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

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you go by the globe timeline it was right after major crimes got involved that the mother left.

MAY 3, 2025

Ms. Brooks-Murray and Mr. Martell attend a briefing at the search and rescue headquarters on nearby Lansdowne Station Road. Mr. Martell said Ms. Brooks-Murray leaves midway through the update to sit in the back of an ambulance. She departs with her mother and Mr. Martell said he hasn’t seen her since. She cuts off contact with him after this.


It is then not until the 6th when Martell has his 4 hour interview.

The next day, the 7th the RCMP ask for Martells phone. Then also on the 7th Brooks-Murray’s mother tells the globe the police instructed them to not speak to the police.

Then the 8th is when the globe is told Brooks-Murray is no longer in a relationship with Martell. They are told that by a women who answers Brooks-Murray’s phone meaning RCMP doesn’t have it (they could’ve copied it and gave it back already of course)

The 8th is also the day that Martell is goes to CPS

MAY 3 above BBM
As usual, the actual happenings are puzzling. Why did MBM leave to go sit in the back of the ambulance midway through the update???. Was her mother in there (she departs with her mother) and the ambulance drove off? Where was baby M?
 
Given the statements police have made about the search, I'm confident that they're certain the children left the trailer by some means.
I've only heard them say "the children are believed to have wandered away from their family home on Gairloch Road in Lansdowne Station, N.S., about 20 kilometres southwest of New Glasgow."

Which doesn't necessarily mean that's what they believe. Moo.

They have stated they don't believe an abduction took place and they have not ruled out that the case is suspicious.

Is there a specific statement that makes you confident?

Personally, I don't believe the kids are still in the trailer, but we really only have the parents word. With no security footage, witnesses, etc. nothing can really be certain at this point (based on what's been released to the public).

Jmo
 
MAY 3 above BBM
As usual, the actual happenings are puzzling. Why did MBM leave to go sit in the back of the ambulance midway through the update???. Was her mother in there (she departs with her mother) and the ambulance drove off? Where was baby M?
This was the same day she did her on camera interview.
Then the same day
Major crimes becomes involved

Later the same day the following also occurs but we don’t know in which order

- She leaves the briefing and the area
- Martell claims his mother kicked people off the property for accusing him. - so was that after she left? Did some of her family stick around and that’s who was involved in the argument?

Martell also said in a different interview that he didn’t know why MBM left.
 
She didn’t go to the hospital. She left the first debrief and sat in the ambulance until her mother arrived and she departed with her mother. I can see the Globe and Mail has quoted the father via the link description, but I cannot access the article.

I’m not asking for info “about" bio dad. Do you recall Kyron Horman’s case? All parents, including step parents were onsite, working together, and in front of the media. If my kids were with my ex and wife and they went missing, I certainly wouldn’t be sitting passively by somewhere waiting for word. I’d be onsite looking for my kids.
And the RCMP didn’t involve the step-dad in the press conference.
 
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Can you read this? https://archive.ph/n0LUn

Yes, thank you. It’s the source of something I recall reading earlier (pasted below). So if in fact LE is attempting to identify cellphones that can be traced to the yard, would that not be indicative of investigating the possibility of an abduction?

“RCMP search the dense forest behind the home in a helicopter. Plainclothes investigators arrive again to speak with Mr. Martell. “Basically at this point they just want to look at any tech that could help match up any phones that came into the yard,” he said.”
 
A few things
- one smaller window is covered with plastic
- the woodpile suggests the mobile home is heated by a wood stove. But as long and narrow is not conducive to heat distribution, it must get very cold at the back on winter/chilly days.
- there’s a newer Nissan parked to the right. No licence plates indicates it’s unregistered. Just odd, if the couple couldn’t afford to repair the furnace or fix the window why not sell the Nissan that’s not being driven?
All in all, it’s not surprising that Lily might’ve had a cough :(

Source Two Nova Scotia children are missing. Here’s a timeline of key events since the siblings vanished (sorry this link has become locked again)
View attachment 585241

In Nova Scotia the plates belong to the person and not the vehicle. So there might have been a legitimate reason for not having the plates on the new vehicle yet.

"Nova Scotia Licence Plates are assigned to the applicant, not to the vehicle itself. So, when you get a different vehicle, you can take your licence plate off the old vehicle and put it on the new vehicle. (However, within 30 days, you have to get a new Certificate of Registration and a new Vehicle Permit from the Registry of Motor Vehicles."
 
Yes, thank you. It’s the source of something I recall reading earlier (pasted below). So if in fact LE is attempting to identify cellphones that can be traced to the yard, would that not be indicative of investigating the possibility of an abduction?

“RCMP search the dense forest behind the home in a helicopter. Plainclothes investigators arrive again to speak with Mr. Martell. “Basically at this point they just want to look at any tech that could help match up any phones that came into the yard,” he said.”
I mentioned it before but I wouldn’t give any credibility to the reasons Martell says police are doing things. They always appear to be reasons that distance the case from him whether he means to or not.
 
In Nova Scotia the plates belong to the person and not the vehicle. So there might have been a legitimate reason for not having the plates on the new vehicle yet.

"Nova Scotia Licence Plates are assigned to the applicant, not to the vehicle itself. So, when you get a different vehicle, you can take your licence plate off the old vehicle and put it on the new vehicle. (However, within 30 days, you have to get a new Certificate of Registration and a new Vehicle Permit from the Registry of Motor Vehicles."


Could well be someone else's vehicle
 
Yes, thank you. It’s the source of something I recall reading earlier (pasted below). So if in fact LE is attempting to identify cellphones that can be traced to the yard, would that not be indicative of investigating the possibility of an abduction?

“RCMP search the dense forest behind the home in a helicopter. Plainclothes investigators arrive again to speak with Mr. Martell. “Basically at this point they just want to look at any tech that could help match up any phones that came into the yard,” he said.”
Except only Mr. Martell is telling us what the investigators are doing.

They have not announced they're looking for other phones in the yard.

Moo
 
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed> ... surprised by decisions that were made when two children were quiet for a while. Mom assumed they were outside and instantly called 911. Posted upthread, step-dad jump in his car and drove around. When he came home, he looked around the yard and surrounding area.

It's all backwards from what I would expect. That is, first search the house, then search the yard, then check the little cabins, then check with the other two people living mere feet from the back door. Then drive a short distance to see whether the children were walking down the road. Finally, as a couple, and after exhausting all possibilities, make the joint decision to call 911.

Actually, just walking from the bedroom to the glass door and no doubt calling the kids would form the initial search which might have taken ten seconds. If they didn't get an answer in the yard, I would call 911 just like this mother. I wouldn't wait while I thought the kids might be in the bush. I would know that if they got 10 metres into the woods, they would get lost.
 
Except only Mr. Martell is telling us what the investigators are doing.

They have not announced they're looking for other phones in the yard.

Moo

Nobody else is telling us anything. I would never expect the RCMP to announce specific details of their investigation but the fact Daniel has mentioned it is interesting. If anything it indicates the investigation is broadening in scope and IMO that’s positive information.
 
Snipped...
...According to the Missing Kids database in Canada, more than 50,000 children are reported missing each year. In 2018, 62 percent of the kids reported missing were found within a day, while 92 percent were located roughly a week after they were reported missing.

 
@Andromeda Does this help? Map of First Nations in Nova Scotia | Government of Nova Scotia

I think the children were mentioned further back as being members of Sipekne'katik Nation. MOO
I don't know enough about it to know whether they're on Sipekne'katik territory tho.
Yes. I posted a link later in this thread from either CBC or MSN saying the kids are part of the Sipekne’katik community via their maternal grandfather. But I there were no maps linked and I personally couldn’t tell whether the home falls within the community. All that to say, the RCMP has been on this case since dot and, the Sipekne’katik community have responded via their social media.
 
Nobody else is telling us anything. I would never expect the RCMP to announce specific details of their investigation but the fact Daniel has mentioned it is interesting. If anything it indicates the investigation is broadening in scope and IMO that’s positive information.
RCMP did actually state the investigation is broad and they will not give up.

It's Daniel that adds bits of info like "they know I'm telling the truth" and I would take those with a hefty grain of salt, jmo.

Moo
 
ADMIN NOTE:

New members need to read TOS (aka The Rules, linked in my signature), and long term members need to refresh their understanding of them.

from: Rules - Copyright Rules

Copyright infringement is a serious legal matter.

No more than 10% of an article may be copied and a link to the source must be provided to give credit to the author.

Posts that copy more than 10% will be modsnipped of all quoted material with only the link remaining. Posts without a link will be removed entirely.

If you copy an image from another site, you must provide a link to the original source or the picture will be removed.

Do not cut and paste information from pay sites or password protected sites.


from: Rules - Copyright Rules

PAYWALLED ARTICLES:

Members may link to a paywalled article so that others who wish to pay for the article can read it. However, even if they have paid for it, members can not screenshot/copy/paste, or quote directly any content within the article. It is not only a violation of Websleuths TOS (aka The Rules), it is a violation of copyright law.

Members may very briefly paraphrase (in their own words) what the article is about or they can copy the Google hit summary to give an idea of what the article contains in the event people wish to pay for the article.

"Gifting" of paywalled articles is not allowed. The qualifying word is "paywalled". If an MSM or other source allows its subscribing members to share a gift article with a few of their friends, they do not mean you can post it on a website where thousands and thousands of potential paying subscribers can read it for free.


Please read the rules yourself and don't rely on other members to interpret them.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
4,072
Total visitors
4,182

Forum statistics

Threads
622,838
Messages
18,456,302
Members
240,179
Latest member
TawannaMic
Back
Top