New witness statements in Jack and Lilly Sullivan’s disappearance are unverified: RCMP

Lilly, left, and Jack Sullivan were reporting missing from their home in Lansdowne Station, N.S., on May 2, 2025. Photo by Contributed /Truro NewsArticle contentA few slim details released by the RCMP about their investigation into the disappearance of Jack and Lilly Sullivan have rekindled online speculation.THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY.Subscribe now to access this story and more:Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsSUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES.Subscribe or sign in to your account to continue your reading experience.Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsRegister to unlock more articles.Create an account or sign in to continue your reading experience.Access additional stories every monthShare your thoughts and join the conversation in our commenting communityGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an AccountorArticle contentBut the newly redacted sections of RCMP warrants don’t provide any answers to what happened to the two Pictou County children who were reported missing by their mother, Malehya Brooks-Murray, on May 2.Article contentArticle contentAlso, witness statements contained in them are not corroborated by other evidence.Article contentArticle contentIn response to a court challenge by the Canadian Press, the Globe and Mail and CBC, in September the RCMP unsealed added sections of the warrant documents, which lay out much of their extensive investigation up to late May.Article contentWith a court date looming where the media was going to seek more redactions be lifted, the RCMP voluntarily lifted more (but not all) of the redactions last week.Article contentThe formerly redacted informationArticle contentThey include statements by two people who live near the rural property in Lansdowne Station that Jack, 4, and Lilly, 6, shared with their mother, step-father Daniel Martell and his mother, Janie McKenzie.Article contentTwo weeks after Jack and Lilly’s disappearance, one nearby resident told police he heard a vehicle go and come from the property “five or six times” during the night before the children were reported missing.Article contentAnother area resident told police that at about 1:30 a.m. on May 2 he heard a car on Highway 289, which runs past Jack and Lilly’s home, then turn around by the railway tracks near the area of Gairloch Road and Lansdowne Station Road. The vehicle stopped making noise for a few minutes, then headed on toward Lairg Road.Article contentArticle contentWide public scrutinyArticle contentSpeculation in chat rooms and among self-declared sleuths operating YouTube channels feeding into an international obsession with the case is that this contradicts the version of events told police by both Martell and Brooks- Murray — that the children were put to bed at about 9 p.m. on May 1 and that no-one left the house until the morning.Article contentThe children were last seen in public the previous afternoon, May 1, based on security footage from a Pictou County Dollarama.Article contentThe RCMP followed up on the statements, looking at security and hunting camera footage obtained from properties in the area.Article content“Investigators conducted a thorough review of surveillance footage from the Gairloch Road area during the early hours of May 2 and found no evidence of any vehicle activity at that time,” reads a statement from the RCMP.Article content“As such, no driver has been identified, and the presence of a vehicle has not been substantiated as a key element in the investigation.”