Authorities investigating the disappearance of siblings Lily and Jack Sullivan are now examining a series of unusual cash withdrawals made in the weeks leading up to the children’s disappearance, according to newly reviewed case documents. The transactions—totaling more than $2,300—were taken from an account belonging to Malehya Brooks-Murray, the woman currently central to the ongoing investigation. The withdrawals occurred over multiple days and involved amounts significantly larger than what typically moved through the account.

Investigators familiar with the case say the timing of the withdrawals is one of several financial details now under close review. While the transactions do not prove wrongdoing, the inability of the account holder or her partner, Daniel Martell, to account for the missing funds has raised what investigators describe as “critical questions” about the days leading up to the children’s disappearance.

According to the documents, the account historically carried low balances, often under a few hundred dollars. The sudden flurry of larger withdrawals—$800, then $600, then $450, then $500—stood out immediately to analysts compiling the financial timeline. Police noted that financial irregularities do not necessarily indicate criminal activity, but they can help investigators establish behavioral patterns or identify inconsistencies.

When questioned about the withdrawals, both Brooks-Murray and Martell reportedly told investigators they could not recall where the money went. They did not present receipts, bank statements, or any recorded purchases that could match the withdrawn totals. Investigators say the answers provided were “vague and incomplete,” though they caution that stress, trauma, or poor memory can also play a role in such interviews.

Still, the combination of missing funds and missing children has become a central focal point in the wider investigation. Authorities emphasize that the financial details are just one piece of a much larger puzzle and that multiple leads are still being reviewed.

The disappearance of Lily and Jack has prompted a province-wide search effort involving ground teams, drones, water-search specialists, and community volunteers. The children were last seen several days before they were reported missing, and authorities have not yet disclosed what they believe happened in the hours before their disappearance. Because of the sensitivity of the case, police have closely guarded many investigative details.

The new information about the cash withdrawals surfaced as detectives reviewed bank records, cell-phone data, digital correspondence, and financial statements—standard procedure in missing-children cases where timelines must be meticulously reconstructed. Investigators say the financial timeline must be understood alongside behavioral patterns, travel movements, and communication logs.

One investigator described the missing funds as “a loose thread” in a much larger fabric. “It doesn’t mean everything,” they said, “but it might mean something. And until we understand it, it remains important.”

Financial irregularities can play a significant role in missing-person investigations, though they are not inherently suspicious. Experts note that individuals under stress may withdraw cash to cover various needs without documenting how it is spent. In other cases, financial activity may reflect panic, confusion, or attempts to prepare for specific situations. Investigators must parse through these possibilities carefully, without assuming intent.

At this stage, authorities have not linked the cash withdrawals directly to the children’s disappearance. They have also not suggested that the money itself is evidence of wrongdoing. Instead, they describe the withdrawals as part of a timeline filled with gaps that must be filled in by interviews, digital evidence, and physical searches.

The financial timeline has, however, highlighted inconsistencies in the statements provided to investigators. According to case documents, neither Brooks-Murray nor Martell offered an explanation that could reconcile the missing funds with any known expenses. While investigators acknowledge that people under pressure may have difficulty recalling specifics, the lack of any consistent account has required closer scrutiny.

Authorities stress that the investigation is ongoing, and no conclusions should be drawn until further evidence is analyzed. They also emphasize that speculation could harm the integrity of the case and the wellbeing of those involved.

Community concern continues to grow as the search for Lily and Jack stretches on. Volunteers have joined search-and-rescue professionals across multiple areas, checking trails, waterways, wooded regions, and residential zones where the children may have traveled. Local residents have contributed food, equipment, and time, while several businesses have posted missing-children flyers in their windows.

Police have asked residents with home security cameras or dashcam footage from the relevant dates to come forward. They have also encouraged anyone with knowledge of the family’s financial activity, travel movements, or communications to contact investigators.

Experts in missing-children cases say that investigations often involve dozens of parallel threads—financial, digital, behavioral, forensic—and that a single thread rarely provides the full picture. Instead, patterns often emerge when details overlap or clarify one another.

Law enforcement officials say they are still conducting interviews with extended family members, coworkers, neighbors, and others who may have interacted with the adults or the children in the days before the disappearance. They emphasize that all interviews are routine and that no one should assume guilt or involvement based solely on questioning.

As for the $2,300, investigators say the significance of the missing funds remains unclear. The withdrawals could be unrelated. They could represent ordinary expenses that the account holder simply cannot recall. They could reflect stress-driven behavior during a chaotic period. Or they could eventually fit into a larger sequence of events that only becomes clear later in the investigation.

For now, the unanswered questions about the money remain exactly that—questions.

Meanwhile, the priority remains locating Lily and Jack. Authorities have reiterated that all resources are being committed to the search, and they continue to encourage the public to report any information, no matter how small it may seem.

In the absence of concrete answers, the community has rallied around the children’s family, offering support while respecting the privacy of those involved. Candles have been placed at makeshift memorial sites, though authorities emphasize that the focus must remain on ongoing search efforts rather than assumptions about the case.

Investigators say the financial review is ongoing, and additional records are being subpoenaed to establish a clearer timeline. Mobile-phone tracking data, GPS records, bank transfers, and third-party financial logs will be compared against witness accounts to determine whether the missing cash aligns with any known activity. At the same time, search teams continue to distribute flyers, canvass neighborhoods, and expand the geographic scope of their work.

As the investigation enters its next phase, police urge the public to stay patient and avoid jumping to conclusions. In cases involving missing children, they say, every detail must be examined carefully and professionally—and that includes the unexplained $2,300 that vanished shortly before the children did.