were joined by local law enforcement using blood-sniffing dogs and aircraft and the FBI. The initial search was suspended after seven days on July 30, 2013. But they did not stop looking for Largay or chasing leads.

Lost Hiker Was Two Miles From Trail When She Died

Hiker found two years after she got lost in the Maine woods left heartbreaking message before she died.

www.nbcnews.com

......

I am suspicious in Jack and Lilly's case but I am trying to keep open minded and cannot rule out accidental and maybe sheltered in in a strange spot. Where would kids go to hide or seek refuge? I hope they looked in oddball spots! Kids have big imaginations, they watch movies to get ideas at times. I hope searchers went off the beaten track for them.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

It has been over 4 months now since Lilly and Jack disappeared "one morning in early May this year" from their home located in a rural area of Nova Scotia.

While their parents at their home were "sleeping in" with their younger half sister, a toddler, for whatever reasons of theirs for sleeping in, but on a school day when their mother called them in "unable to attend school" (and be picked up by their usual school bus) due to her saying they had coughs ...

And their parents they'd been living with for the last 2 years-ish have said they don't know what happened as to how or why they disappeared and their conclusions were they thought they must have "wandered from home / into the woods"...

And that scenario was not eclipsed by LE's searches and investigation thus far, though they didn't find any evidence of them having done so during their searches so called off the searches (including use of cadaver dogs) and stated they had no evidence of an abduction, and so were "shifting their investigation wider out to their community and region" (paraphrasing)...

And LE has made no further statemements about the results of their investigation since then, except one about them saying they had no evidence of criminal activity involved in their disappearance...

Then, if all the above is true, and LE is investigating other scenarios, which have not come to frution, as hard as they have tried and are still trying ...

It seems a foregone conclusion they must have wandered off in some way that isn't obvious to LE hard on it and/or been the victims of someone(s) else whom did something to them/took them against their will on the "down low"... yet undiscovered after 4 months...

And none of their friends or relatives outside of their parents they were living with and nearby on the same property seem to "have a clue"... although we aren't privvy to the results of LE's interviews of friends (if they had any and what they may have shared with them if they did) and a myriad of relatives (since their mother had another child by their 'stepfather', he has 2 other children they're not related to by blood, and their biological father was not involved in their lives apparently in the last 2 years-ish since their mother was cohabitating with her new partner who is the father of their half sister), nor any of the constellation of aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins, half siblings-ish, etc.

So, IMO, it must have either been they did wander off and have not been found nearby if they perished that way, or someone known to them or a stranger did abduct them...

But there doesn't seem to be enough evidence, sadly to this day, 4 months later, for LE to state any suspicions they may have nor any suspects or persons of interest or significant leads they're following up on.

Although this may be just a recap of the circumstances on this case thus far IMOO, and I'm sincerely hopeful something is about to break in terms of LE finding out what happened to these dear young innocent children, I'm just flabbergasted about and frightened that their case is going cold, and it's not right, even if their families and friends and community and LE doing their best has come to naught.

Bumping with this long winded post just to keep the seeking of answers alive on Lilly and Jack's disappearance.

JMMusings and heartfelt condolences to all involved, we're still here hoping for answers.

MOO

 

[FromGermany1]

The missing sweatshirts (DM):
The person, who did the laundry on Thursday evening, has to know (maybe), where these sweatshirts are ....
MOO

Of course I don't know, whether this is important or not at all. It seems to be also mysterious like the whole disappearing of the little children.

ETA and next thought:
In the evening or night, it was said, at the parents home had been a party, which was allegedly no party. Did someone of the visitors steal 2 sweatshirts for wearing them later to impersonate DM (ie. on some surveillance video) during unknown tasks? Possible?

 

[OneLove]

The missing sweatshirts (DM):
The person, who did the laundry on Thursday evening, has to know (maybe), where these sweatshirts are ....
MOO

Of course I don't know, whether this is important or not at all. It seems to be also mysterious like the whole disappearing of the little children.

ETA and next thought:
In the evening or night, it was said, at the parents home had been a party, which was allegedly no party. Did someone steal 2 sweatshirts for wearing them later to impersonate DM (ie. on some surveillance video) during unknown tasks? Possible?

Good points. The 'party/not a party' along with the coming and going through the night of some kind of loud vehicle, along with DM making a particular point of the mysteriously missing 2 sweatshirts seems not insignificant.

 

[Serononin]

Good points. The 'party/not a party' along with the coming and going through the night of some kind of loud vehicle, along with DM making a particular point of the mysteriously missing 2 sweatshirts seems not insignificant.

I still want to know what DM meant when he said that the person who started the party rumour was trying to "get the heat off themselves"

 

[musicaljoke]

Likewise on your posts!

I agree about the age estimates of the witness, and we don't even know if she said she was sure or if only when pressed, etc.

I've thought it's not beyond the realm of possibility all along that this sighting was Lilly and Jack. It has always seemed way too much of a coincidence to me, the sighting of 2 kids fitting their descriptions overall IMO, on the very day and around the very time on the very road by the property they disappeared from, to be "a nothingburger".

As far as the woman the witness said she saw standing next to the open back door of a goldish car as the girl & boy were approaching it IIRC, that's another kettle of fish, IMO.

There isn't any additional info on LE's pursuit of that potential lead thus far. However, at the point the witness gave their statement it was several weeks later, and their statement about the woman and car could still be being looked into by LE. So perhaps why no Amber Alert type of public warning BOTLOF for such a vehicle in response to an OP or two asking 'why not?'.
It was likely unvetted by LE at the time "it came out", it didn't "come out" willingly by LE AFAIK, it was from a FOIA request by media, so may never have come out if they were still unable to verify it and/or this type of vehicle wasn't seen on CCTV they're reviewed leaving the area. Even though that doesn't mean the goldish car if it had Lilly and Jack in it, couldn't have taken back roads even leading to a hiding spot in an old barn out in the middle of nowhere, etc. IMO.... so it may have gone nowhere.

As far as the clothing the witness said she saw them wearing (the girl in a blue tank top with ties/straps, the boy in shorts, IIRC), these outfits would appear to be (a) not what their parents said they were last seen wearing/had slept in, and (b) sounds like they were underdressed for temperatures around 45 degrees Fahrenheit that morning:

Charlottetown, Canada Weather History | Weather Underground

If it was Lilly and Jack dressed that way, it could indicate they decided to get dressed for school and sneak out and walk towards town or get a ride there because they didn't want to stay home with sleepy parents another day and were bored and weren't that sick/their coughs were better, which has always seemed like a possibility as well, IMO, from the beginning. As far as being underdressed, IIRC their school said this had happened before, and if they were dressing for it getting warmer later in the day on a Spring day that didn't seem that cold to them, they could have been dressed like that.

I hope some more evidence will come to light soon on which way it is leaning for LE, if it is, if they were picked up by someone walking along the road (known or unknown to them) and it is just a matter of time for the to be found.

MOO

The parents would likely have a good idea whether or not these kids could be their children by the clothing description. Jack is described as wearing shorts. Little boys don't usually still fit into last year's summer clothes, so many parents put away the summer clothes once the weather turns colder in the fall. Would they have shorts out and ready for Jack by the first of May? I don't know. It's a tad early, but the parents might be able to eliminate this sighting if what the kids were wearing was simply impossible.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I still want to know what DM meant when he said that the person who started the party rumour was trying to "get the heat off themselves"

I can't be sure of course but it sounded like the kind of response you'd hear from a neighbor that has a history with the other neighbor. One accusing the other of this or that, and the other (DM) defending and implying an accusation back across the fence, as it were.

 

[Mauig’ma]

Good points. The 'party/not a party' along with the coming and going through the night of some kind of loud vehicle, along with DM making a particular point of the mysteriously missing 2 sweatshirts seems not insignificant.

I have to think the reason both slept in so late has to be because they stayed up late with others imo.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I have to think the reason both slept in so late has to be because they stayed up late with others imo.

I raised up 7 kids, never partied or anything like that while doing it, and ended up having miserable nights awake with babies/toddlers countless times. To be fair, there really are all sorts of other reasons DM and the children's mom were sleeping in that morning, other than them staying up late with guests. To which, DM has already said the rumored party the night before isn't true. So, there's also that.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

The missing sweatshirts (DM):
The person, who did the laundry on Thursday evening, has to know (maybe), where these sweatshirts are ....
MOO

Of course I don't know, whether this is important or not at all. It seems to be also mysterious like the whole disappearing of the little children.

ETA and next thought:
In the evening or night, it was said, at the parents home had been a party, which was allegedly no party. Did someone of the visitors steal 2 sweatshirts for wearing them later to impersonate DM (ie. on some surveillance video) during unknown tasks? Possible?

You just made an excellent and interesting point - they did laundry at MBM's grandmother's house. Very interesting since DM said 2 sweaters are missing.

Did this happen during laundry? When DM says the sweaters were taken, did he mean by MBM's family while laundry was happening or a home intruder? Did DM sneak away two sweaters from the laundry pile? Were those missing sweaters even part of the laundry that night? The timing of ALL events is curious, to no one specifically really.
.....

Days before disappearance​

The documents describe in detail how the family spent the days leading up to the disappearance running errands.

On Wednesday, April 30, all five, including Jack and Lilly's baby sister, went to Brooks-Murray's grandmother's house to do laundry at 2 p.m.

More than an hour later, Brooks-Murray took the baby with her to get a licence plate for her car while Martell stayed at her grandmother's house with Jack and Lilly.

According to the documents, "they went to the Ultramar in Millbrook to get gas and she stopped to get a vape for Daniel at High Grade."

The entire family later went for groceries and eventually arrived back home at 10:19 p.m.

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

 

[LadyL]

I still want to know what DM meant when he said that the person who started the party rumour was trying to "get the heat off themselves"

I wonder if the person who started the drug rumour is the same one who reported the 5-speed vehicle coming & going.

 

[TMich6811]

If they wandered off - why didn’t they use cadaver dogs? Or do you think they did and didn’t release?

 

[OneLove]

I still want to know what DM meant when he said that the person who started the party rumour was trying to "get the heat off themselves"

I lean toward believing DM is neither very emotionally mature nor super highly intelligent. That remark seemed to me to be somewhat kin to a schoolyard kid at recess being called on the carpet for throwing rocks and reacting with "but so-and-so threw rocks too".

I think the neighbor may have been insinuating that DM was cooking meth in the night (common for meth cookers because it smells horrid and can't be concealed) and then selling as batches were done. Or maybe one designated person ferried the goods off-site to safety as batches were done (the repetitive coming and going). Feeling super threatened by the neighbor making this implication, DM may have had an immediate knee jerk reaction to point the arrow right back at the neighbor in something of a "look, squirrel" moment.

Thats all just my take on it. The reason I'd tend to believe the neighbor was innocent is because if the neighbor WAS manufacturing and/or dealing drugs in the night, I'd think the dead last thing the neighbor would want to do is bring on law enforcement suspicion of ANY such things going on so very close to him and also terribly judgemental for someone doing the same thing. It just doesnt seem logical to me. Unless on the very very outside chance they were both in the same business and he thought he'd eliminate his competition.

Anything is possible since we just don't know much for sure yet so I do keep an open mind. But if I were asked for my "guess" or reading of that situation, I'd say highly unlikely the neighbor was guilty of the charge and DM was just having an immature moment pointing elsewhere.

 

[katydid23]

If they wandered off - why didn’t they use cadaver dogs? Or do you think they did and didn’t release?

I have always wondered that same thing. I remember back at the beginning, people were asking that---where are the cadaver dogs? I never heard anyone confirm they were used.

Some locals said that there might not be any trained cadaver dogs available in that remote area though. So IDK.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

If they wandered off - why didn’t they use cadaver dogs? Or do you think they did and didn’t release?

IIRC

LE used search dogs comprehensively enough in their on the ground searches within a 1.2 square mile radius while searching the property and off property, which they said resulted in no sign/scent of the children anywhere but on the property and terminating at the end of their driveway.

They gave this as the reason why they decided not to search with cadaver dogs, because the scent-based tracking dogs did not detect their fresh scents leading anywhere off the property.

I would presume those type of trained scent dogs they used would have been able to detect any fresh scents of them which they would have alerted to as well as any scents of fresh blood or bodily decay. Granted we don't know if the dogs they used were capable of detecting all types of scents. However, it seems like one (living) could lead to the other (injured or deceased), so hypothetically, if they didn't alert to any kind of scents associated with either child, there wouldn't be justification for bringing in another type of dog trained in just finding scents of death.

That's the way I interpret their decision not to bring in cadaver dogs, and JMO, though it still seems like not fully closing that loop brings up questions on what else they believed based on other evidence they had which has not been disclosed.

In addition, if later in the investigation they had new evidence leading them to believe they might have perished on or around the property into the woods and/or on the trail, it seems like they would have come back at a later date to search with cadaver dogs, but they haven't re-searched around there as far as we know.

Which coincides with their statements at the end of the search that they found no evidence of them leaving the property on foot, so the on the ground and aerial search was ended with that conclusion, after which they said they went on to focus their investigation outward into the community and region.

JMMusings, it's still a bit of a conundrum, although their decision must have been based on other evidence that Lilly and Jack were not going to be found thereabouts.

So if they wandered off, they must have done so in a way not detectable by S&R teams with each and every one having a dog with them at all times, or not, perhaps (gaps in coverage with dogs?)...But comprehensively conducted just the same following professional protocols.

JMO

 

[Twistinginthewind]

You just made an excellent and interesting point - they did laundry at MBM's grandmother's house. Very interesting since DM said 2 sweaters are missing.

Did this happen during laundry? When DM says the sweaters were taken, did he mean by MBM's family while laundry was happening or a home intruder? Did DM sneak away two sweaters from the laundry pile? Were those missing sweaters even part of the laundry that night? The timing of ALL events is curious, to no one specifically really.
.....

Days before disappearance​

The documents describe in detail how the family spent the days leading up to the disappearance running errands.

On Wednesday, April 30, all five, including Jack and Lilly's baby sister, went to Brooks-Murray's grandmother's house to do laundry at 2 p.m.

More than an hour later, Brooks-Murray took the baby with her to get a licence plate for her car while Martell stayed at her grandmother's house with Jack and Lilly.

According to the documents, "they went to the Ultramar in Millbrook to get gas and she stopped to get a vape for Daniel at High Grade."

The entire family later went for groceries and eventually arrived back home at 10:19 p.m.

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

Good questions, and recap of the day 2 days before they went missing, and day before they were last seen in public at the Dollarama.

It seems that week was quite different from most, in terms of Lilly and Jack's schedule/routine typically attending school Mon. - Fri, because they had a day off from school for "in service/development" of their teachers/staff starting mid week, and then their mother called them in sick to school thereafter.

It seems to me it was either a free flowing kind of week for them they all were enjoying, not having Lilly and Jack attending school after the first 2 days they had attended that week, their parents doing laundry and errands and shopping with their 3 kids in tow.

Or it's an anomalous set of circumstances that in the days leading up to their disappearance, they were not on their typical schedule or following their normal routine, IMO. And again, the hinky (IMO) timing for them missing school being the last days of the week before they were due to be assessed by their school regarding concerns they had, learning/behavioral issues or addressing potential neglect regarding them being underdressed previously, or otherwise.

If it was an enjoyable free flowing kind of week they took advantage of to go out and about and not have to worry about the older 2 kids attending school, even though they were too sick to attend school according to their mother:

Why would their parents choose to do all kinds of chores and errands and shopping if it meant their sick kiddos wouldn't be resting up at home, when neither of their parents were working during those days (except DM working a late night shift on one night), and one of them could have stayed home with them nursing their coughs?

Why would their entire family go grocery shopping so late in the day with young sick kids and a toddler in tow, getting back home after 10 pm (which is kind of late, IMO, for the bedtimes of sick 4 and 6 year olds and a toddler), when it wasn't necessary to do so? Unless DM not having a running car was a factor in them doing so much in those few days leading up to their disappearance but so late of an evening with littles in tow, one a toddler and two who were supposedly too sick to attend school?

It doesn't seem right, IMO, even though it could have been opportunistic on the part of their parents with one vehicle and two of the kids having been called in sick, to take advantage of the opening in their schedules for catching up on outside the home activities.

I don't necessarily know whether it's significant or not, what their parents took them along to do in those days leading up to their disappearance, staying out and getting home late 2 days before, doing laundry in the middle of the week, and with 2 sweaters of DM's "going missing" then or soon after.

But it still seems off to me, for them to be going out and about when their two older kids were too sick to attend school right before they disappeared.

JMO