ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #10

[Cardinal47]

Not really. Our lot is 75' wide as are the other lots in our subdivision. So two lots, side-by-side, equal 150'=50 yards. My grandson and I walk down three lots each evening to go by the light to look for toads and we do it, there and back, in about 2-3 minutes. 50 yards is really not far. All MO, of course.

I have to stand by my earlier statement. To me a gentleman, on an oxygen tank, left in charge of a 2 year old 50 yards away is a terrible risk.

As we now see I am right because DeOrr is gone and nobody knows what happened to him.

Sad just sad.

 

[katydid23]

<modsnip>

Children under the age of 5 in the United States are more likely to be killed by their parents than anyone else. Contrary to popular mythology, they are rarely killed by a sex-crazed stranger. FBI crime statistics show that in 1999 parents were responsible for 57 percent of these murders, with family friends and acquaintances accounting for another 30 percent and other family members accounting for 8 percent. Crime statistics further reveal that of the children under 5 killed from 1976 to 1999, 30 percent were murdered by their mothers while 31 percent were killed by their fathers. And while the strangers, acquaintances, and other family members who kill children skew heavily toward males (as does the entire class of murderers), children are as likely to be murdered by their fathers as by their mothers.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2002/03/when_parents_kill.html



In other words, IF, and that is a big if, this little guy met with foul play, then there is a strong possibility that it was family or close family friend that was responsible, according to the FBI statistics.

Of course we have no idea if he met with foul play. But the parents were claimng so.

 

[iluvmua]

I really wish they would release the PG tests.

 

[ILOKAL]

I have to stand by my earlier statement. To me a gentleman, on an oxygen tank, left in charge of a 2 year old 50 yards away is a terrible risk.

As we now see I am right because DeOrr is gone and nobody knows what happened to him.

Sad just sad.

Yes, as it turned out, any distance was too far since apparently no one was watching when little Deorr disappeared. I just don't know that a shorter distance would have changed that.

 

[Cardinal47]

Yes, as it turned out, any distance was too far since apparently no one was watching when little Deorr disappeared. I just don't know that a shorter distance would have changed that.

Oh I have to disagree. I think if little DeOrr was close by grandpa would have a much better view of him. As it stands now somebody could have jumped out and snatched him in the blink of an eye.

How close to shrubbery and trees was the little tyke when he went missing from grandpa's eyesight?

Didn't grandpa state something about DeOrr going over the embankment and he thought he was with mommy and daddy? Heck maybe that's when he was taken???

It's hard enough to keep track of a toddler in front of you let alone 50 yards away especially when you are not really 'up for the job'.

 

[ILOKAL]

<modsnip>


Children under the age of 5 in the United States are more likely to be killed by their parents than anyone else. Contrary to popular mythology, they are rarely killed by a sex-crazed stranger. FBI crime statistics show that in 1999 parents were responsible for 57 percent of these murders, with family friends and acquaintances accounting for another 30 percent and other family members accounting for 8 percent. Crime statistics further reveal that of the children under 5 killed from 1976 to 1999, 30 percent were murdered by their mothers while 31 percent were killed by their fathers. And while the strangers, acquaintances, and other family members who kill children skew heavily toward males (as does the entire class of murderers), children are as likely to be murdered by their fathers as by their mothers.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2002/03/when_parents_kill.html



In other words, IF, and that is a big if, this little guy met with foul play, then there is a strong possibility that it was family or close family friend that was responsible, according to the FBI statistics.

Of course we have no idea if he met with foul play. But the parents were claimng so.

The parents believe their child was abducted while the mindset I'm talking about grasps unto foul play by way of murder by the parents. And since those statistics don't include a child who vanished in a forest and has not been determined to be deceased, they don't apply and he is not counted in those numbers, yet that is the direction many posters insist on taking, and THAT'S what is scary, IMO

Also, those statistics only include murder, they do not include all forms of foul play as you seem to have suggested, e.g. Abduction by stranger.

 

[ILOKAL]

Oh I have to disagree. I think if little DeOrr was close by grandpa would have a much better view of him. As it stands now somebody could have jumped out and snatched him in the blink of an eye.

How close to shrubbery and trees was the little tyke when he went missing from grandpa's eyesight?

Didn't grandpa state something about DeOrr going over the embankment and he thought he was with mommy and daddy? Heck maybe that's when he was taken???

It's hard enough to keep track of a toddler in front of you let alone 50 yards away especially when you are not really 'up for the job'.

I too have been trying to find out how far the campsite was from the tree line, but no one has responded. Guess no one knows. I do agree that someone (except I believe something) DID stalk him from the tree line and pounced on him in an instant and that was that.

 

[Cardinal47]

We don't really know what the parents think happened to little DeOrr because I don't believe they have spoken in almost two months. There was the interview and the candlelight vigil in the very beginning but I think that's about it.

That's a shame because I think bringing awareness to ones missing child is the key to collecting funds for searches and having volunteers in place to search. Plus when you are active it seems to put a bug under LE's butt to not get buried under a stack of paperwork.

I am sure there is always another case and limited funds and manpower so we have to do what we can to make our case a priority.

I am wondering has there been any searching going on at all?

I know I read somewhere, so we will call it a rumor, that there was a search planned but it was called off.

Anybody know what action is taking place to find DeOrr there where he went missing?

Usually we see a hardy bunch with a table set up and search teams going out at least every weekend.

Case in fact would be when Hailey Dunn went missing. There was a group of women that never gave up searching for that child. They decorated a bridge to bring awareness, searched every single day and held fund raisers and brought in search experts to keep them directed in their search.

I always think of those women and their trying so very hard to find a lost child. Sigh.

MOO

 

[katydid23]

The parents believe their child was abducted while the mindset I'm talking about grasps unto foul play by way of murder by the parents. And since those statistics don't include a child who vanished in a forest and has not been determined to be deceased, they don't apply and he is not counted in those numbers, yet that is the direction many posters insist on taking, and THAT'S what is scary, IMO

Also, those statistics only include murder, they do not include all forms of foul play as you seem to have suggested, e.g. Abduction by stranger.

I disagree that children who 'vanish in the forest' are not included in these numbers. Because if a parent kills a child and disposes of them in the forest, which does happen, then they are included in these numbers.

I am not sure why it is considered so scary that people are suspicious of the parents when their child vanishes into thin air. Just like when an adult goes missing, their spouse is going to be the first suspect. Any detective will tell you that when a child is reported missing, a parallel investigation will immediately begin, which will look to clear the parents. Most parents are interviewed and then often given polygraphs, in order to clear them, so LE can move on.

I think it would be scarier not to consider them as possible suspects. Our son broke his arm at home when he was only 3. It is unusual to break a bone at that age. At the hospital my husband and I were interviewed separately by CPS because of the incident. I was nervous about the situation but was glad the hospital routinely had investigations of injuries to toddlers. Too many abusers fall through the cracks. The doctors were convinced the injury happened as we described and our son was old enough to describe how he jumped from the couch to the coffee table. [ He had just come from a trampoline Birthday party and forgot the couch was not a trampoline.] My point is, it is annoying and scary to be a suspect, but when certain circumstances happen, it is a necessity to be dealt with. JMO

 

[Cardinal47]

I disagree that children who 'vanish in the forest' are not included in these numbers. Because if a parent kills a child and disposes of them in the forest, which does happen, then they are included in these numbers.

I am not sure why it is considered so scary that people are suspicious of the parents when their child vanishes into thin air. Just like when an adult goes missing, their spouse is going to be the first suspect. Any detective will tell you that when a child is reported missing, a parallel investigation will immediately begin, which will look to clear the parents. Most parents are interviewed and then often given polygraphs, in order to clear them, so LE can move on.

I think it would be scarier not to consider them as possible suspects. Our son broke his arm at home when he was only 3. It is unusual to break a bone at that age. At the hospital my husband and I were interviewed separately by CPS because of the incident. I was nervous about the situation but was glad the hospital routinely had investigations of injuries to toddlers. Too many abusers fall through the cracks. The doctors were convinced the injury happened as we described and our son was old enough to describe how he jumped from the couch to the coffee table. [ He had just come from a trampoline Birthday party and forgot the couch was not a trampoline.] My point is, it is annoying and scary to be a suspect, but when certain circumstances happen, it is a necessity to be dealt with. JMO

Oh I think that is very true and if you ever have the chance to listen to Mark Klass whose daughter Polly went missing he says do anything at all to get the police to move on from you. Submit, submit, submit. Time is of the essence. Be a volunteer and clear yourself pronto so the police can find your missing child.

I do believe that would be Parents of a missing child 101.

MOO

 

[ILOKAL]

I disagree that children who 'vanish in the forest' are not included in these numbers. Because if a parent kills a child and disposes of them in the forest, which does happen, then they are included in these numbers.

I am not sure why it is considered so scary that people are suspicious of the parents when their child vanishes into thin air. Just like when an adult goes missing, their spouse is going to be the first suspect. Any detective will tell you that when a child is reported missing, a parallel investigation will immediately begin, which will look to clear the parents. Most parents are interviewed and then often given polygraphs, in order to clear them, so LE can move on.

I think it would be scarier not to consider them as possible suspects. Our son broke his arm at home when he was only 3. It is unusual to break a bone at that age. At the hospital my husband and I were interviewed separately by CPS because of the incident. I was nervous about the situation but was glad the hospital routinely had investigations of injuries to toddlers. Too many abusers fall through the cracks. The doctors were convinced the injury happened as we described and our son was old enough to describe how he jumped from the couch to the coffee table. [ He had just come from a trampoline Birthday party and forgot the couch was not a trampoline.] My point is, it is annoying and scary to be a suspect, but when certain circumstances happen, it is a necessity to be dealt with. JMO

I think you missed my message completely and in so doing we end up mixing apples with oranges. I am not talking about what LE routinely does when a child goes missing so that the investigation can move forward. That HAS been done in this case. According to the sheriff and his deputy, they are comfortable with the family and IR. All have voluntarily taken polygraphs. Vehicles and homes searched and re-searched. Interviews have taken place on multiple occasions. The sheriff requested assistance from the FBI to go over everything to make sure nothing was missed. So, yes, even in THIS case, protocol has been followed. But for many posters, that is simply not good enough. They want more, by golly and they shall continue to "accuse" the victims in this case with little, if any, regard for the pain and suffering they are experiencing. It's not what LE does in these cases that is scary.

 

[Cardinal47]

Marc Klass on what to do and expect when your child is missing. Very interesting.

http://klaaskids.org/missingkids/lawenforcement/#prepared


Law enforcement will inevitably follow the statistics and concentrate on the child’s known universe. They will launch parallel investigations with a focus on the family and move outward. Like concentric ripples in a pond, they will look at family, friends and acquaintances, peripheral contacts, sex offenders registered in the community and finally the most frightening and daunting scenario of all: stranger abduction.

As intrusive as it may become and as irrelevant as it may seem, fully cooperate with law enforcement and eliminate yourself as a suspect. They will ask questions that seem irrelevant and may even ask you to take a polygraph examination. It is not fair, but it is necessary. Remember, like you, law enforcement doesn’t know where your child is and the sooner they are able to gather and assimilate information and evidence, the sooner they are going to be able to direct their investigation toward the solution.

 

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

Does anyone know the path the search dogs took? We are told they kept returning to the reservoir. Other than that, where did they go? That is, the dogs arrived and I assume they were taken directly to the camp site and given an article that had Deorr's scent on it. Did they then go directly to the reservoir or did they go somewhere else first?

 

[Cardinal47]

I think you missed my message completely and in so doing we end up mixing apples with oranges. I am not talking about what LE routinely does when a child goes missing so that the investigation can move forward. That HAS been done in this case. According to the sheriff and his deputy, they are comfortable with the family and IR. All have voluntarily taken polygraphs. Vehicles and homes searched and re-searched. Interviews have taken place on multiple occasions. The sheriff requested assistance from the FBI to go over everything to make sure nothing was missed. So, yes, even in THIS case, protocol has been followed. But for many posters, that is simply not good enough. They want more, by golly and they shall continue to "accuse" the victims in this case with little, if any, regard for the pain and suffering they are experiencing. It's not what LE does in these cases that is scary.

But since the 'we are good with the parents' things have taken a turn. It is now called a Criminal Investigation and the sheriff referred to the campsite as a Crime Scene and also all four are now called Persons of Interest.

The FBI is currently reviewing all information and now we wait. Yes things have certainly changed during the investigation.


I think things HAVE changed and that certainly is not apples and oranges.

MOO

 

[ILOKAL]

I disagree that children who 'vanish in the forest' are not included in these numbers. Because if a parent kills a child and disposes of them in the forest, which does happen, then they are included in these numbers.

I am not sure why it is considered so scary that people are suspicious of the parents when their child vanishes into thin air. Just like when an adult goes missing, their spouse is going to be the first suspect. Any detective will tell you that when a child is reported missing, a parallel investigation will immediately begin, which will look to clear the parents. Most parents are interviewed and then often given polygraphs, in order to clear them, so LE can move on.

I think it would be scarier not to consider them as possible suspects. Our son broke his arm at home when he was only 3. It is unusual to break a bone at that age. At the hospital my husband and I were interviewed separately by CPS because of the incident. I was nervous about the situation but was glad the hospital routinely had investigations of injuries to toddlers. Too many abusers fall through the cracks. The doctors were convinced the injury happened as we described and our son was old enough to describe how he jumped from the couch to the coffee table. [ He had just come from a trampoline Birthday party and forgot the couch was not a trampoline.] My point is, it is annoying and scary to be a suspect, but when certain circumstances happen, it is a necessity to be dealt with. JMO

Only children who have been murdered are included in those statistics. Furthermore, my point of view has ONLY to do with the mindset of many posters HERE and TOS regarding victims. Although all the personal stories are quite interesting they are OT in this case.

 

[ILOKAL]

But since the 'we are good with the parents' things have taken a turn. It is now called a Criminal Investigation and the sheriff referred to the campsite as a Crime Scene and also all four are now called Persons of Interest.

The FBI is currently reviewing all information and now we wait. Yes things have certainly changed during the investigation.


I think things HAVE changed and that certainly is not apples and oranges.

MOO

Oh I must disagree. To my knowledge there has been no change in the "we are good with the parents" - no change at all. All persons that were present are considered POI and we have been assured they are not suspects. It is unknown why the sheriff used the term crime scene, but what we DO know is that the sheriff has given no indication whatsoever that he believes a crime took place. The sheriff asked for assistance from the FBI to review everything and to make sure nothing was missed, because based on what the sheriff has said, he has no clue what caused the disappearance of little Deorr. And, even the deputy offered his dismay regarding the rumors about the victims on SM. Needless to say I agree with him 100%.

 

[Mickshawn]

This afternoon, I went to the Post Office for my job..There I am, waiting in line behind a young mom and her 2 year old (they were also waiting in line)...The little girl was busy busy busy playing with a rack of cards.

Then it was the Mom's turn in line...She steps up to the counter, (taking her eyes off her child who was just happily playing with the rack of cards), is talking to the Postmaster and I watch the kid start to open the door TO LEAVE! I blocked her and said "Noooooooo" (or something), which caused the mom to turn around and physically get her over to the counter with her.

Holy Schmoo!!.....in a Nanosecond...that kid would have been out the door!!!!

 

[bluesneakers]

But since the 'we are good with the parents' things have taken a turn. It is now called a Criminal Investigation and the sheriff referred to the campsite as a Crime Scene and also all four are now called Persons of Interest.

The FBI is currently reviewing all information and now we wait. Yes things have certainly changed during the investigation.


I think things HAVE changed and that certainly is not apples and oranges.

MOO

Despite any turns that may have been taken the parents are still victims.

 

[bluesneakers]

Oh I must disagree. To my knowledge there has been no change in the "we are good with the parents" - no change at all. All persons that were present are considered POI and we have been assured they are not suspects. It is unknown why the sheriff used the term crime scene, but what we DO know is that the sheriff has given no indication whatsoever that he believes a crime took place. The sheriff asked for assistance from the FBI to review everything and to make sure nothing was missed, because based on what the sheriff has said, he has no clue what caused the disappearance of little Deorr. And, even the deputy offered his dismay regarding the rumors about the victims on SM. Needless to say I agree with him 100%.

I don't see what's changed either. The only differences I've seen since about a week after DeOrr went missing is we know IR's name, GGP's age, and no one uses the exact same words and phrasing each time they discuss the case. How does "we are good with the parents" suddenly mean nothing if the sheriff says he's 99% sure DeOrr was up there. IMO there's no contradiction and it doesn't suggest anything has changed.

 

[katydid23]

I think you missed my message completely and in so doing we end up mixing apples with oranges. I am not talking about what LE routinely does when a child goes missing so that the investigation can move forward. That HAS been done in this case. According to the sheriff and his deputy, they are comfortable with the family and IR. All have voluntarily taken polygraphs. Vehicles and homes searched and re-searched. Interviews have taken place on multiple occasions. The sheriff requested assistance from the FBI to go over everything to make sure nothing was missed. So, yes, even in THIS case, protocol has been followed. But for many posters, that is simply not good enough. They want more, by golly and they shall continue to "accuse" the victims in this case with little, if any, regard for the pain and suffering they are experiencing. It's not what LE does in these cases that is scary.

Just because LE publicly announces they are comfortable with the family it does not always mean they are not suspects. The recent Noah Thomas case is a perfect example.
And we don't know what happened with the polygraph results. I would think the officer could have easily said ALL results prove their innocence but that did not happen. He was careful to sidestep the question of the results by acting like he didnt know them.
Calling in the FBI made me more suspicious, not less. If he thought the boy was lost in the woods I doubt they would call in the FBI.
I am not accusing the parents of anything, especially of purposely harming their child. But I am looking sideways at the family friend and I do have issues with the 'facts' as we know them. I am sorry if it hurts their feelings, which I doubt, because I think they have bigger fish to fry than my opinions on a forum. I have a problem believing that they told their grandfather, who was allegedly sitting by the fire with his oxygen, to watch a 2 yr old that was quite a 'go-er'--especially when GGP says he saw the boy heading towards the bank, then he vanished, but he did nothing to look for him when that happened. that does not sit right with me and it makes me doubt their version of the story.
On top of that, the GGP, who was allegedly the last person to see the boy alive, has not made any statements. Plenty of others have spoken for him. But he has said nothing. I find that very unusual in a case of a lost child in the woods. usually everyone in the family is speaking on the air, to the press, on the radio, as often as possible. And we have not heard one word form GGP ever.

I am not going to apologize for finding that odd and a little suspicious. As I said above, it was suspicious when our 3 yr old broke his arm but we had to speak up and allay peoples suspicions. It was all on us to do that and I did not blame the intake nurses or the hospital social worker for having initial concerns. If we had clammed up or told inconsistent stories then their suspicions would have grown. And I think that is what has happened here. JMO