Current 4yo Boy Missing Yunta SA * Police Declare a Major Crime

[Curious Clues]

 

[CodyRose]

Why would a non-family member go out of their way to assist in a serious crime? What would be their motivation?

Misplaced mateship loyality perhaps

 

[Poppy Penny]

View attachment 2535124

View attachment 2535124

What a beautiful little boy.

 

[CodyRose]

Maybe they thought the police would never get a warrant to do a more in-depth search inside the house

Pure arrogance

 

[CodyRose]

Maybe Jess and Josh believed Gus just wandered off on the property and with police suspecting foul play are now putting a statement out, in case there’s other factors involved and or he was removed from the property.

The guy (?Jason O'Connell) that searched for Gus with Josh said very early on, that he believed after searching, that Gus was not on Oak Park .

 

[CodyRose]

To this point the police have said that no suspicion has fallen on the parents. They have however pointed to one of the grandparents.

Interestingly, the parents have been strong in their appreciation of the police and SES etc in their statement, and are 'pleading with the person who may know what happened, or anyone who may have heard or seen something to come forward'.

I find that wording interesting in the circumstances.

IMO Smells of assistance of some kind by a third party.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Why would the parents release a new photo and video of Gus now? But not when he first disappeared, which might have been useful in finding him.

It could be that they were being controlled by the person responsible for his disappearance.

 

[redhotdip]

Too true and I`m sorry to say this very delayed release of a different photo and video footage of Gus on a bike poses more questions. Sorry, because we all know of cases where people in close proximity to missing loved ones were mistakenly under suspicion and I really hope that Gus` parents have no knowledge whatsoever of what happened.

However, it is fair to ask why now they`re Asking for help and releasing a clear photo and footage that could jog somebody`s memory/assist the case generally? Why not before when that is usually the first step in a situation like this especially as the new photo and the footage the public never saw can not be called intrusive or unsuitable?

If neither of them are implicated in the wall of silence from Oak Park and what led to it, why would you not release these images when the news became public as often it is public information that leads to missing children/teens/older people being found, alive or deceased? The trail went cold months ago. IMO Gus` mother must know more and it`s not implausible that she assisted in making a timeline that didn`t happen.

Maybe because when Gus went missing under the two more likely scenarios that the police were probably considering at the time there was little likelihood Gus was moving around anywhere he might be seen and recognized by the general public. He was either lost on the vast property or something had happened within those family members. In neither case would publishing photographs be of much use.

 

[Percel]

While there is no substantial proof at the present we know of that will lead to somebody being charged with Gus` murder or manslaughter and detained pre-trial, I don`t think it`s beyond possibility that one or both of the parents know what happened.

An accident covered up because your own family member/s did it does have a difference from covering up a murder by a family member or members. People react differently to very sudden and tragic circumstances and the family dynamics at play can include financial realities such as inheritances which can influence complicity. From what is known, the grandparents own those properties so the significance of that wealth could come into play.

Potentially there is so much to lose in this case if the family members who were not responsible know what happened - a parent or parents facing a murder/manslaughter trial with all the notoriety attached to it including sending the police and other helpers on a false trail, wasting millions of dollars of police resources and time when there are already problems with getting police to crime scenes in the urban areas because of under-staffing.

Other charges for the non responsible family member/s on being an accessory/accessories after the fact, etc.

I know some will flatly oppose any theories like that and I hope these are just theories that will be proved wrong. But sadly in missing family member cases, it`s not unknown for even parents to cover up a crime they didn`t do for a number of reasons and one of these is family ties.

Seriously late to the party

 

[Inspector Small]

While there is no substantial proof at the present we know of that will lead to somebody being charged with Gus` murder or manslaughter and detained pre-trial, I don`t think it`s beyond possibility that one or both of the parents know what happened.

An accident covered up because your own family member/s did it does have a difference from covering up a murder by a family member or members. People react differently to very sudden and tragic circumstances and the family dynamics at play can include financial realities such as inheritances which can influence complicity. From what is known, the grandparents own those properties so the significance of that wealth could come into play.

Potentially there is so much to lose in this case if the family members who were not responsible know what happened - a parent or parents facing a murder/manslaughter trial with all the notoriety attached to it including sending the police and other helpers on a false trail, wasting millions of dollars of police resources and time when there are already problems with getting police to crime scenes in the urban areas because of under-staffing.

Other charges for the non responsible family member/s on being an accessory/accessories after the fact, etc.

I know some will flatly oppose any theories like that and I hope these are just theories that will be proved wrong. But sadly in missing family member cases, it`s not unknown for even parents to cover up a crime they didn`t do for a number of reasons and one of these is family ties.

There is no reason to cover up an accident unless the child had access to a firearm.

 

[31550]

Maybe they thought the police would never get a warrant to do a more in-depth search inside the house

More likely just an oversight (the silencer I mean). One seemingly innocuous item among various firearm paraphernalia. Possibly didn't even know or remember it was there, or know it was illegal. Maybe too busy concealing other evidence to worry about a silencer which probably had nothing to do with Gus.

 

[31550]

There is no reason to cover up an accident unless the child had access to a firearm.

There could be a myriad of reasons to conceal an 'accident'. Or it may be more than an accident.

 

[Lady O]

More likely just an oversight (the silencer I mean). One seemingly innocuous item among various firearm paraphernalia. Possibly didn't even know or remember it was there, or know it was illegal. Maybe too busy concealing other evidence to worry about a silencer which probably had nothing to do with Gus.

Probably just wanted to get hold of the gun for forensics.

 

[Wallace52]

Too true and I`m sorry to say this very delayed release of a different photo and video footage of Gus on a bike poses more questions. Sorry, because we all know of cases where people in close proximity to missing loved ones were mistakenly under suspicion and I really hope that Gus` parents have no knowledge whatsoever of what happened.

However, it is fair to ask why now they`re Asking for help and releasing a clear photo and footage that could jog somebody`s memory/assist the case generally? Why not before when that is usually the first step in a situation like this especially as the new photo and the footage the public never saw can not be called intrusive or unsuitable?

If neither of them are implicated in the wall of silence from Oak Park and what led to it, why would you not release these images when the news became public as often it is public information that leads to missing children/teens/older people being found, alive or deceased? The trail went cold months ago. IMO Gus` mother must know more and it`s not implausible that she assisted in making a timeline that didn`t happen.

It might be part of a police strategy? I’m only saying that because an appeal 5/6 months later after the disappearance is completely pointless. IMO

 

[Wallace52]

Probably just wanted to get hold of the gun for forensics.

True true. But the charges pertained to a silencer, not a gun.

 

[the_navyblue]

Maybe because when Gus went missing under the two more likely scenarios that the police were probably considering at the time there was little likelihood Gus was moving around anywhere he might be seen and recognized by the general public. He was either lost on the vast property or something had happened within those family members. In neither case would publishing photographs be of much use.

That`s logical on one hand - but on the other hand, when children/teenagers/adults go missing it`s usual for identifying photos/footage to be released early on in the situation.

From the jump regardless of the remote location, there was a feeling that the residents of Oak Park did not want any involvement from anybody outside themselves apart from the father of Gus who wasn`t living there at the time.

In any situation like this, the option of somebody abducting a child always has to be looked at regardless of the remoteness of the location. Releasing a clear photo and video footage would serve the purpose of alerting anybody who might have seen a child like Gus passing through the area with anybody.

I am not criticising the police at all because the low-key approach was the right one for a while and those who are not involved directly in the investigation don`t have access to all the investigative details.

However, it`s a pity that motorbikes etc were not taken at the time to test for DNA etc - the emphasis on a disappearance with no familial involvement despite the unlikely elements of Gus going away so far and so quickly if the family members` stories are to be believed, created a subtle pressure for hard questions not to be asked.

Of course the police were not going to be giving away suspicions they might have had early on but DNA testing could have been done on objects etc that could have been removed from the property at that time.

 

[Underarrest_]

I don’t understand the relevance of more photos being released for the public.
Is one photo enough for public to identify a child? (although it did take a few days for the first photo to be released.) Taking into account that Gus might look completely different, shaved head, etc if anyone was to see several photos.
Is the purpose to release more photos to humanise Gus? Hope that a perpetrator softens? (If that’s possible.)

 

[31550]

I don’t understand the relevance of more photos being released for the public.
Is one photo enough for public to identify a child? (although it did take a few days for the first photo to be released.) Taking into account that Gus might look completely different, shaved head, etc if anyone was to see several photos.
Is the purpose to release more photos to humanise Gus? Hope that a perpetrator softens? (If that’s possible.)

Possibly the family gave in to media pressure. Possibly they were acting on advice that it wasn't good 'optics' for them to stay so secretive and privacy-driven. Perhaps releasing more photographs supports the family image they are attempting to convey to the public.

 

[Run n Spread]

This latest release is to put pressure on the grandparents to cooperate/turn the other in imr working on a theory they've had outside help/spoken to someone else
The reason no photos were released is Gus went missing in the middle of nowhere with no one else around.
Police didn't want to waste time following false tip offs.

 

[MP_]

This latest release is to put pressure on the grandparents to cooperate/turn the other in imr working on a theory they've had outside help/spoken to someone else
The reason no photos were released is Gus went missing in the middle of nowhere with no one else around.
Police didn't want to waste time following false tip offs.

Yeah I reckon it’s aimed at guilting the perpetrators.

 

[CodyRose]

There is no reason to cover up an accident unless the child had access to a firearm.

The feminizing hormones taken by transgender females can cause symptoms such as irritability, emotional intensity, and mood swings.

 

[craffles]

Said it before and will say it again. Cops have absolutely **** all and are trying every trick in the book and failing miserably.

 

[MP_]

The feminizing hormones taken by transgender females can cause symptoms such as irritability, emotional intensity, and mood swings.

So do periods

 

[Lady O]

True true. But the charges pertained to a silencer, not a gun.

Gus's DNA or fingerprints.

 

[dc3]

Yeah I reckon it’s aimed at guilting the perpetrators.

Yep , just as the general public and even this thread was going cold the realese of the new photo gets poor guys front of mine again

The perpetrator won’t be resting easy

Would SAPOL have access to that they might have been typing into google ?