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

[MistyWaters]

Out of curiosity, I looked up how many cadaver dogs there are here in the UK, and the most recent source I could find (albeit from ten years ago) said there were 70. Seems odd that we would have so many more when Canada is so much bigger!

I hadn’t noticed it published anywhere the total number of cadaver dogs in Canada. Some are trained directly by the RCMP and have member handlers, others are connected to a non-profit organization which supports police services when required.

Canadian Cadaver Canines | search and recovery

When your loved one goes missing, we help find answers. Canadian Cadaver Canines is a team search and recovery specialists serving Vancouver Island and beyond.

www.canadiancadavercanines.ca

 

[sunspun]

Doesn't it seem like SAR dogs would also be of at least some use in finding dead bodies? Even untrained hunting dogs? Obviously this isn't the case, since they say cadaver dogs must be specially trained for it, but it seems odd, when I know my silly little, completely untrained doggies seem to be very good at sniffing out little dead squirrels and such with distressing (to me) frequency!

 

[MistyWaters]

Doesn't it seem like SAR dogs would also be of at least some use in finding dead bodies? Even untrained hunting dogs? Obviously this isn't the case, since they say cadaver dogs must be specially trained for it, but it seems odd, when I know my silly little, completely untrained doggies seem to be very good at sniffing out little dead squirrels and such with distressing (to me) frequency!

Yes in one of the articles I recall reading it noted the SAR dogs could also detect bodies where recent death had occurred. But I think at the time the dogs were mainly used for tracking, hoping to pick up a trail of the alive children, rather than a broad forest search which would’ve probably been much slower.

In other words, if successfully using the dogs to seek a trail that led to the children, would’ve found them quicker whether dead or alive.
JMO

 

[OneLove]

To be fair, the article linked a few posts ago says there are fewer than 10 cadaver dogs in the whole of Canada, and they're having to bring these dogs to NS from BC. That's a big undertaking that probably would've been hard to justify early in the investigation, when they had no way of knowing that they weren't about to find definitive evidence of the children being somewhere other than the woods

Yes, exactly, and there are logical reasons why if one considers the science. The dogs that were already there for thorough searching picked up the kids scents. No scent was indicated beyond a small boundary from the house and yard. The logical conclusion is the kids left the property contained in a vehicle of some sort. If the kids had "wandered" into the woods then died of exposure or other dangers there, there would have been live scent leading into the woods.

The only science based reason cadaver dogs would pick up scent the others did not is if the children had been killed before being carried into the woods, stripped naked and not wrapped in any article of clothing, blanket, towels, stuffed animal, *clothes from the night before they reportedly slept in*, Daniel's sweaters, anything from the house, car, or grandma's houses etc, that would have ALSO carried their *live* scent.

<modsnip: There is no known fact to support such a statement of fact>

 

[LadyL]

There is no definitive timeline on how long the scent can remain detectable, as it depends on the size of the person and environmental factors, said Pike. But he noted a case in which a dog uncovered material related to an investigation two years later from the ocean floor at low tide.

They're also able to detect scents underwater and underground. Even in challenging environments like septic fields or landfills, the dogs can be effective because human decomposition is unique.”

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/rcmp-say-cadaver-dogs-will-be-deployed-to-search-for-missing-n-s-children-1.7638195

[bbm]

wow I didn't realize they're so sophisticated

 

[katydid23]

Yes, exactly, and there are logical reasons why if one considers the science. The dogs that were already there for thorough searching picked up the kids scents. No scent was indicated beyond a small boundary from the house and yard. The logical conclusion is the kids left the property contained in a vehicle of some sort. If the kids had "wandered" into the woods then died of exposure or other dangers there, there would have been live scent leading into the woods.

The only science based reason cadaver dogs would pick up scent the others did not is if the children had been killed before being carried into the woods, stripped naked and not wrapped in any article of clothing, blanket, towels, stuffed animal, *clothes from the night before they reportedly slept in*, Daniel's sweaters, anything from the house, car, or grandma's houses etc, that would have ALSO carried their *live* scent.

<modsnip: There is no known fact to support such a statement of fact>

I agree with all of the above.

But let's say a crazy neighbour or friend of a neighbour happened upon the children, back where the footprint was seen. Maybe they were put into a vehicle, told they were going to get a ride to school or to a restaurant?

If said crazy neighbour ended up disposing of them eventually, in the surrounding woods, cadaver dogs would be very helpful.

And in the slight possibility, one of the parents, or some other individual on their land, happened to accidentally or intentionally harm them, they may have also hid them under a rocky area somewhere.

<modsnip: There is no MSM or other approved source to support speculation on meth>

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This post lands at random.

It seems we have some members here who publicly disagree with or dislike some of Websleuths rules and what is or is not allowed.

Please ask yourself, if you don't like our rules, don't like our approved sources, or just don't like it here, why are you here?

 

[Andreee]

To be fair, the article linked a few posts ago says there are fewer than 10 cadaver dogs in the whole of Canada, and they're having to bring these dogs to NS from BC. That's a big undertaking that probably would've been hard to justify early in the investigation, when they had no way of knowing that they weren't about to find definitive evidence of the children being somewhere other than the woods

I still think they should've tried to bring them in sooner. Perhaps even from across the border.

 

[musicaljoke]

I still think they should've tried to bring them in sooner. Perhaps even from across the border.

They likely needed to first investigate whether or not the children were kidnapped. NS doesn't have endless money to pour into investigations, so bringing in the dogs could wait until the investigation was ready to take that step. After all, bringing in the cadaver dogs would indicate that there was no hope the children were still alive. We mustn't forget that their families didn't believe that the children were in the woods, so going there before it was the only remaining logical step might have been unnecessarily distressing to the family.

It was only recently that the ban on anyone being in the forest has been lifted.

I think need to trust that the timing is right.

 

[MistyWaters]

I still think they should've tried to bring them in sooner. Perhaps even from across the border.

Maybe but you’re only assuming the reason a cadaver dog wasn’t used was because one wasn’t available in Canada. We don’t know if that’s a fact. LE stated at the onset a missing persons investigation is considered suspicious until the people closest have been ruled out. So it appears that’s exactly what they focused on after the initial search didn’t prove fruitful. Had the RCMP been able to identify a suspect, that likely would’ve yielded clues to the location of the victims, if not a confession. The other way around, all efforts to locate the bodies not knowing where they are doesn’t always lead to a suspect.

So it appears if the RCMP doesn’t believe criminality was involved it’s time to again pursue the likelihood the children indeed wandered off. It’s certainly not unheard of that initial searches fail for various reasons. Perhaps too many people were frantically looking in one area for tracking dogs to be able to detect the children’s scent.
JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

Worth watching, informative video on this link including interview of retired RCMP Major Crimes investigator

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.6910211

Cadaver dogs will soon be used to search for two children who disappeared from rural Nova Scotia more than four months ago, but RCMP officials maintain they do not have reason to believe Lilly and Jack Sullivan are dead. Retired RCMP Major Crimes Investigator Bruce Pitt-Payne discusses the latest efforts to find the children, and why the RCMP might be using the cadaver dogs now.

 

[Andreee]

Maybe but you’re only assuming the reason a cadaver dog wasn’t used was because one wasn’t available in Canada. We don’t know if that’s a fact. LE stated at the onset a missing persons investigation is considered suspicious until the people closest have been ruled out. So it appears that’s exactly what they focused on after the initial search didn’t prove fruitful. Had the RCMP been able to identify a suspect, that likely would’ve yielded clues to the location of the victims, if not a confession. The other way around, all efforts to locate the bodies not knowing where they are doesn’t always lead to a suspect.

So it appears if the RCMP doesn’t believe criminality was involved it’s time to again pursue the likelihood the children indeed wandered off. It’s certainly not unheard of that initial searches fail for various reasons. Perhaps too many people were frantically looking in one area for tracking dogs to be able to detect the children’s scent.
JMO

It is still JMO! That is all.

 

[Andreee]

They likely needed to first investigate whether or not the children were kidnapped. NS doesn't have endless money to pour into investigations, so bringing in the dogs could wait until the investigation was ready to take that step. After all, bringing in the cadaver dogs would indicate that there was no hope the children were still alive. We mustn't forget that their families didn't believe that the children were in the woods, so going there before it was the only remaining logical step might have been unnecessarily distressing to the family.

It was only recently that the ban on anyone being in the forest has been lifted.

I think need to trust that the timing is right.

It is still JMO thats all.

 

[Panniniclaus]

Maybe but you’re only assuming the reason a cadaver dog wasn’t used was because one wasn’t available in Canada. We don’t know if that’s a fact. LE stated at the onset a missing persons investigation is considered suspicious until the people closest have been ruled out. So it appears that’s exactly what they focused on after the initial search didn’t prove fruitful. Had the RCMP been able to identify a suspect, that likely would’ve yielded clues to the location of the victims, if not a confession. The other way around, all efforts to locate the bodies not knowing where they are doesn’t always lead to a suspect.

So it appears if the RCMP doesn’t believe criminality was involved it’s time to again pursue the likelihood the children indeed wandered off. It’s certainly not unheard of that initial searches fail for various reasons. Perhaps too many people were frantically looking in one area for tracking dogs to be able to detect the children’s scent.
JMO

I agree - we don't know if tried to secure dogs and were thwarted. I also don't believe Tim Houston's fire ban would hold against the need to search for missing children. So this all should have been done sooner.

 

[MistyWaters]

I agree - we don't know if tried to secure dogs and were thwarted. I also don't believe Tim Houston's fire ban would hold against the need to search for missing children. So this all should have been done sooner.

I think determining if a crime occurred and identifying a suspect should be the #1 priority in a missing persons case. Before that occurs it’s a wild card of what specific areas that cadaver dogs should be used to assist in a search. Without any indication of a suspect who caused the children to die, focus goes back to the beginning, they must’ve wandered from their home. But we don’t yet know if that’s even the answer.

Earlier many posters suggested the bodies might be somewhere between New Glasgow and Landsdowne Stn, after the last sighting away from the home. Others think a woman in a gold car took them away or if not, maybe the 5-speed allegedly heard by neighbours during the night. A lot of possibilities within known tips and we’re not privy to the total, more than 700, which police can’t just ignore and not bother to investigate.
JMO

 

[Slebby]

If cadaver dogs are being brought in under a theory the children perished due to wandering away/lost/exposure, I wonder at the size of the search area, and I wonder if the dogs and their handlers are up to that size of search.
I personally have never felt this was a case of wandering, imo. One reason is the lack of hits by the initial search dogs. They just never indicated wandering was likely, imo. How else to account for dogs not finding their scent? So in my opinion, I believe, between 700 tips, plus forensic examination of security and trail cam footage, emails, cell phones, and interviews with many individuals, some known to us via MSM, possibly some not known to us, all this has led LE to some conclusions as to where they may or may not be dumped. If I am right, it will be interesting to see where the cadaver dogs begin their search.
All imho.

 

[MistyWaters]

If cadaver dogs are being brought in under a theory the children perished due to wandering away/lost/exposure, I wonder at the size of the search area, and I wonder if the dogs and their handlers are up to that size of search.
I personally have never felt this was a case of wandering, imo. One reason is the lack of hits by the initial search dogs. They just never indicated wandering was likely, imo. How else to account for dogs not finding their scent? So in my opinion, I believe, between 700 tips, plus forensic examination of security and trail cam footage, emails, cell phones, and interviews with many individuals, some known to us via MSM, possibly some not known to us, all this has led LE to some conclusions as to where they may or may not be dumped. If I am right, it will be interesting to see where the cadaver dogs begin their search.
All imho.

I double we’ll ever know, given the ‘highest probability’ search sites will not be publicized but that does indicate preplanned and specific search areas. But I’d imagine outdoorsman-type intel could determine any less difficult routes into the forest that include opportunities for children to hide from searchers, given average kilometre distances 4 and 6 year old children might typically walk.
JMO

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/rcmp-say-cadaver-dogs-will-be-deployed-to-search-for-missing-n-s-children-1.7638195

“On Friday, police said there are "searches planned," but would not say where and when, citing safety concerns. They did confirm the searches will not happen this weekend. The Mounties did say the searches would be conducted in "areas of highest probability."”

 

[Serononin]

Does anyone know if search dogs missing a scent is something that happens regularly? I think I mentioned Asha Degree earlier in the thread, but dogs couldn't pick up her scent beyond her parents' property either, even though eyewitness accounts indicate that she walked away from the house

 

[SimplyCass]

Does anyone know if search dogs missing a scent is something that happens regularly? I think I mentioned Asha Degree earlier in the thread, but dogs couldn't pick up her scent beyond her parents' property either, even though eyewitness accounts indicate that she walked away from the house

I understand that scent tracking (generally speaking) can be extremely fickle and can really depend on the handler as well as the dog. A poorly trained handler can ruin any useful info. It's far less precise than the movies make it seem.

 

[wvmoonangel]

I still think they should've tried to bring them in sooner. Perhaps even from across the border.

I have thought it too because from day one I haven't believed their stories nor believed those babies left that property alive or if left the property at all.