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

[branmuffin]

I haven't read through the whole thread yet but I'm having a little problem with the narrative and the back story. I don't know if this has been mentioned but the first thing that stood to me was that both of these kids, according to the mom and the stepdad have undiagnosed autism. So, if they are undiagnosed what behaviors do they have to suspect that diagnosis? Have they been told that by the teachers? Any other family members? Their primary care physician? I think it matters because children, especially those with autism seem to have an affinity for water sources. I can't tell you how many missing children with autism end up in the water. The Middle River in Pictou County is about as close as you can get to Landsdowne Station. I hope that river, that can have the characteristics of a creek in certain places, has been searched by LE. I'm not sure what the snow melt was like in this part of Nova Scotia but it's possible what is usually a benign river could be moving swiftly in areas and higher on the banks. It flows north to Pictou Harbour then into the Northumberland Straight. There's a farm just north, northeast of Landsdowne Station that has two sizeable ponds on the property. I hope they have searched there.

 

[vls12345]

DM creating unnecessary sensationalism. It’s certainly never been reported by any reliable source the children were last seen near a road and that’s why DM can’t say who sighted them.

Neither do I recall this being stated during the PC - BBM (give it an hour or two and it will go whoosh!)
“MacKinnon added 'we're not packing up and we're not giving up', saying that all missing persons files remained 'suspicious until our investigation leads us to determine otherwise'.”

CBC also reported this statement.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/pictou-county-missing-children-lily-jack-sullivan-may-7-1.7528438

MacKinnon said all missing persons files "are treated as suspicious until our investigation leads us to determine otherwise."

 

[MistyWaters]

I'm well aware of what I stated. I stated that it is reportedly at least almost seven days - that we know of - since anyone else has seen the kids. Meaning, there are currently no public reports of anyone else having seen them since.

I stated nothing about them not having been seen as a fact. I simply pointed out that there are no reports of anyone besides the parents having seen them for a week - which I supported with an article three times.

Either you think I'm stating something I'm not, or you're choosing to get hung up on some perceived angle. Either way, you're free to disregard my statement if you don't like it. It's simply an observation based on the current publicly available information.

Wednesday, Thursday is at most two days, assuming they were in school on Tuesday. I don’t know how you’re calculating that we know of no one other than the parents who have seen the kids for seven days. I’m not hung up on any perceived angle, other than we try to post factual information here on WS so as not to create confusion or misinformation.

 

[Ontario Mom]

CBC also reported this statement.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/pictou-county-missing-children-lily-jack-sullivan-may-7-1.7528438

It makes complete sense that all missing person's files are considered suspicious.
People "going missing" is almost by definition, highly suspicious.

 

[MistyWaters]

CBC also reported this statement.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/pictou-county-missing-children-lily-jack-sullivan-may-7-1.7528438

Interesting. I don’t have the energy to listen to the PC once again but I’d think that statement as it stands discourages people from reporting missing persons. Why would anyone want to invite suspicion upon themselves by doing the right thing?

 

[Ontario Mom]

I haven't read through the whole thread yet but I'm having a little problem with the narrative and the back story. I don't know if this has been mentioned but the first thing that stood to me was that both of these kids, according to the mom and the stepdad have undiagnosed autism. So, if they are undiagnosed what behaviors do they have to suspect that diagnosis? Have they been told that by the teachers? Any other family members? Their primary care physician? I think it matters because children, especially those with autism seem to have an affinity for water sources. I can't tell you how many missing children with autism end up in the water. The Middle River in Pictou County is about as close as you can get to Landsdowne Station. I hope that river, that can have the characteristics of a creek in certain places, has been searched by LE. I'm not sure what the snow melt was like in this part of Nova Scotia but it's possible what is usually a benign river could be moving swiftly in areas and higher on the banks. It flows north to Pictou Harbour then into the Northumberland Straight. There's a farm just north, northeast of Landsdowne Station that has two sizeable ponds on the property. I hope they have searched there.

I'm unclear how someone might be a "little autistic" but either way, my best guess is that whatever Martell is conveying to the public he's already shared with LE looking for the kids. I presume the searchers are well trained and know that autistic kids tend to gravitate toward water.

 

[Fabled Automatic]

Wednesday, Thursday is at most two days, assuming they were in school on Tuesday. I don’t know how you’re calculating that we know of no one other than the parents who have seen the kids for seven days.

Their step-father stated the kids were not in school last Thursday, May 1. Today is Wednesday, May 7. That is seven days. There are currently no public reports of anyone having seen the kids since then. That's all I was stating. It's not that deep, and I'm going to leave it there.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Interesting. I don’t have the energy to listen to the PC once again but I’d think that statement as it stands discourages people from reporting missing persons. Why would anyone want to invite suspicion upon themselves by doing the right thing?

I think they mean the circumstances surrounding a person going missing is what's suspicious. Not the person reporting it.

 

[iamshadow21]

I'm unclear how someone might be a "little autistic" but either way, my best guess is that whatever Martell is conveying to the public he's already shared with LE looking for the kids. I presume the searchers are well trained and know that autistic kids tend to gravitate toward water.

It's just as silly as 'a little bit pregnant', IMO.

 

[Andreee]

Posted an hour ago by mainstream Canadian Press. MSN (not sure if this particular article already posted)

 

[Ontario Mom]

It's just as silly as 'a little bit pregnant', IMO.

I wouldn't call it silly since I'm not sure what he meant when he said that. He might have meant they exhibit slight autistic traits, but just doesn't have the verbal skills to say it that way.

I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt, either way.

 

[FansBlowing]

Hopefully, this "scaling back" of the search means they have some other solid leads to follow to find those kids.

 

[MistyWaters]

It makes complete sense that all missing person's files are considered suspicious.
People "going missing" is almost by definition, highly suspicious.

Off the top of my head I can think of missing people who are lost and wandering may or may not be suffering from a medical issue, attacked and injured or worse by another human or wild creature in an unknown location, vehicle run off the road, or kidnapped. None of that should be viewed with suspicion IMO, Only when there’s no indication the person actually ‘went missing’ should suspicion be raised that other circumstances (ie foul play) might be involved.
JMO

 

[realanastasia]

Their step-father stated the kids were not in school last Thursday, May 1. Today is Wednesday, May 7. That is seven days. There are currently no public reports of anyone having seen the kids since then. That's all I was stating. It's not that deep, and I'm going to leave it there.

Their school was not in session on Wednesday April 30--professional development day Calendar

 

[MistyWaters]

CBC also reporting it.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/pictou-county-missing-children-lily-jack-sullivan-may-7-1.7528438

“MacKinnon said all missing persons files "are treated as suspicious until our investigation leads us to determine otherwise." He said there have been no confirmed sightings of the children.

He said the active search is being scaled back, but "we're not packing up and we're not giving up."

"I want to assure you that our missing persons investigation continues," MacKinnon told reporters at an RCMP command centre set up near the children's home, about 25 kilometres southwest of New Glasgow.”

 

[Kaley Smith]

The RCMP calling it an investigation now says a lot.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Off the top of my head I can think of missing people who are lost and wandering may or may not be suffering from a medical issue, attacked and injured or worse by another human or wild creature in an unknown location, vehicle run off the road, or kidnapped. None of that should be viewed with suspicion IMO, Only when there’s no indication the person actually ‘went missing’ should suspicion be raised that other circumstances (ie foul play) might be involved.
JMO

I get what you're saying. If the word "suspicious" is being used in the sense that there is a great lack of facts or answers surrounding a person being missing, then it makes a lot more sense. Not that LE automatically assume someone's done something wrong, but that it's just a suspicious situation until they have all those facts & answers that they're looking for. Similar to how LE will almost always say they're not ruling anything out, until they have the facts to rule things out.

 

[TMich6811]

I would guess that by a little autistic they meant a level 1 vs level 3 diagnosis and not have the correct language to communicate that

 

[iamshadow21]

I would guess that by a little autistic they meant a level 1 vs level 3 diagnosis and not have the correct language to communicate that

There's no indication either child had a diagnosis, so it's not really possible to accurately assess what was meant. It could simply be that the children needed prompting to stay on task at school or had anxiety with transitions, which many children do at their age without coming close to meeting criteria for diagnosis for anything.

MOO

 

[Stunned]

Why haven't the children's teachers and friends of the family spoken out? Or have they and I missed it?