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

[su5ie]

Thats fine. Middle of night here and I was half asleep so basically couldnt believe my eyes lol.

No worries just giving a friendly point in the right direction

 

[tlcya]

Extended interview with Daniel just released

7:42 mark of the video interview DM answers questions about allegations around his use of drugs. I didn't have any drugs. If I had, Major Crimes would have charged me. There were no drugs at the house. Not a dealer, don't owe drug debts. He wants to make sure to impress upon the listeners that there is no evidence he was on drugs that night. But doesn't say anything like, I haven't used drugs in months or weeks or days. Just there was no party I had no drugs on me and LE didn't find any drugs in the house.

MOO I am listening not just to what he says but what does NOT say.

 

[agent902]

On the morning of May 2, 2025, Brooks-Murray called 911 to report that Lilly, 6, and Jack, then 4, had gone missing from the rural home she shared with her boyfriend, Daniel Martell, and their baby daughter.

If DM is (was) responsible for everything, as he claims, why didn't HE call 911? He's so articulate and loves to talk. It's strange that he, as the man of the house, didn't call them. MOO

"We didn't see them anywhere. And Malehya said, should I call 911? And I said, well, just wait one second. I ran up in the woods to the kids. They have cabins up in the woods. It’s about, I don't know, 100 feet up in the woods. Ran up there, ran right back down, which only took me like 30 seconds." - Daniel Martell, transcribed quote

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/friday-july-18-2025-episode-transcript-1.7588759

Think about that.

-Should we call 911?

-No, wait. Let me go.... ???

Really?

Did it only take 30 seconds?

SHE made the 911 call. And did it in the moments he ran off. After telling her to wait. Her instinct knew the call needed to be made, despite his urge to wait. I think there may even have been an urgency to call while he wasn't right there.

But doesn't say anything like, I haven't used drugs in months or weeks or days.

He can't deny what he's already publicly admitted to The Globe and Mail:

(...) interviews with The Globe that he’s never struggled with drugs and does not have a drug problem. Despite that, he has admitted to taking methamphetamines and “pretty much everything.”

There's another "I do it a lot, but it's not a *problem*" type similar quote in some of the unmentionable sources and their loosely vetted screengrabs.

 

[BCSleuth]

"We didn't see them anywhere. And Malehya said, should I call 911? And I said, well, just wait one second. I ran up in the woods to the kids. They have cabins up in the woods. It’s about, I don't know, 100 feet up in the woods. Ran up there, ran right back down, which only took me like 30 seconds." - Daniel Martell, transcribed quote

[...]

So what are you getting at? She phoned 911 too quickly or not quickly enough?

And there is a huge difference between trying a drug and having a drug problem.

 

[LadyL]

Depending what time the search dogs were brought to the property there may’ve been multiple people beforehand including police officers and family members frantically going to and fro which destroyed the scent trial.

not to mention they're not infallable

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Just catching up; someone said a few pages back that we now know why MBM was crying after she talked to law enforcement in the car the morning the children were reported as missing. I couldn't find that reason. Can someone fill me in please? Tia.

<RSBM>

There's this reason/explanation according to MBM's friend in this week's new MSM article:

"Robinson said they all went to the nearby command centre for a briefing on the search.

As she reviewed maps of the large swaths of woods that crews had already covered — with no trace of Lilly and Jack — Brooks-Murray handed off her baby to a loved one because she was having a panic attack and received medical attention, said Robinson.

She would never return to the Martell property.

“We weren't leaving her there,” said Robinson. “After learning everything … we did, and seeing the condition that [the baby] was living in, it just wasn't the proper fit.” "

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/lilly-jack-sullivan-disappearance-malehya-brooks-murray-9.7071768

 

[TMich6811]

So what are you getting at? She phoned 911 too quickly or not quickly enough?

And there is a huge difference between trying a drug and having a drug problem.

I think previous poster was saying that she didn’t call because he said to wait but then called the moment he left because she was safe to

imo Most people don’t just try meth. It’s not a casual have fun drug

 

[Fabled Automatic]

7:42 mark of the video interview DM answers questions about allegations around his use of drugs. I didn't have any drugs. If I had, Major Crimes would have charged me. There were no drugs at the house. Not a dealer, don't owe drug debts. He wants to make sure to impress upon the listeners that there is no evidence he was on drugs that night. But doesn't say anything like, I haven't used drugs in months or weeks or days. Just there was no party I had no drugs on me and LE didn't find any drugs in the house.

MOO I am listening not just to what he says but what does NOT say.

He's stated that he attends some sort of Anon type meetings up to three times a week. I guess he knows enough to not pretend he's always been a super clean living guy. But I do wonder when he started attending these alleged meetings. He never indicated if it was before or after the kids went missing. Like the comment you mentioned, his wording left the timeline unaddressed.

 

[su5ie]

He's stated that he attends some sort of Anon type meetings up to three times a week. I guess he knows enough to not pretend he's always been a super clean living guy. But I do wonder when he started attending these alleged meetings. He never indicated if it was before or after the kids went missing. Like the comment you mentioned, his wording left the timeline unaddressed.

After , he states in one of his interviews buried in pages and pages back that he was doing an anger management course , parenting course and attending narcotics anonymous to clear his name for cps .

At the time this was revealed a number of posters and I debated if casual occasional drug use would warrant attending NA or would only addicts with uncontrollable drug use attend .

While DM didn't exactly state a specific timing of his attendance it was stated in relation to him proving his innocence and willingness to cooperate so I surmised from the context that he had only just begun these courses and attending NA. Which would therefore be after the kids went missing but maybe other posters may recall differently

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Going back to this MSM article from mid-January (BBM):

MSN

"Newly unsealed court documents revealed allegations of abuse in the months leading up to the disappearance of Jack and Lilly Sullivan, two Nova Scotia siblings missing since May 2025, multiple news outlets reported.

Malehya Brooks-Murray, the mother of the children, accused their stepfather Daniel Martell of being physically abusive toward her on multiple occasions, according to records [sic] cited by Global News."

If DM was abusive to his intimate partner -- as MBM alluded to previously and has now claimed and been documented in court

And DM has now been arrested for and charged with assault, forcible confinement and sexual assault, though his guilt has yet to be decided in a court of law, of course

And MBM was the one he abused and it occurred on Gairloch Rd and presumably at home and Lilly and Jack were witnesses to it or exposed to his abuse...

Regarding this aspect on the backstory of the case of Lilly and Jack's disappearance -- the circumstances of their home life before they went missing:

Referencing the following that is interesting to learn about recent research in Canada regarding intimate partner violence (IPV), which states children's exposure to IPV can be considered as "child maltreatment" (BBM).

Research Snapshot: Children’s Exposure to Intimate Partner Violence as Child Maltreatment - Vanier

The Vanier Institute of the Family is a national, independent, think tankdedicated to understanding families and family life in Canada.

vanierinstitute.ca

"Research Snapshot: Children’s Exposure to Intimate Partner Violence as Child Maltreatment

Recent data show that the most common type of substantiated child maltreatment in Canada was children’s exposure to intimate partner violence.

Summary text:
What this research is about
Compared with the U.S. and Australia, Canada has the highest rate of child maltreatment investigations and substantiation (confirmed cases). In 2019, the most common type of substantiated child maltreatment in Canada was children's exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) .... where a child is exposed to violence between two intimate partners, at least one of whom is the child's caregiver. Exposure to IPV can take the form of direct witness of physical violence, indirect exposure to physical violence, or exposure to emotional violence.
....
What you need to know
In 2019, cases of child maltreatment in Canada that were most likely to be substantiated (confirmed) involved children's exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV). This type of child maltreatment has detrimental effects on the development and wellbeing of children.
....
Investigations involving children's exposure to IPV were six times more likely to be substantiated than other types of investigations. However, the majority of these cases were not transferred to receive ongoing child welfare services.
....
What the researchers found
....
Compared with other types of maltreatment investigations, cases of exposure to IPV were more likely to involve young children aged 0-3 years, caregivers with alcohol problems, families with few social supports, and households whose income was mainly from full-time work. In contrast, these cases were less likely to involve children with at least one child functioning concern. Several factors influenced the decision to transfer a case to child welfare services. These factors included the child's age and ethnicity (e.g., being Indigenous); the presence of at least one child functioning concern; caregivers with alcohol/problems or mental health concerns; families with few social supports; caregivers running out of money for basic necessities; and housing concerns.

 

[su5ie]

Going back to this MSM article from mid-January (BBM):

MSN

"Newly unsealed court documents revealed allegations of abuse in the months leading up to the disappearance of Jack and Lilly Sullivan, two Nova Scotia siblings missing since May 2025, multiple news outlets reported.

Malehya Brooks-Murray, the mother of the children, accused their stepfather Daniel Martell of being physically abusive toward her on multiple occasions, according to records [sic] cited by Global News."

If DM was abusive to his intimate partner -- as MBM alluded to previously and has now claimed and been documented in court

And DM has now been arrested for and charged with assault, forcible confinement and sexual assault, though his guilt has yet to be decided in a court of law, of course

And MBM was the one he abused and it occurred on Gairloch Rd and presumably at home and Lilly and Jack were witnesses to it or exposed to his abuse...

Regarding this aspect on the backstory of the case of Lilly and Jack's disappearance -- the circumstances of their home life before they went missing:

Referencing the following that is interesting to learn about recent research in Canada regarding intimate partner violence (IPV), which states children's exposure to IPV can be considered as "child maltreatment" (BBM).

Research Snapshot: Children’s Exposure to Intimate Partner Violence as Child Maltreatment - Vanier

The Vanier Institute of the Family is a national, independent, think tankdedicated to understanding families and family life in Canada.

vanierinstitute.ca

"Research Snapshot: Children’s Exposure to Intimate Partner Violence as Child Maltreatment

Recent data show that the most common type of substantiated child maltreatment in Canada was children’s exposure to intimate partner violence.

Summary text:
What this research is about
Compared with the U.S. and Australia, Canada has the highest rate of child maltreatment investigations and substantiation (confirmed cases). In 2019, the most common type of substantiated child maltreatment in Canada was children's exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) .... where a child is exposed to violence between two intimate partners, at least one of whom is the child's caregiver. Exposure to IPV can take the form of direct witness of physical violence, indirect exposure to physical violence, or exposure to emotional violence.
....
What you need to know
In 2019, cases of child maltreatment in Canada that were most likely to be substantiated (confirmed) involved children's exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV). This type of child maltreatment has detrimental effects on the development and wellbeing of children.
....
Investigations involving children's exposure to IPV were six times more likely to be substantiated than other types of investigations. However, the majority of these cases were not transferred to receive ongoing child welfare services.
....
What the researchers found
....
Compared with other types of maltreatment investigations, cases of exposure to IPV were more likely to involve young children aged 0-3 years, caregivers with alcohol problems, families with few social supports, and households whose income was mainly from full-time work. In contrast, these cases were less likely to involve children with at least one child functioning concern. Several factors influenced the decision to transfer a case to child welfare services. These factors included the child's age and ethnicity (e.g., being Indigenous); the presence of at least one child functioning concern; caregivers with alcohol/problems or mental health concerns; families with few social supports; caregivers running out of money for basic necessities; and housing concerns.

Well the last paragraph would make a lot of sense in this case as to why cps became involved and imo it wasn't solely because the kids struggled to keep up with their peers as DM spouted on numerous occasions. He may have been truthful on one aspect but he held back on the other reasons because they would fall firmly at his feet and after trying so hard to maintain is innocent stance he couldn't very well take responsibility for at least some of the reason cps made a visit to the home

 

[BCSleuth]

I think previous poster was saying that she didn’t call because he said to wait but then called the moment he left because she was safe to

imo Most people don’t just try meth. It’s not a casual have fun drug

Thanks. The kids did have a little "fort" made of branches a little ways into the woods. It would make sense to check it before calling 911.

I always found it a little odd how, in the interview she did, she said, "And I instantly just called 911. I just had the instinct I needed to call."

 

[seasideForest]

After , he states in one of his interviews buried in pages and pages back that he was doing an anger management course , parenting course and attending narcotics anonymous to clear his name for cps .

At the time this was revealed a number of posters and I debated if casual occasional drug use would warrant attending NA or would only addicts with uncontrollable drug use attend .

RSBMFF
Iirc from my time in 12 Step groups, the attendee themselves decides whether their use of the substance or their behaviour is bad enough and or causing them enough suffering for them to be in the 12 Step programme. So occasional drug use could be enough. There will be ex drug-users in NA as well, doing steps 10 thru 12, not just addicts with uncontrollable usage.

Iirc attending for reasons other than to get dry, clean, sane so like to prove to cps you're a good enough parent wouldn't count as being an adequate reason to go to meetings or indeed adequate to get or stay dry, clean etc, but otoh they wouldn't turn somebody like that away. The programme is open to anyone who wants to heal.

All IMO and IIRC

 

[Bigditch]

After , he states in one of his interviews buried in pages and pages back that he was doing an anger management course , parenting course and attending narcotics anonymous to clear his name for cps .

At the time this was revealed a number of posters and I debated if casual occasional drug use would warrant attending NA or would only addicts with uncontrollable drug use attend .

While DM didn't exactly state a specific timing of his attendance it was stated in relation to him proving his innocence and willingness to cooperate so I surmised from the context that he had only just begun these courses and attending NA. Which would therefore be after the kids went missing but maybe other posters may recall differently

NA like AA or CA is voluntary. People supporting people with addiction issues to help them stay clean. I'm not sure if Children's Aid can make a person attend programs, although they can probably force them into treatment (a 90 day facility) or the person runs the risk of losing their kids. This of course would be monitored by having to submit to drug testing.

 

[Fabled Automatic]

imo Most people don’t just try meth. It’s not a casual have fun drug

I can't speak for most, however, I personally know or have known a number of people who tried it casually, not habitually. It's definitely a "party drug" to some. According to a study done by the CDC about half of users had use disorder.

I only say this to point out that many of us have an idea of what an addict looks like and sometimes in real life they don't fit that mold. Conversely, others use drugs recreationally but may not qualify as "addicts" by the definition of it being a disorder.

I have no way of knowing whether Daniel is an addict, but it's possible his use wasn't chronic or habitual (regular) and his attendance of a program is required by CPS. Or, he could have a use disorder.

 

[Fabled Automatic]

NA like AA or CA is voluntary. People supporting people with addiction issues to help them stay clean. I'm not sure if Children's Aid can make a person attend programs

It's a voluntary agreement between the parent and CPS if charges/court isn't involved. Once/if the court becomes involved it can be mandated.

Many families who become involved with child protection services do so without court proceedings being commenced, through temporary care agreements (in which children are placed in short-term foster care with the written agreement of the parents), voluntary agreements (in which the parents agree that while the child will remain in their care they will meet certain conditions, such as substance abuse treatment

https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/fl-lf/famil/fv-vf/p5.html?utm_source

 

[Serononin]

I can't speak for most, however, I personally know or have known a number of people who tried it casually, not habitually. It's definitely a "party drug" to some. According to a study done by the CDC about half of users had use disorder.

I only say this to point out that many of us have an idea of what an addict looks like and sometimes in real life they don't fit that mold. Conversely, others use drugs recreationally but may not qualify as "addicts" by the definition of it being a disorder.

I have no way of knowing whether Daniel is an addict, but it's possible his use wasn't chronic or habitual (regular) and his attendance of a program is required by CPS. Or, he could have a use disorder.

I don't have the link to hand I'm afraid, but a while back MBM was reported to have said (I think to a family member, who subsequently told a journalist) that DM had "concealed a drug problem from her for the first year of their relationship". It's also been said that "meth use in the home" was the reason members of M's family initially accused D of having something to do with the children's disappearance

 

[Lexiintoronto]

^^ Just adding a source to the post above.

Summary of this paylocked article where MBM’s grandmother mentions abusive behaviour by DM and that MBM told her he hid a drug addiction problem from her for a year.

Months after Nova Scotia children vanished, a clearer picture emerges of their lives before their disappearance

There are still few answers about missing siblings Jack and Lilly Sullivan, but trauma and stigma have left their families and community farther apart

www.theglobeandmail.com

The setting was described: a very rural area, and a cellular dead zone. A hamlet of 100 people. Several abandoned mineshafts and a train that passes by once a day, sounding its horn.



-pregnant with Daniel’s child, Malehya and the children needed a place to live 2 years ago, so the step-grandmother invited them to live in her trailer. The step-grandmother then moved into a camper on her property as the children were too loud.

-the trailer is described as chaotic and rundown, with holes, tarps and clutter.
-outside the partially fenced in backyard, over a steep embankment was a fort where the children played. [My note: the G & M included a photo of toys dotting the forest in that area, and my question would be whether it was easy to watch the children unless you were up over that embankment with them.]



-Daniel said he saw Lilly pop in and out of the bedroom several times that morning they disappeared and at around 9:40 am he and Malehya became concerned because they couldn’t hear the children. Malehya called the police at 10:00 am.



-it was one of the largest searches in NS’s history. Scrutiny revealed that all was not well inside the trailer.



-the article describes what was searched on the property, including a suitcase in the middle of the yard and a dryer outside on the property.



-Malehya texted paternal grandmother Belynda that she didn’t expect that the children would run off. She later messaged her saying she believed they were abducted.



-the article quotes the radio chatter where an officer says that family found a blanket that Malehya confirmed belonged to Lilly. K9s were dispatched to the area, and the RCMP seized the blanket. The blanket was torn and wrapped around the bottom branches of a spruce tree. It was found less than a kilometre from their home, off Lansdowne Road, the road where Daniel’s father and uncles live. [My note: the article doesn’t specifically say whose property it was found on.] Daniel initially told the RCMP that it was NOT Lilly’s blanket.



-the article describes Daniel’s father’s bungalow, cluttered property and the RCMP banging on his door in the early morning hours to search it. He also has an old junk-filled log cabin and several rundown campers on the property. [My note: I’ve lived in the province for about 8 years and have never seen these type of properties with so many inexplicable out-buildings and dilapidated campers.]



-paternal grandmother Belynda says she had never been to the trailer until the children disappeared, but had passed it many times when driving to Halifax. She was surprised by how cluttered and unclean the kitchen and entire property was, believing Malehya to be a neat and clean person.



- Belynda asked Malehya what the children may have been drawn to, and what they may have been interested in doing when they disappeared, but Malehya said she didn’t know. Belynda searched the nearby woods until nightfall and considered sleeping in her car to resume the search the next morning.



-Gairloch Road is described as remote and few people have reason to drive on it. An opportunistic abduction seemed unlikely. Daniel and Malehya said the children would go off with anyone. Daniel said if they were offered food or water from a stranger, they’d go off with them.



-in the late afternoon on Saturday (the second day of the search), Malehya and Daniel’s family clashed. Malehya’s family confronted the possible issue of meth use in the home, and suggested Daniel was responsible for the disappearance. Some of the family were ordered off the property by Daniel’s mother.



-the scene where Malehya left the RCMP update during day 2 was discussed. Malehya became upset as the RCMP updated her on the areas that had been searched. She said she wasn’t feeling well and left to sit in the back of a waiting ambulance, sobbing. Her infant daughter and mother were with her. Daniel asked to speak to her alone, but her mother stood in front of her. Daniel told her to get the —— out of there. Her mother, Malehya and daughter then left in the mother’s car. Malehya then blocked him on social media and they have not seen each other since that day.



-When Belynda learned that Malehya left, it troubled her. She felt Malehya would only leave if she knew the children weren’t coming back.



-Daniel was also upset that Malehya left. He said he was the only person there for the children. He had been the only person that could control, feed and generally take care of them—not Malehya. He said he put the children to bed every night. He recalled what they did on the evening before they went missing, but not what time the children went to sleep.



-a neighbour reported to the RCMP and the G & M that there was strange activity during the night before the disappearance. A loud 5-speed vehicle was heard going back and forth to the trailer about 6 times between midnight and 5 am. They believe it was the same vehicle each time.



-abandoned mine shafts have been searched, and the police have said they plan to search more of them.



-Daniel told the G & M on May 5th that the pink blanket found did not belong to Lilly. He later changed his story and said that blanket had been in his trash and had been planted in the woods. He also added that two of his sweaters went missing after the children disappeared.



-the CPS interaction prior to the disappearance was discussed. The G & M reported that CPS responds to allegations of abuse or potential abuse, or when a child’s welfare is threatened. An unidentified school board employee told the G & M that the children were often dirty and not dressed properly for the weather. School staff provided them with clothes. Jack was photographed with a black eye in September and also had one on a school trip in December (the G & M printed the school photo of him with a black eye in December.)



-Daniel said Jack had black eyes many times, caused by playing and one time by Lilly.



-Daniel told the G & M that CPS became involved because of developmental delays in the children and they were scheduled to be tested for autism when they disappeared. He declined to comment further.



-Daniel said that Lilly had a black eye when she disappeared. The day before she and Jack went missing, Daniel said she injured herself while playing with a toy car.



-the family’s financial pressures were discussed. Daniel’s work hours had been cut. He hadn’t filed his taxes by the April 30th deadline, which prevented Malehya from receiving the children’s baby bonus money (approximately $1900 per month.) Malehya had also stopped receiving child support from Lilly and Jack’s biological father as he was out of work.



-Malehya told Belynda that she had never wanted to live at the trailer and wanted out, as Daniel was controlling.



-Malehya told her paternal grandmother that she had been scared with Daniel, and was not able to come and go as she wanted. He held her down to grab her phone. Malehya told her that Daniel concealed a drug addiction issue during the first year they were together.



-Daniel didn’t respond to those specific allegations, but said he didn’t have drug issues. However, he contradicted himself by saying he had used a variety of drugs and was now attending Narcotics Anonymous meetings, as well as parenting and anger management, and substance abuse courses (to name a few).



-the discussions on social media were reported. Daniel said the rumours are impacting his daily life. However, the G & M found that one social media account connected to Daniel was active in these discussions and fuelling the rumours that the children were abducted.



-Belynda says that in the photos she saw of the children taken in the last two years, they looked thin, malnourished and their lips were dry and cracked. She said that they all failed the children.

 

[Bigditch]

^^ Just adding a source to the post above.

Summary of this paylocked article where MBM’s grandmother mentions abusive behaviour by DM and that MBM told her he hid a drug addiction problem from her for a year.

Months after Nova Scotia children vanished, a clearer picture emerges of their lives before their disappearance

There are still few answers about missing siblings Jack and Lilly Sullivan, but trauma and stigma have left their families and community farther apart

www.theglobeandmail.com

Thank you so much for posting. Great recap of events.

 

[agent902]

So what are you getting at? She phoned 911 too quickly or not quickly enough?

My point wasn't about her. It was about HIM. Why would you tell someone to wait on calling 911? What did you need to check or do first?

But beyond that, the dynamic of her feeling the need to ask him. "*Should* we call?" Not, "oh god we need to call 911". It's a subtle thing to read too much into, but I think it potentially demonstrates a pattern of needing to defer to Daniel about decisions.

But in calling regardless of his wishes, I think it demonstrates that Malehya was (perhaps even subconsciously?) suspicious of Daniel. She took the opportunity to call in his absence, maybe hoping to be able to speak more freely.

While listening to the search on scanner, there was a heaviness of things unsaid. One thing that was spoken in very laden tones was the assertions that "family INSISTS they would NEVER cross the road, under any circumstances, so there's definitely no need to search in that direction". The searchers were clearly communicating some polite skepticism of family narrative during the very first day of searching. Same with their tone around the reported timeline for last hearing them.

It's that same special tone used by doctors and social workers. "So and so reports that..."

They arrived on scene, and knew right away that there may be some "unreliable narrator" potential.