RCMP LOOKED FOR FOOTAGE AT STORE | LILLY AND JACK SULLIVAN
The behavior of Jack and Lily’s mother and stepfather has raised quite a few eyebrows. There are several red flags and inconsistencies that are hard to ignore. Many online sleuths are questioning whether Malia Brooks, the mother, has been watching videos online and adjusting her behavior based on what she sees.

All week, people have been asking: why would the mother of missing children shut down her Facebook page and stop talking about them, especially when social media is such a powerful tool to raise awareness and keep their names and faces in the public eye? Then suddenly, she reopened her page yesterday, and it remains active.

Meanwhile, the stepfather, Daniel Martell, continues to speak with the media and seems very eager to keep the case in the spotlight. He claims that his main goal is to find the children and bring them home. He says he is fully cooperating with the police and is willing to help in any way he can. He is absolutely adamant that he had nothing to do with Jack and Lily’s disappearance.

So, what are the police doing behind the scenes? Do they suspect foul play? When they called off the search, it felt strange—almost as if they knew something sinister had happened, but were waiting for solid evidence before making any arrests. The major crimes unit is now involved.

And now I’ve heard something I had to share with you all. It could mean that the mother and stepfather are being quietly investigated, and that foul play is, in fact, being considered. A Reddit user claims that the RCMP visited his workplace to obtain security footage from a front-facing camera directed toward a local store. Investigators reportedly believe that a financial transaction tied to one of the parents occurred at that store earlier in the week—at a time when the children were already absent from school but had not yet been reported missing.

The police hope the footage might capture a glimpse of Jack and Lily in the car. This suggests they suspect the children may have been missing well before the official report was made.

It really makes you wonder what’s happening behind the scenes—and whether we might be hearing news of an arrest very soon. 

Let’s start with the behavior of the parents.

Malia Brooks’ decision to take down her Facebook page shortly after the children were reported missing raised alarm bells immediately. Most parents in such devastating situations use every tool at their disposal to search for their missing children—especially social media. It’s how you get attention, raise tips, and keep people looking. Shutting down your online presence—during a crisis—is the opposite of what we usually see from frantic, heartbroken parents.

The fact that she’s now reopened her page, days later, has led many to speculate she might be watching the public reaction online and adjusting her behavior accordingly. It’s not proof of guilt, of course—but it suggests someone very aware of how they are being perceived, and possibly trying to correct that perception.

Then there’s Daniel Martell. His behavior is much more visible—he’s speaking to the media, reiterating that he wants the children home and that he had nothing to do with their disappearance. To some, this level of openness might be reassuring. To others, it feels performative—especially if there are inconsistencies in his timeline or behavior, as some have hinted.

People often say, “Look at what the parents do—not just what they say.” And in this case, what’s been done—removing social media accounts, inconsistent statements, lack of obvious distress—feels at odds with the gravity of the situation.

Then there’s what the RCMP is doing.

Calling off the large-scale search without a clear resolution is deeply suspicious to many. Typically, when young children vanish, the search intensifies until there is some definitive lead. But here, it was scaled back significantly, despite no public announcement of a discovery or a shift in theory.

Enter the Major Crimes Unit. Their involvement is telling. They’re not the team you bring in for a wilderness disappearance. You bring them in when you believe a crime has occurred. And yet, authorities have been tight-lipped, offering very little to the public since that decision.

Now we’re learning—through alleged sources on platforms like Reddit—that police may be collecting surveillance footage tied to the parents’ movements before the children were officially reported missing. That is huge. If accurate, it would mean the RCMP are looking at a potential timeline where the children were already dead or missing days before anyone called 911. That sort of delay is often a key detail in child homicide cases—it means the family may have been covering something up, or at the very least, avoiding police until it was unavoidable.

The detail about the RCMP looking for footage related to a financial transaction is especially revealing. If Malia or Daniel made a purchase at a store while the children were supposedly in their care—but weren’t seen with them—that could point to a lie in the timeline. And if that footage does show Jack and Lily, but much earlier than claimed, it could confirm they were already gone by the time the parents say they last saw them.

This would explain the eerie silence from police: they may already suspect the truth, but are gathering the final pieces before moving forward with arrests. If they make their move too soon—without bodies, without a cause of death, without conclusive forensic evidence—they risk losing the case in court. So they wait. Quietly. Carefully.