Daniel’s Cousin Speaks Out: Real Witness or Redirection? | Lilly and Jack Sullivan
sorry no

go ahead but did

did mom ever like hey

I just find it so odd you would think

did any of them ever make the statement that

they wanted to look for the children

or did she make a fuss and like

I don’t want to leave until I find my kids no

really no

so that’s what I stated as well

because I when I got there

I said do you want me to stay with the baby

you can go look

she goes I’m gonna stay with the baby okay

said whatever so I went looking

in a live stream no one saw coming

but few can now forget a woman

stepped into the shadows of one of the most disturbing

child disappearance cases

in recent memory she called herself Logan

and more than just a bystander

she claimed something chilling

she was Daniel Martel’s cousin

her voice wasn’t just personal

it was piercing what she shared wasn’t theory or rumor

it was testimony director

emotional and possibly calculated

because in the disappearance of Lily and Jack Sullivan

Logan wasn’t some stranger with internet opinions

she was blood family to the men

many are quietly suspecting

and her words they might just shift everything

let’s break down what Logan said and why it matters

because in a case going colder by the hour

someone finally spoke

but the real question isn’t what she revealed

it’s why she chose to reveal it now

from the outset

Logan asserts that she is Daniel Martel’s cousin

a detail that immediately frames her as an insider

this claim while unverifiable

grants her a privileged narrative position

she speaks not as an outsider

theorizing from a distance

but as someone embedded

in the emotional and logistical core of the story

this is a powerful narrative stance

and one that she leans into fully

her speech is delivered with a calm

rehearsed certainty free of hesitation

hedging language or speculation

traits that often lend a speaker an air of credibility

even when the content itself

is emotionally or logically charged

so that’s what I stated as well

because I when I got there

I said do you want me to stay with the baby

you can go look

she goes I’m gonna stay with the baby

okay said whatever

so I went looking yet

this confident delivery masks a deeper

rhetorical strategy

Logan positions herself as the voice of reason

in a sea of chaos but every element of her speech

is saturated with subtle blame

redirection and behavioral contrast framing

when she recalls offering to care for Meadow

so that Maleahiah could go out

and search for her missing children

and Maleahiah allegedly declined

the implication

is not just that Maleahiah made a choice

but that she made the wrong one

the framing is binary

a good mother would have seized that opportunity

a mother who stays behind is at best passive

and at worst complicit

sorry no

go ahead but did did mom ever like hey

I just find it so odd

you would think did any of them ever

make the statement that

they wanted to look for the children

or does she make a fuss and like

I don’t wanna leave until I find my kids no

really no

so that’s what I stated as well

Logan furthers this behavioral framing

by emphasizing what Malehaya didn’t do

she repeats phrases like she didn’t cry

she didn’t say she wouldn’t leave until they were found

and she didn’t show urgency

these are not neutral statements

they are emotionally loaded voids

designed to paint a picture of cold detachment

this absence of expected behavior

is then used as indirect evidence of guilt

or indifference

Logan does not outright say that Maleah doesn’t care

but she structures the narrative

so that the audience is LED to that conclusion

naturally

it’s a classic method of narrative manipulation

pose a question through omission

then let the audience fill in the emotional gaps

um so that was the next thing was when the baby was

when she was told that the baby um

had to leave the residence

um she

they were she’s exactly told

she did not have to leave the residence

they just wanted the baby off the residence at

at from away from the residence

that’s like this whole scenario

isn’t something a kid should be a part of

so the baby was gonna come to my house

so she was she’s never been apart from the baby

never like she’s meadow meadow

meadow meadow

meadow meadow meadow

so I said you’re more than welcome to come too

if not I am comfortable

I have three kids of my own

like Malaya I can take care of this kid

like I can take care of the baby

no problem so first the baby was just gonna be the baby

and then she decided she was gonna come with me

so but then something changed

and we were at the briefing

her mother said something to her

and then I had to take everything out of my car

and put it in her mother’s car

and like I said she would had this whole plan

like she was gonna drive her car into my house

mm hmm and she was gonna

and then the plan changed

oh I’m gonna take the car to my mother’s

like I’m going with my mother

well she didn’t even come back for the car

like the

search and rescue

had her car towed to wherever she was

because they left the car

that’s how much of a hurry that was to leave

one of the most

striking elements of Logan’s storytelling

is how she introduces

and reinforces the image of Maleah’s mother

Logan does not describe her as concerned or grieving

instead she depicts her as controlling

manipulative and emotionally vacant

she recounts a moment

when she was preparing to drive Malaya and Meadow home

only for the grandmother to say something

that made them completely reverse course

bags were moved to the grandmother’s car

the family left

later Logan describes how

Malaya never even returned for her vehicle

requiring rescue crews to retrieve it

an act framed not as practical but symbolic

an escape an abandonment

these narrative beats are carefully planted

to build an emotional storyline

one

in which the grandmother exerts mysterious influence

and Maleahia appears weak or under control

I just find it strange how the grandmother

would convince her daughter to leave

to leave to leave the residence

instead of staying with her to look for these babies

that woman has never shed a tear

the whole time she was there

my dad even stated that he goes

I cried like my father cried and cried and cried

this is a 55 year old man

um and he cried for those children

and that grandmother didn’t shed a tear

Logan reinforces this narrative through

emotion based contrast

she says the grandmother didn’t shed a single tear

then adds

my dad cried and he’s not even related to those kids

this emotional juxtaposition

is designed to trigger audience suspicion

by exploiting expected grief norms

it plays directly into forensic behavioral profiling

not with data or direct proof

but through comparative emotion

who grieves who doesn’t and what that supposedly means

yet the evidence here is purely observational

unverifiable and deeply subjective

I believe her mother’s kind of manipulative

from what I’ve seen of her

why would the mom why would the mom wanna do this

I don’t know but I

from what I understand what it

what I’ve met of the mother

I’ve been what

Daniel and her have been together three years

this is the first time I have ever met the mother

and like I said she’s

and you know

when you get you get vibes from people

you know um

she just even

when I was putting my phone number in Malaya’s phone

for her um

when she was leaving

her mother seemed like I was doing something wrong

like she was like

what are you doing with Malaya’s phone

like what are you doing

I said I’m giving her my number so she has me to call

like I’m a safe place like you right

why are you why are you being so nosy on what I’m doing

to your daughter’s phone

like you know what I mean right

like why but when I did try to call Malaya afterwards

like
on that Sunday to check on Meadow and to check on her

she answered and as soon as she answered the

what I got was I said how is Meadow

she goes Meadow is fine

and then I hear in the background

who are you talking to hang that phone up

so she’s very toxic yeah

yes so then when I called back the next time

because I’m I’m very persistent

I’m going to call the next day my number was blocked

so you know

little trick on your phone if you’re blocked

you can private your number

and it will still go through

so I did call and but I didn’t say anything

because I wanted to see who would answer the phone

her mother answered the phone

and she went Malaya’s phone

so I did not talk and I just hung up the phone

because I know I wasn’t gonna get anywhere

you’re a 27 year old girl

and your mother has custody of your phone

I think there’s an issue there

the climax of Logan’s framing

lies in her account of communication control

she claims she was blocked from contacting Maleah

and that when she called again

using a hidden number

it was Maleah’s mother who answered

from this

she concludes that the grandmother is monitoring

or even controlling her adult daughter’s phone

this is perhaps the strongest part of Logan’s testimony

from a statement analysis perspective

it introduces a clear cause effect narrative

an observable action the phone being picked up

and a logical implication control

however even this point raises questions

why would Logan share this specific moment

why does it follow an entire string of accusations

and suspicion building

the risk of intentional sequencing becomes clear

it’s not just what Logan says

but how each piece builds upon the last

in a careful escalation of doubt

from a credibility assessment standpoint

Logan’s story holds internal consistency

but not external verification

she rarely expresses uncertainty

doesn’t admit to gaps in knowledge

and never qualifies her statements

this uniformity may make her sound persuasive

but it also aligns with

known patterns of agenda driven testimony

most genuine eyewitnesses or insiders

admit to moments of doubt

conflicting emotions or partial information

Logan does not her tone is unwavering

her narrative

sharply focused on casting Maleah and the grandmother

as emotionally void

controlling and unmotherly

oh and I describe Daniel and Malia’s relationship great

to be totally honest

like for every time I’ve been around and been there

they’ve completely got along

so I I don’t know every

every relationship has issues

but I’ve never

I I describe their relationship as great

like they became very close

they had a child together

he raises their kids she helped raise his other kid

like you know what I mean

as the narrative transitions

to the relationship between Daniel and Malaya

Logan carefully constructs a portrait of harmony

a home where there was no visible conflict

where Daniel helped raise not only his own children

but also Malaya’s from a previous relationship

she uses phrases like they got along very well

and there were no signs of any major problems

which serve two purposes they humanized Daniel

and they undercut any suggestion

that this was a volatile or dangerous household

these statements are unqualified

containing no hedging or nuance

which is notable in real relationships

especially blended families

complexity is the norm

Logan’s lack of acknowledgment of

that complexity may reflect a deliberate effort

to simplify Daniel’s character

for sympathetic consumption

so did it come as a shock to Daniel

that she actually up and left him

yes 100%

like he

because at one moment

there was an altercation at the end of the driveway

which was me and one of my

Malaya’s family members screaming at each other um

and the cops were called down

so when the cops came down

they took Malaya aside they took my mother aside

because my mother said she was part of the altercation

which she was I was as well

and my aunt

we all got spoken to by the police

um Malaya literally told the police officer

right then and there

like this is the happiest I’ve ever been

I feel the safest when I’m with here

like even when when she left

Officer Mason was dead shocked

as was Daniel that she actually left

a critical turning point in Logan’s narrative

is her reference to the polygraph test

Daniel allegedly passed

she elevates this point as a credibility anchor

stating it with emphasis

even though there has been no official confirmation

from the RCMP worse

there are circulating reports

that Daniel may have arranged a private polygraph

which further complicates the reliability of this claim

here Logan introduces a statement

meant to establish factual authority

but without the backing to support it

a tactic often found in narrative manipulation

where subjective

or unverifiable information is presented as

definitive truth what follows is perhaps

the most

emotionally manipulative section of her testimony

Logan recounts how Daniel was blindsided by Malachiya

leaving

according to her Malachi had just recently told police

she felt safest in that home

this inconsistency is repeated by Logan

as if it were a key exhibit in a courtroom

suggesting that Maleah’s departure was

not only unexpected but irrational

and that Daniel was the one left betrayed

the use of direct quotes attributed to Maleah

such as I’m happiest when I’m with him

reinforces this emotional betrayal narrative

it also allows Logan

to align the viewer with Daniel’s point of view

framing him as a man who trusted too much

and was suddenly abandoned

the aim is clear elicit sympathy for Daniel

and raise suspicion toward moleeya

without directly accusing her

so um

to know that he got home to go contact her

that he was blocked and deleted was a complete

complete and utter shock

Logan also highlights a specific behavioral pattern

after leaving Malahia allegedly blocked Daniel’s number

effectively cutting off contact

this is characterized as another red flag

especially when contrasted with her earlier

affectionate statements

from a statement analysis standpoint

this juxtaposition is deliberately constructed

to highlight cognitive dissonance

in Maleah’s behavior

words of love followed by acts of isolation

however Logan does not address why Maleah might do this

in the context of trauma fear or coercion

the framing is one sided

and that narrow lens suggests an intentional effort

to control how the audience interprets her actions

importantly

Logan does not go so far as to directly accuse Maleah

of harming her children

instead she leaves that implication dangling

like an open ended suspicion

and suddenly pivots blame toward the grandmother

this shift of focus is not accidental

it allows Logan to preserve the appearance of fairness

I’m not saying Maleah did anything

while still guiding the audience

to consider a new target of distrust

it’s a narrative sleight of hand

claim neutrality

while strategically reassigning suspicion

the most strategic element of Logan’s testimony

lies not in what she says

but when she says it

her live stream occurred only after a damaging leak

text messages

allegedly showing Daniel criticizing Malia’s parenting

this timing is critical it invites the question

is Logan acting as Daniel’s mouthpiece

attempting to neutralize public backlash

by redirecting the narrative

the live appearance doesn’t seem spontaneous

it comes across as deliberate crisis management

cloaked in familiar concern

the decision to speak up at this precise moment

and with such carefully structured storytelling

supports the theory

that Logan’s intent is not merely to

share what she knows

but to reconstruct Daniel’s public image

using an emotionally calculated counter narrative

a question that I have is

did Malaya have

or do you know if Malaya had her own cell phone

yes she has her own cell phone

I’ve called her on it okay

and Daniel has his own cell phone

absolutely but they’re a very open couple

okay alright

yeah no

I I was just curious

um I see that oh

and I described Daniel and Malia’s relationship great

to be totally honest

like for every time I’ve been around and been there

they’ve completely got along

so I I don’t know every

every relationship has issues

but I’ve never I I describe their relationship as great

like they became very close

they had a child together

he raises their kids she helped raise his other kid

like you know what I mean

Logan introduces the idea that Daniel and Maleah

previously shared open access to each other’s phones

this detail while subtle is not random

it serves a clear narrative manipulation function

reinforcing the image of a trusting

transparent relationship which she implies

deteriorated suddenly and without cause

by presenting them as once

emotionally and practically close

sharing parenting homes and even phones

Logan establishes a contrast

that makes Malehaya’s later actions

blocking contact separating

restricting access to Meadow appear not only abrupt

but suspicious the use of the phrase

they were open about their phones

becomes more than a factual observation

it is a strategic contrast tool

implying that only someone with something to hide

would sever such openness

when Logan mentions

that Daniel is no longer allowed to see Meadow

she attributes this to intervention by CPS

Children’s Aid not to any specific act or legal ruling

here her choice of words is critical

she avoids discussing why CPS may have made that

decision there is no mention of accusations

safety concerns

or specific behavioral incidents involving Daniel

this is a conspicuous omission in statement analysis

such gaps particularly when the speaker has knowledge

but avoids sharing

can indicate deliberate narrative omission

meant to shield the audience from information

that could complicate the preferred framing

instead of addressing the cause of CPS’s decision

Logan subtly redirects blame

by suggesting CPS interference is unwarranted

casting the system itself in a questionable light

she frames Daniel as a father

unjustly separated from a child he helped raise

thereby shifting the audience’s scrutiny

away from Daniel’s actions

and onto institutional authorities

this is a classic behavioral framing tactic

undermine the legitimacy of external entities

CPS police

perhaps even Malahera

to make Daniel’s situation appear unjust

rather than investigative in nature

the baby Meadow is in custody of her mother

like Malaya

Malaya and Malaya has custody of Meadow at the moment

I I don’t understand why they wouldn’t allow Daniel

that’s I don’t understand why if this is a case

unless she made allegations of domestic abuse

um

but he we have to go to family court

and he should be allowed at a minimal right now

supervised access absolutely

and we’ve been furthermore

Logan underscores

that Malaya currently holds custody of Meadow

though this may seem like a simple statement of fact

its placement

following her criticisms of Maleah’s emotional

responses and decision making behavior

builds a rhetorical undercurrent of unfairness

as if someone unfit emotionally disengaged

or manipulated by her own mother

as Logan has repeatedly suggested

now controls the fate of an innocent child

while the more stable

emotionally invested father figure has been removed

no I was actually thinking back to

when Daniel had said that

he had gone out looking for the children

and that the police

he had offered up his phone to the police

to check the GPS and

you know all that sort of thing right

absolutely yeah

no they do have separate cell phones

okay all right

and the cops even gave Daniel a cellphone

while they took Daniel’s cellphone

so

most telling is Logan’s comment

that Daniel’s phone was confiscated

and he was later issued a temporary replacement

this is a legally significant development

which she drops in casually but without elaboration

in the context of an ongoing

missing person’s investigation

such an action implies that

Daniel is still under scrutiny

possibly as a person of interest

yet Logan does not dwell on that

she does not speculate

why law enforcement would need access to his device

instead she moves past it quickly

this is what’s known in credibility assessment

as a strategic silence

when a speaker

includes a detail that inherently raises a red flag

but avoids exploring its implications

it suggests an attempt to preempt criticism

without allowing it to take root

by omitting the most crucial question

why is Daniel being restricted from contact with Meadow

Logan leaves a vacuum in her narrative

that vacuum is important

viewers are invited to assume the restriction is unfair

but no context is provided for them to judge

the legitimacy of the restriction themselves

the absence of counter narratives

alternative explanations or even ambiguity

indicates that Logan

is not presenting a neutral perspective

but a constructed one

designed to insulate Daniel from public suspicion

in some

Logan’s handling of these custody and procedural facts

appears on the surface to offer balance or context

but under forensic scrutiny

her statements reflect a continued effort

to frame Daniel as a wronged father

delegitimize the systems investigating him

and suddenly paint Maleah

as the gatekeeper of Daniel’s unjust exclusion

these moves

though calmer and more procedural than her earlier

emotionally loaded claims

are no less strategic they function as

quiet reinforcements of the broader narrative

Logan appears committed to

one in which Daniel is the discarded

misunderstood figure

at the mercy of manipulative women

and intrusive institutions

an image meticulously crafted

yet conspicuously devoid of critical information

that would allow the public to see a fuller

more complex picture

Logan didn’t speak

like someone merely recounting a series of events

she spoke like someone on a mission

beneath every sentence every carefully chosen word

there was a thread of urgency

a drive to correct what she believed the public

had misunderstood to her

this wasn’t just a case about two missing children

it was a battle over the narrative

a battle she refused to let Daniel lose in her voice

there was conviction but also caution

she never shouted she didn’t beg for belief

instead she laid out a portrait that felt rehearsed

not in theatrics but in intent

her purpose was clear

shift attention away from her cousin and subtly

almost surgically redirected elsewhere

but even as she defended Daniel

Logan didn’t simply ignore the darkness

she redirected it toward the grandmother

toward the quiet woman behind the scenes

whom Logan painted as the one pulling strings

shaping choices and guiding Malaya’s every step

it wasn’t just defense

it was redirection executed with emotional precision

whether intentional or not

Logan’s testimony raised questions

the official investigation hadn’t answered

but it also demanded a careful lens

because sometimes

the loudest defenders aren’t revealing the truth

they’re protecting the version of it

they need the world to believe

there’s a fine line between testimony and theater

between truth and performance

and as Logan spoke that line grew increasingly blurred

her words were detailed

deliberate and emotionally weighted

but there is one critical truth we cannot overlook

Logan’s identity has never been independently verified

no press conference no sworn statement

just a livestream shared reshared and now dissected

which begs the question

what happens when a stranger to the public

claims to be family to a suspect

and then takes center stage

if Logan’s account is false

then this case

may have just been thrust

into a dangerous spiral of distraction

one that could derail public perception

and potentially hinder justice

but if she’s telling the truth

then what she described is far more disturbing

because it wouldn’t just be a story about a mother

losing her children it would be a story about control

generational control

emotional manipulation and a young woman

Malaya possibly

trapped in the shadows of her own mother’s influence

throughout the live stream

Logan didn’t just mention the grandmother

she fixated on her repeating words like controlling

toxic manipulative

it wasn’t an accidental observation

it was a theme a narrative

one repeated so consistently

so confidently it almost felt scripted

not in the sense of fiction

but in the sense of purpose

could it be that this wasn’t simply a spontaneous

act of revelation but a strategic move

one designed to speak on behalf of Daniel

at a time when he could no longer speak for himself

if so then Logan’s live stream wasn’t just a statement

it was damage control

a calculated attempt to steer the public

away from one suspect and toward another

and that leads us to the most haunting question of all

what does Logan know that the rest of us don’t

because if everything she said is true

why didn’t she take it to law enforcement

why not to a journalist

why choose a TikTok live stream over an official report

and if she really is Daniel’s cousin

is it possible that he’s using her to speak the words

he no longer can

in a case already shrouded in silence

the loudest voices demand the closest scrutiny

thank you for watching True Crime Stories hour

if you enjoyed this story

don’t forget to like share

subscribe and hit the notification bell