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

[Hoosier952]

Pictures from camp. Campsite is approximate, so circles are approximate as well. First is the search radius at 2.5 miles in all directions. Second is 50 yd radius around camp.

 

[ILOKAL]

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

All your suspicions don't change what LE has already done and they are comfortable with the family and IR as far as we, the public, have been told. So unless and until that changes, the entire family are victims. The TOS here are clear, to me, and all the so-called suspicions and "concerns" some may have still don't change victims into suspects and any and all, partial or whole, accusations against the victims should be kept in check and to oneself, IMO.

 

[desert-blue]

Pictures from camp. Campsite is approximate, so circles are approximate as well. First is the search radius at 2.5 miles in all directions. Second is 50 yd radius around camp.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for the images of the campground. It really shows the terrain and how much country was searched in that 2.5 mile radius. It seems unlikely that any 2.5 year old would be able to navigate outside that radius, unless he was walking on relatively flat land*, such as on a road.

It would be interesting to superimpose the two circles on one map.

*Not that the roads are flat as in horizontal; I realize the roads probably have some slope as they go up and down hills, but they have no vegetation and would be much easier to walk on than going up and down hills of sagebrush and forest.

 

[Hoosier952]

 

[Hoosier952]

Sorry that's huge, I don't know how to edit it smaller

 

[desert-blue]

Sorry that's huge, I don't know how to edit it smaller

Thanks - I think it is interesting to note how tiny the area that he went missing is compared to the area searched.

I wonder how long it took SAR to reach the outer edges of that search area? Did they finish the whole 2.5 mile radius on the first day he was missing? (sorry if that's already been addressed - I don't remember)

 

[gitana1]

Against my better judgment I've checked in here. Sadly, I see no new news but still the same speculation. Disappointing. Nevertheless, i have a few comments:

Thank you for the images of the campground. It really shows the terrain and how much country was searched in that 2.5 mile radius. It seems unlikely that any 2.5 year old would be able to navigate outside that radius, unless he was walking on relatively flat land*, such as on a road.

It would be interesting to superimpose the two circles on one map.

*Not that the roads are flat as in horizontal; I realize the roads probably have some slope as they go up and down hills, but they have no vegetation and would be much easier to walk on than going up and down hills of sagebrush and forest.

"He went over hills, washes, and thickets. He went through a lot," Search and Rescue spokesman Jeff Newnum told ABC News affiliate ABC 15.

"All together, Emmett probably walked close to three or four miles," Newnum said.http://abcnews.go.com/US/TheLaw/emmett-trapp-wandered-off/story?id=11323106

Emmett was two years old and wandered in incredible temperature extremes through all sorts of terrain until his little body gave out and he died.

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

Children who die from accidents or tragedies like getting lost in the forest, are not included in those statistics. Those stats only apply to murdered children. And in the case of children found murdered, yes, most are killed by their own families or people they know, especially when under the age of five.

But Deorr has not been found murdered. He has not been found at all. So, a better question would be to ask what are the stats on missing kids? How many are found alive? How many were lost? How many ran away? How many died from accident? How many killed?

There is no doubt that of children who experience foul play, most are victims of those closest to them when young. And in cases of missing kids, when not solved quickly, foul play is always investigated along with those closest to the child.

Nothing suggests that didn't happen here. Nothing suggests the family wasn't fully investigated. By local LE and the FBI. Yet no arrests, no statements regarding suspicion, or a desire for more information or cooperation, etc.

In Noah Thomas' case his parents were arrested a week after he went missing. So LE's initial comments that they didn't suspect the parents there can't really be compared to this case.

Also, the facts are quite different in this case. And none of the theories anyone has proposed make a bit of sense. The friend did something ("see, I'm not accusing the parents!"), but grandpa is lying and so are the parents, and what, covering for the friend for some reason? because there are so many "inconsistencies", or things that don't seem to add up to certian posters because "I would never leave my kid with an incapacitated old man therefore it didn't happen." Or "I would be giving very detailed interviews all the time to the media answering every speculative question of some people on the internet and since they haven't, they did something". Etc.

Bottom line, again, is that LE have done their job. Exhaustively. And there is nothing to suggest they don't know exactly when the family got there or whether there are any discrepancies or that the family has failed to fully cooperate, or give credible information or clear up any inconistencies, etc.

Finally, just because there seems to be nothing left to talk about if we can't speculate about the parents or the friend or whatever, doesn't mean all bets are off. Boredom doesn't make the family any less victims than they currently are.

There are so many other cases that could use some sleuthers.

 

[rkf]

What IS a concern, actually a GREAT concern not only for me but for humanity, is that in virtually every case, past or present, on WS, where a child has gone missing or was found dead, it's a real battle defending the parents because nearly 100% per cent of the time they are targeted by posters right off the bat, no matter what the circumstances. Then, going forward, unless a substantial lead is developed, the parents stay in that front row seat no matter what. There just seems to be a certain mindset and it's quite scary, to tell you the truth.

MOO, I think that is often the case because we hold parents responsible for their children's welfare and because statistically, a child is much more likely to be harmed or killed by a parent than a stranger.

 

[renarde]

" I personally wish JM would be interviewed By herself one time, so we could hear things from her perspective, without DK's explanations. JMO

I'm thinking maybe everyone was interviewed separately by LE.... I would hope.

 

[gitana1]

For the purpose of discussion.. it all comes down to who and what you choose to believe. I discounted the dogs both cadaver and scent early on. Think of the casey anthony case for example.. those dogs hit on the garden..the baby wasnt there. So, dogs are out for me.

GGP is probably frail and slow to move being dependent on oxygen and having to lug a small O2 delivery device with him makes him less likely to have participated in some plot to make Deorr vanish or even to chase him. IR was fishing and never saw the baby when the mom and dad returned from the store..imo. Furthermore if the parents wanted some alone time, they would sneak away so as not to tip off the baby.. they saw their "moment" "we thought deorr would be good with grandpa by the campfire" and they bolted. JMO

Of course that presupposes that you believe the baby returned from the visit to the store or even went to the store "as a family". A receipt is only proof someone bought goods and the time they bought them..imo. And i have to rell you, i throw out receipts..so I am surprised they even had one..and yes, i understand the store might have a duplicate but the sheriff said they had a receipt..jmo

IMO and only my opinion, this may boil down to "one lies and the other swears to it".. either because they know or because they trust the other person. JMO

In the Caylee Anthony case there was disturbed earth under her playhouse and the ladder was moved on the above ground pool. Dogs hit on the playhouse and by the pool. Yet you are totally confident that casey did not lay the body of her dead baby down by the pool (where casey may have drowned her after taping her nose and mouth or have tried to place her to pretend she drowned after suffocating her), or under the playhouse (where she might have tried to bury her with the borrowed shovel before giving it up for a bad job, i.e., too difficult).

I'm not. But I agree with you that any vast conspiracy involving all these parties is unlikely. However, that would go to any cover ups about a disappearance that occurred while the parents were at the store as well. Because to my knowledge, both grandpa and the friend likely recall seeing Deorr after the family returned from the store.

 

[pepelepolecat]

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.

It does sound like the parents have done this in this case. The sheriff has said they are cooperating, they've taken PGs, and he's good with them. Now hopefully the investigation IS being directed towards the solution at this point.

 

[ILOKAL]

MOO, I think that is often the case because we hold parents responsible for their children's welfare and because statistically, a child is much more likely to be harmed or killed by a parent than a stranger.

I appreciate your reply, however, this little boy and his FAMILY and friend are not statistics and should not be treated, at least not here, as though they are. Little Deorr and his family and friend are victims in THIS case and should be treated accordingly, IMO

 

[iluvmua]

I just don't get the silence from JM and DK. Why are they not out there begging people to help them find their child? Why are they not on national TV shows (Good Morning America, TODAY show etc.) holding up his missing poster and asking for any information that would lead to the safe recovery of Deorr???

I just don't get their though process at all.

And one hinky thing stands out........ Why did they not come out and correct people when they got the timeline wrong about what day they got into camp?

We heard it was a Friday but now it actually was a Thursday........ Hink all around JMO.

 

[pepelepolecat]

Shoot, I love hearing about people's own personal experiences, whether it be about watching grandkids or having friends who are ggp's age and active, people who camp, etc. But I just deleted my post. Sorry that it was considered OT.

I do, too. I think all of our personal experiences color our view of the world and how we approach cases.

 

[katydid23]

Against my better judgment I've checked in here. Sadly, I see no new news but still the same speculation. Disappointing. Nevertheless, i have a few comments:



"He went over hills, washes, and thickets. He went through a lot," Search and Rescue spokesman Jeff Newnum told ABC News affiliate ABC 15.

"All together, Emmett probably walked close to three or four miles," Newnum said.http://abcnews.go.com/US/TheLaw/emmett-trapp-wandered-off/story?id=11323106

Emmett was two years old and wandered in incredible temperature extremes through all sorts of terrain until his little body gave out and he died.



Children who die from accidents or tragedies like getting lost in the forest, are not included in those statistics. Those stats only apply to murdered children. And in the case of children found murdered, yes, most are killed by their own families or people they know, especially when under the age of five.

But Deorr has not been found murdered. He has not been found at all. So, a better question would be to ask what are the stats on missing kids? How many are found alive? How many were lost? How many ran away? How many died from accident? How many killed?

There is no doubt that of children who experience foul play, most are victims of those closest to them when young. And in cases of missing kids, when not solved quickly, foul play is always investigated along with those closest to the child.

Nothing suggests that didn't happen here. Nothing suggests the family wasn't fully investigated. By local LE and the FBI. Yet no arrests, no statements regarding suspicion, or a desire for more information or cooperation, etc.

In Noah Thomas' case his parents were arrested a week after he went missing. So LE's initial comments that they didn't suspect the parents there can't really be compared to this case.

Also, the facts are quite different in this case. And none of the theories anyone has proposed make a bit of sense. The friend did something ("see, I'm not accusing the parents!"), but grandpa is lying and so are the parents, and what, covering for the friend for some reason? because there are so many "inconsistencies", or things that don't seem to add up to certian posters because "I would never leave my kid with an incapacitated old man therefore it didn't happen." Or "I would be giving very detailed interviews all the time to the media answering every speculative question of some people on the internet and since they haven't, they did something". Etc.

Bottom line, again, is that LE have done their job. Exhaustively. And there is nothing to suggest they don't know exactly when the family got there or whether there are any discrepancies or that the family has failed to fully cooperate, or give credible information or clear up any inconistencies, etc.

Finally, just because there seems to be nothing left to talk about if we can't speculate about the parents or the friend or whatever, doesn't mean all bets are off. Boredom doesn't make the family any less victims than they currently are.

There are so many other cases that could use some sleuthers.

And that's exactly what I said in my initial post===I said that IF the sweet boy met with foul play then the parents/family friend would be a likely place to look.

I have no reason to believe the parents are kidnappers or killers and have never made any accusations like that.

But I do have problems with some the various stories that have been conveyed about the last time the boy was seen.

 

[rkf]

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.

All this has been done and yet the sheriff has not changed the POI designation of family and family friend who were at the campsite. Yes, I understand he modified POI with "because they were there", but there is some reason he called them POIs "because they were there and not witnesses "because they were there. They are not suspects, so it's not necessary for LE to mirandize them whenever they speak with one of the POIs. To call them "suspects" is to invite everyone to lawyer up. If LE had enough evidence to arrest someone, LE would have named a suspect. Clearly at this point, they do not. They may never. If the sheriff believed there was no foul play, MOO is that he would not have called in the FBI, he would not have sent drones up "just in case", he would not call the campsite a "crime scene" and he wouldn't say he is 99% sure DeOrr was at the campground. He would not have announced that other counties offered to help in a criminal investigation, with those counties subsequently helping in the investigation (in Idaho Falls, for example, an hour and a half from where DeOrr "disappeared". I doubt they were checking to see if DeOrr managed to find his way home on his own from Timber Creek.) If he didn't think foul play had occurred, I don't believe the sheriff would have methodically "ruled out" drowning (100%), said he is convinced it wasn't stranger abduction and dismissed an animal attack. Whether people agree with him or not, he seems to believe if DeOrr was there, his and the Salmon SAR dogs would have found him.

As much as we aren't supposed to draw conclusions from the use of terms such as "person of interest", terms such as "good with them", "solid" and "cooperating" don't have legal definitions, either. I'm most interested in the things the sheriff says that are not in direct answer to a question. What information does he provide freely when speaking about the case? As much as he's trying not to let details leak out when speaking to the press, saying "I'm 99% sure" about anything, when not asked "how sure" he is about something, tells us a great deal. I am surprised that he is 100% sure DeOrr isn't in the creek or reservoir, but 99% sure DeOrr was there. I would expect those numbers to be reversed. Even seven weeks after DeOrr went missing, I wouldn't be at all surprised if his body is found in the "that" water.

IMO, not wanting something to be true shouldn't preclude us from looking at what could be true, or what is most likely true (given statistics, evidence or lack there of and time elapsed) even if these hypotheses prove ultimately to be wrong.

BTW, parent or family abduction is much more common than stranger abduction and a parent, family member or family friend murdering a child is much more common than a stranger abduction.

 

[katydid23]

Maybe I am wrong, but I cannot think of or remember a missing child case where the lead investigator has come out weeks later and called the parents/family 'Persons of Interest' in the case. I know, I know, it just means they were there. But the parents are almost always there and are usually just called witnesses, not POI's. JMO

 

[rkf]

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!!!!

Imagine if she had left the child at the post office for ten minutes. That's more on par with what happened with DeOrr. Most of us parents have had close calls with our toddlers, but that was while we were watching them and turned our heads for a second. That's how quick and surprisingly capable they are! If we were leaving our children unattended in malls, parks, front yards, churches and forests for ten minutes or more at a time, I am quite sure we would have many more missing children never recovered. JMO

 

[gitana1]

And that's exactly what I said in my initial post===I said that IF the sweet boy met with foul play then the parents/family friend would be a likely place to look.

I have no reason to believe the parents are kidnappers or killers and have never made any accusations like that.

But I do have problems with some the various stories that have been conveyed about the last time the boy was seen.

Got ya'. The only thing that matters though is what was told to LE. Media sometimes gets things wrong and sometimes in initial interviews given by LE or witnesses, facts are incorrectly stated. There is high emotion at those times.

 

[rkf]

Pictures from camp. Campsite is approximate, so circles are approximate as well. First is the search radius at 2.5 miles in all directions. Second is 50 yd radius around camp.

So helpful! Really brings home how huge the area, and how many tiny places a little boy could be.