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

[Ontario Mom]

I'm not sure if he suspected the neighbour of any wrongdoing concerning Lilly and Jack. I think he was just throwing shade.

That was the same impression I got.

 

[Serononin]

True it’s possible the cameras didn’t record it but don’t you think the RCMP are smart enough to be aware of the type of device that recorded the surveillance footage that they reviewed? “NO evidence” is quite a precise statement as opposed to any ‘vehicle activity being undetermined’.

I’m curious, general question, why is the RCMPs review of surveillance footage considered to possibly have been unsatisfactory without knowing any of the details about what was reviewed?

However, RCMP confirmed Monday a "thorough review of surveillance footage" from the Gairloch Road area of Pictou County found "no evidence of any vehicle activity at that time."

That seems like pretty standard phrasing that the RCMP has been using in this case - they've been saying "no evidence of abduction" all along, but also that they're investigating all possibilities, so I don't know if we can really read much into their word choices tbh

 

[MistyWaters]

That seems like pretty standard phrasing that the RCMP has been using in this case - they've been saying "no evidence of abduction" all along, but also that they're investigating all possibilities, so I don't know if we can really read much into their word choices tbh

It makes perfect sense if you consider the entire purpose of police investigations is seek evidence. LE don’t have a crystal ball to foresee what they’ll find as the investigation progresses. At the onset there was no evidence of an abduction but that’s not to say the RCMP must stop the investigation and give up. The definition of “evidence” is generally something used in court to support a conviction against an accused, very different than speculation thank goodness.

Surveillance footage indicating no vehicle activity is not going to suddenly reveal traffic volumes regardless of how many times it’s watched.

 

[Serononin]

It makes me wonder though, if there was animosity between the neighbours and DM. Did the neighbours immediately assume that any noisy vehicle must be DM? They didn't see the vehicle. Did they talk about it together and suddenly both remembered the noisy vehicle? DM seemed to imply in one of his comments that the police should be checking out someone nearby whom he suspected. Was it one of these neighbours? I don't know, but it seems to me that there could be a bad relationship there. The noisy vehicle and lights at night might possibly be an attempt to cast shade on DM.

Am I misremembering, or did Janie also imply that there was some kind of conflict with a neighbour in her CBC interview a while back? It does seem like there was no love lost between the family and their neighbours, although for what reason I daresay we'll never know

 

[tlcya]

It makes perfect sense if you consider the entire purpose of police investigations is seek evidence. LE don’t have a crystal ball to foresee what they’ll find as the investigation progresses. At the onset there was no evidence of an abduction but that’s not to say the RCMP must stop the investigation and give up. The definition of “evidence” is generally something used in court to support a conviction against an accused, very different than speculation thank goodness.

Surveillance footage indicating no vehicle activity is not going to suddenly reveal traffic volumes regardless of how many times it’s watched.

and that BBM, is the point some of us are making about RCMP's statement as to the alleged vehicle in question. This investigation is still IMO very much an active and evolving thing. LE cannot speak with certainty about any single aspect of this case because they aren't done investigating and following leads yet. They haven't solved the case as yet.

MOO RCMP is smart enough not to rule anything out until it can be. No evidence of abduction doesn't mean they dismiss that angle altogether, never to look at it again, even if later evidence is located which may indicate an abduction, they continue to pursue it and all the other possibilities in this case. All some of us are saying is that we feel no video doesn't equal ruled out or definitively didn't happen. It simply means they are unable to validate those two neighbor's claims through surveillance video.

I am confident RCMP is way too smart to fall victim to tunnel vision.

The Dangers of Tunnel Vision in Criminal Investigations | Bannister, Wyatt & Stalvey

 

[MistyWaters]

and that BBM, is the point some of us are making about RCMP's statement as to the alleged vehicle in question. This investigation is still IMO very much an active and evolving thing. LE cannot speak with certainty about any single aspect of this case because they aren't done investigating and following leads yet. They haven't solved the case as yet.

MOO RCMP is smart enough not to rule anything out until it can be. No evidence of abduction doesn't mean they dismiss that angle altogether, never to look at it again, even if later evidence is located which may indicate an abduction, they continue to pursue it and all the other possibilities in this case. All some of us are saying is that we feel no video doesn't equal ruled out or definitively didn't happen. It simply means they are unable to validate those two neighbor's claims through surveillance video.

I am confident RCMP is way too smart to fall victim to tunnel vision.

The Dangers of Tunnel Vision in Criminal Investigations | Bannister, Wyatt & Stalvey

Sorry I’m missing the connection between tunnel vision and an ‘thorough review’ of surveillance footage to corroborate a tip involving vehicle activity. All tips received by police, surely we expect LE to investigate each and every one?

Another report -

Missing N.S. children: RCMP dispute witness accounts in case

Nova Scotia RCMP say they have found no evidence to back up witness accounts of a vehicle driving back and forth near the rural, northeastern home where two young children went missing in May.

www.ctvnews.ca

Missing N.S. children: RCMP dispute witness accounts in case​

HALIFAX — Nova Scotia RCMP say they have found no evidence to back up witness accounts of a vehicle driving back and forth near the rural, northeastern home where two young children went missing in May.

Spokesperson Cindy Bayers says investigators conducted a thorough review of surveillance footage from the area in Lansdowne Station, N.S., where six-year-old Lilly and four-year-old Jack Sullivan were reported missing on May 2.

 

[tlcya]

I am missing the connection between thorough review and ruled out. No evidence to back up witness (multiple) accounts doesn't mean they did not see/hear exactly what they said they saw/heard.

My stance is, no video can exist that verifies a vehicle AND a vehicle's presence could still factor into this case.

In my view this isn't an either or. The two concepts can and do easily coexist for me.

 

[MistyWaters]

Maybe most of us here are city folk? Our life’s experiences influence our thoughts and so I was thinking about what someone here already mentioned but I’m unable to find the post.

In rural areas without nighttime light pollution vehicle headlights are highly visible from far away. The surveillance footage could’ve been captured from quite a distance away as long as the camera faced Gairloch Road. The area around the road remaining in complete darkness all night would indicate no vehicle activity. The information from the tip stated the headlights lit up the tops of the trees which indicates the headlights were on and brightly lit.

BBM incl UL

Nova Scotia RCMP dispute witness accounts in missing children case

HALIFAX — Nova Scotia RCMP say they have found no evidence to back up witness accounts of a vehicle driving back and forth early in the morning near the rural, northeastern home where two young children went missing in May. Spokesperson Cindy Bayers said investigators conducted a thorough review...

halifax.citynews.ca

Spokesperson Cindy Bayers says investigators conducted a thorough review of surveillance footage from the area in Lansdowne Station, N.S., where six-year-old Lilly and four-year-old Jack Sullivan were reported missing on May 2.

 

[Bodhi]

This is an interesting aspect to me. I am one of the people who has not dismissed the theory that the kids did walk off (but I'm also not dismissing possible murder nor even abduction either), probably mostly because I am not in the least supicious about the bodies not being found yet - I've shared that anecdote previously, but an adult relative of mine committed suicide in an area with far less untamed wilderness with no large predators and it still took 8 years to find his body, despite the general area being known and heavy police involvement.

I can think of a few reasons why the kids might have not responded to Daniels calls:
* afraid of getting into trouble - IMO, that's a huge probability with kids this young, especially in a somewhat chaotic household, "not being seen before they've calmed down" is a concept kids learn quickly
* not wanting to respond - if they were, say, "running away" or going to do something forbidden and not yet in immediate distress at all, they might have gotten farther away on purpose
* not able to respond - such as drowning in water, having suffered a fall down one of the old mine shafts or similar (depending on the closeness of these objects)
* not able to hear him - the woods block sound quite well and I have not ruled out that the timeline is a bit fuzzy regarding how soon the search started and when it reached the point of yelling in the woods

I can see people side-eyeing the family, but I feel it is too easy to judge someone of low socio-economic background living in a remote trailer with 3 kids from our mostly comfortable middle-class lives. Sure, the family has some issues. However, this also increases the probability of accidents, kids running away and even abduction.

I have not made up my mind about this case, but the lack of a crime scene and the existance of Lillys-boot-sized boot print in the search area is making me cautious against a witch hunt for now. There are no dingoes in Canada, but sometimes drastic outcomes (two kids dead) don't need a drastic reason to happen (lack of supervision and Canadian wilderness).

Yes! It's possible the children heard DM or searchers calling and did not respond. Family dynamics are a big factor. Kids learn how to cope.

I'm so sorry for your loss and the heartbreakingly long wait your family endured for certainty. We had a similar experience in my family. Friends with a young relative reported that he'd fallen through the ice the night before. The ice had frozen over by then. His family and friends knew he'd died. But without a body, speculation in town ran rampant: unfounded rumors that issues at home caused him to run away or that he was living it up in New York and laughing at their distress. In the spring, his body was recovered and his parents had certainty--and the peace they needed to grieve.

 

[OneLove]

That seems like pretty standard phrasing that the RCMP has been using in this case - they've been saying "no evidence of abduction" all along, >snip<

Thank you for this.

"No evidence of abduction"
is not in any fashion the same as
"Evidence there was no abduction"
and the RCMP did NOT say there was evidence that there was no abduction

That's about as simply as it can be stated. There are reasons why the RCMP state things very precisely the way they do.

That, along with the fact that GPS locating via Google maps can very simply be turned on and off with one tap in one second's time using "Battery Saver Mode"

along with camera footage along that road being sketchy

and we, as the public NOT privy to carefully guarded investigative info, seem to be back at the square one of all possibilities are still open.

 

[MistyWaters]

<snipped>

along with camera footage along that road being sketchy

and we, as the public NOT privy to carefully guarded investigative info, seem to be back at the square one of all possibilities are still open.

I don’t recall that we know anything about camera footage from along that road, do we? (pertains to my post a couple posts upward)

 

[Ontario Mom]

Am I misremembering, or did Janie also imply that there was some kind of conflict with a neighbour in her CBC interview a while back? It does seem like there was no love lost between the family and their neighbours, although for what reason I daresay we'll never know

I don't recall JM saying anything about a neighbor. However, the video interview of her was edited at least once that I'm aware of so it's possible I missed that comment.

 

[musicaljoke]

Maybe most of us here are city folk? Our life’s experiences influence our thoughts and so I was thinking about what someone here already mentioned but I’m unable to find the post.

In rural areas without nighttime light pollution vehicle headlights are highly visible from far away. The surveillance footage could’ve been captured from quite a distance away as long as the camera faced Gairloch Road. The area around the road remaining in complete darkness all night would indicate no vehicle activity. The information from the tip stated the headlights lit up the tops of the trees which indicates the headlights were on and brightly lit.

BBM incl UL

Nova Scotia RCMP dispute witness accounts in missing children case

HALIFAX — Nova Scotia RCMP say they have found no evidence to back up witness accounts of a vehicle driving back and forth early in the morning near the rural, northeastern home where two young children went missing in May. Spokesperson Cindy Bayers said investigators conducted a thorough review...

halifax.citynews.ca

Spokesperson Cindy Bayers says investigators conducted a thorough review of surveillance footage from the area in Lansdowne Station, N.S., where six-year-old Lilly and four-year-old Jack Sullivan were reported missing on May 2.

I live on an island in a Dark Sky zone, so our nights have no artificial illumination. Cars can be seen coming from a considerable distance, but it would be very unusual for car headlights to light up the tree tops.

Headlights in Canada are set so the beam is directed 2.5" from the headlight centre point at 25'. The beam lights up the road about 200' in front of the car, but the beam is still at a low angle. Unless a car is approaching while going up a steep hill, the tree tops never get illuminated. It's unusual to see headlight illumination above the power lines.

 

[sunspun]

Emphasis mine.
Was the link for the (bolded) DM quote, upthread ?
Tia.

I am getting behind in this case but it doesn't sounds like much progress has been made.

yes, it was. It would be in the post I replied to in my post that you quoted.

 

[sunspun]

I remember seeing quite a lot of vehicles in the early pictures of the property, although I assume some of them were the cars of people who had arrived to help with the search.

My biggest question is, if he was doing something that might that he didn't want other people to know about, why he would take his own, loud vehicle rather than M's reportedly very quiet new car

Maybe to avoid incriminating evidence to be left and later found in their primary car, the one that was necessary to their transportation needs. In other words, the one they wouldn't want seized by LE?

DM's barely-working, louder vehicle was moved off their property and onto that of his dad, imo, soon after the night before they went missing. To reiterate, that is my opinion, with the caveat that I do not know when his car was moved to his dad's.

 

[OneLove]

This post lands at random and not a response to anyone in particular.

I'm just wondering, for those inclined to disbelieve the 2 neighbors detailed reports, what reason you think they might have for confabulating such elaborate lies.

I have ideas but just curious what your thought process is about this matter.

 

[Chimera]

yes, it was. It would be in the post I replied to in my post that you quoted.

Ok, thanks !

Maybe to avoid incriminating evidence to be left and later found in their primary car, the one that was necessary to their transportation needs. In other words, the one they wouldn't want seized by LE?

DM's barely-working, louder vehicle was moved off their property and onto that of his dad, imo, soon after the night before they went missing. To reiterate, that is my opinion, with the caveat that I do not know when his car was moved to his dad's.

Bbm.
Yes, it could hold evidence or nothing at all, maybe needed a part that his dad had ?
A lot of people move their cars around for repairs or whatever reason, some do it at night if they're gone at work during the day.

It's just that with no real answers as to here these precious little kids went we're left trying to find clues or to figure out if anything was missed in the search !
Which is why I'm here at WS.
Imo.

 

[Andreee]

It makes me wonder though, if there was animosity between the neighbours and DM. Did the neighbours immediately assume that any noisy vehicle must be DM? They didn't see the vehicle. Did they talk about it together and suddenly both remembered the noisy vehicle? DM seemed to imply in one of his comments that the police should be checking out someone nearby whom he suspected. Was it one of these neighbours? I don't know, but it seems to me that there could be a bad relationship there. The noisy vehicle and lights at night might possibly be an attempt to cast shade on DM.

Yes, that could be the case. It isn't a well populated area, so I am thinking a neighbour could recognize the sounds that certain cars in their close vicinity make, especially louder ones. But of course that doesn't mean it was DM's car. I wonder just when DM's car ended up at his dad's, and if a forensic look at it and at his wife's car was done. I would certainly hope so.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Yes, that could be the case. It isn't a well populated area, so I am thinking a neighbour could recognize the sounds that certain cars in their close vicinity make, especially louder ones. But of course that doesn't mean it was DM's car. I wonder just when DM's car ended up at his dad's, and if a forensic look at it and at his wife's car was done. I would certainly hope so.

If the RCMP had any evidence to suggest it was needed, I have no doubt they would have thoroughly examined both vehicles.

 

[tlcya]

“He said his residence is at an elevated position from Daniel's residence and he could see vehicle lights over the treetops,” said RCMP Cpl. Charlene Curl in her written request to the court.

“He said the vehicle left three or four times after midnight and into the early hours of the morning. He said the vehicle would drive off in the distance and he could hear it stop and then return. He said it remained in earshot the entire time.”
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova...hildren-court-documents-car-vehicle-9.6943179

Is it possible someone was on an ATV that was very loud and it wasn't running back and forth on the road per se, but off road in the vicinity? Perhaps that is why the neighbor seemed to hear someone coming and going but not really leaving the area. Perhaps someone was out in the woods or on logging or pipeline trails. If so that could that explain the noise, lights and lack of a vehicle on the road wherever RCMP found those cameras they gave a thorough review.
--------------------------
He [DM] told police he went to bed “fairly early” and didn’t wake up until it was light the next morning. (from the above linked CBC article)

MBM told LE that she put the children down and then went to bed around 10pm but that DM had stayed up later. She did not know what time he made it to bed, but it was his practice to tackle "projects" around the house at night (from the CBC here: https://archive.ph/20250822223804/h...er-suggests-no-criminal-involvement-1.7615551 and the G&M article recently discussed)