Gus Filks Disappearance: Suspect Identified, Family Lawyers Hired – Latest Updates

South Australian police have resumed a search for evidence at Oak Park Station, the remote sheep station where four-year-old Gus Lamont disappeared in September 2025. The renewed search, which began on February 16, 2026, is expected to continue for at least two days, according to police statements.

The search coincides with the arrest of a 75-year-old man from Grampus on unrelated firearm offences. While the arrest stemmed from a previous search of Oak Park Station, authorities have stressed that the charges are not connected to Gus’s disappearance or a prior incident involving media access to the property. The man has been bailed to appear in the Peterborough Magistrates Court on May 6, 2026.

Gus Lamont was last seen playing on a mound of dirt at Oak Park Station on September 27, 2025. His disappearance triggered a large-scale search operation across the vast South Australian outback. Despite extensive efforts, Gus remains missing.

In recent weeks, the investigation has taken a significant turn. Police revealed earlier this month that a person with close ties to the household, but not Gus’s parents, had initially cooperated with detectives before allegedly “withdrawing cooperation” and subsequently being identified as a suspect. Authorities have declined to provide further details about the suspect, citing the ongoing nature of the investigation and potential challenges it presents.

“The person who has withdrawn their co-operation is now considered a suspect in the disappearance of Gus,” Detective Superintendent Darren Fielke stated. “I do want to stress, however, that Gus’s parents are not suspects in his disappearance.”

Superintendent Fielke also acknowledged “discrepancies” and “inconsistencies” in information provided by some family members, which contributed to the shift in focus. The investigation is now being treated as a major crime, a significant escalation from the initial missing person inquiry.

The developments have prompted Gus’s grandparents to seek legal counsel. Josie Murray has retained criminal lawyer Andrew Ey, while Shannon Murray is being represented by defence lawyer Casey Isaacs. In a joint statement released on February 6, 2026, the legal teams confirmed their representation of the grandparents and expressed the family’s devastation over the recent police statements.

“We are absolutely devastated by the media release of Sapol Major Crime,” the statement read. “The family has co-operated fully with the investigation and want nothing more than to find Gus and reunite him with his mum and dad.”

Police have indicated they no longer expect to find Gus alive. This grim assessment, while not publicly detailed, underscores the increasingly challenging nature of the investigation and the limited leads available to investigators. The focus has shifted towards establishing the circumstances surrounding his disappearance and identifying those responsible.

The case has drawn considerable attention in Australia, highlighting the vulnerabilities of remote communities and the complexities of investigating disappearances in sparsely populated areas. The vastness of Oak Park Station and the surrounding terrain present significant logistical challenges for search teams and investigators.

The renewed search at Oak Park Station aims to uncover any new evidence that may shed light on Gus’s disappearance. Task Force Horizon detectives are meticulously examining the property, hoping to piece together the events of September 27, 2025 and bring closure to the distraught family. An update on the search activities is expected as they progress.

The arrest of the 75-year-old man on firearm charges, while unrelated to Gus’s disappearance, adds another layer of complexity to the case. A previous incident involving media personnel at Oak Park Station in October 2025 reportedly involved a family member brandishing a firearm, allegedly to dispatch a snake. Police clarified that the incident occurred on private property without permission and that the firearm was used for its intended purpose.