ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #11

[TeaTime]

A Suburban is a large SUV which has no truck bed to install the 5th wheel connection. Therefore, the camper is likely a typical pull behind travel trailer and it more than likely has a toilet and shower. I haven't seen a TT without a toilet/shower in decades. Even pop-ups have them now.

Why is it important to know what the parents were doing on the walk about to explore? If they were getting high, then they could have lost all sense of time passing and it would also add to a neglect charge, if any. All details matter.

Now what about the strange man who was staring at DeOrr and was seen by others on a hiking trail and at a store in another area, what kind of vehicle does he drive? Is there a drawing of him for possible ID?

 

[kammiemc]

i dont know who "we" are. I do not want to be included in any collective "we". TIA I have reason to believe they may have been doing something other than they said they were doing because I have a contrary OPINION. If I believed everything I heard I would have no friends and many of my patients in 38 years of nursing would not have had positive outcomes. I form opinions based on what adds up and what doesnt. JMO

Thank you for sharing your unique opinions and perspective. I appreciate when people do that (even when I don't personally agree with everything said)! The bickering over opinions that not every single person on the thread shares is a little hard to take, for me, IMO.

 

[pepelepolecat]

I was thinking that GGP had what we in the UK call a caravan because he was pulling it with a Suburban which I assume is a SUV that can't pull a "fifth wheel" trailer?

Fifth wheel trailer:

View attachment 81665

Caravan:

View attachment 81666

Of course someone will tell me that the Suburban is a pick-up truck....

This may be off-topic, but you can actually pull a fifth wheel with a Suburban if you have a special kind of hitch. That said, I've no clue what kind of camper he has. Could even have been a little pop-up, which is little more than a sleeping area.

 

[ILOKAL]

i dont know who "we" are. I do not want to be included in any collective "we". TIA I have reason to believe they may have been doing something other than they said they were doing because I have a contrary OPINION. If I believed everything I heard I would have no friends and many of my patients in 38 years of nursing would not have had positive outcomes. I form opinions based on what adds up and what doesnt. JMO

If a collective "we" is in my opinion, as was indicated, then it stands.

 

[ReadySet]

More questions: In the video talking about the re-enactment (last updated 5:24 pm Sept. 16) Mr. Vilt states

" This gentleman here was camping here. He went into his trailer just for a moment."

http://www.localnews8.com/news/kunz-family-reenacts-toddlers-disappearance/35281146

At first I thought he was referring to GGP on the day of the disappearance. But is he talking about a random guy (or someone who was there to help) who was at the campground when they were re-enacting, not GGP?

So the camp trailer shown in the video is not GGPs, correct?

Just trying to clarify, TIA

 

[desert-blue]

I am guessing that it was something like this. It's only an educated guess based on what I've seen in some of the family photos online. This is just a random photo from a google search - it is NOT GGP's actual camp trailer. You would probably see something like this at just about any developed campground in Idaho. I do believe that most of them have a bathroom, but there is no way to know for sure. Again, this is just a suggestion of what type of trailer GGP might have been pulling behind his Suburban.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

Now what about the strange man who was staring at DeOrr and was seen by others on a hiking trail and at a store in another area, what kind of vehicle does he drive? Is there a drawing of him for possible ID?

Listening to Sheriff Bowerman's answer to Nate Eaton's question about this and it comes across to me that what Vilt said in his interview is the first the Sheriff had heard about this.

Nate Eaton asks him if he'd heard anything about this and Bowerman's instant response is "just the report" which I take to mean what Vilt had said about it in his interview.

Then at the end of answering the question he then says "yes we have heard that information" which again comes across as him finding this out rather than it being told to him earlier by Jessica.

But that is just my take.

 

[desert-blue]

More questions: In the video talking about the re-enactment (last updated 5:24 pm Sept. 16) Mr. Vilt states

" This gentleman here was camping here. He went into his trailer just for a moment."

http://www.localnews8.com/news/kunz-family-reenacts-toddlers-disappearance/35281146

At first I thought he was referring to GGP on the day of the disappearance. But is he talking about a random guy (or someone who was there to help) who was at the campground when they were re-enacting, not GGP?

So the camp trailer shown in the video is not GGPs, correct?

Just trying to clarify, TIA

BBM: I thought the exact same thing at first, but after watching the video a few times, I think the camp trailer and ATV that are in the background belong to someone who happened to be camping at the campground during the re-enactment (or it could have been someone that came with the re-enactment group but that seems less likely to me). I'm pretty sure it is not GGP's camp trailer, though. MOO.

 

[kammiemc]

BBM: I thought the exact same thing at first, but after watching the video a few times, I think the camp trailer and ATV that are in the background belong to someone who happened to be camping at the campground during the re-enactment (or it could have been someone that came with the re-enactment group but that seems less likely to me). I'm pretty sure it is not GGP's camp trailer, though. MOO.

I am realizing that I am totally confused about what GGP was doing? I can't recall what the most updated information is. Is it from the sheriff's interview? I can look it up, but does anyone happen to remember offhand whether it was that GGP was watching the little toddler and turned his head for a moment and he was gone? Or, GGP watched the boy go over to the embankment (assuming he was joining his parents, I think?), or could it be the case now that he went into the camper for a moment (but not necessarily if the point of what the PI did was just to show that it doesn't take long for someone to pick up and take off with a toddler?)
I swear I have been following along. I am just not sure of where things landed, as far as we have been told, of course.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

Per Sheriff Bowerman interview re: GGP/Parents/Deorr

1, Parents supposedly thought they were turning over Deorr to GGP.
2, Parents went down to the crick/creek right next to the campground.
3, Within 10-15 minutes they go up to find their child to show him some fish in the stream and he's nowhere to be found.
4, GGP assumes he went down to them because they were in line of sight and wasn't too far from campground.

Paraphrased from video.

 

[katydid23]

Would finding a good fishing spot require more than 10 minutes/50 yards? Just wondering... I'm not all that familiar with fishing but it seems like that would barely get them down to the creek (and back).

And if your baby is getting ready to go down for an afternoon nap, why not wait a bit until you can have an hour or so to really explore a fishing area? I never understood the urgency to walk away and leave him playing in the dirt. :waitasec:

 

[katydid23]

I am realizing that I am totally confused about what GGP was doing? I can't recall what the most updated information is. Is it from the sheriff's interview? I can look it up, but does anyone happen to remember offhand whether it was that GGP was watching the little toddler and turned his head for a moment and he was gone? Or, GGP watched the boy go over to the embankment (assuming he was joining his parents, I think?), or could it be the case now that he went into the camper for a moment (but not necessarily if the point of what the PI did was just to show that it doesn't take long for someone to pick up and take off with a toddler?)
I swear I have been following along. I am just not sure of where things landed, as far as we have been told, of course.

The only reason you are confused is because all three of your versions have been communicated to us in the past.

Originally, the parents said GGP was sitting at the fire pit and was playing with DeOrr there. Later it was described that DeoRR was playing in the dirt with his toy trucks.

<modsnip> Then later, we heard from the sheriff that GGP watched the boy head towards the bank, and he assumed he went down there and found his parents because they were still in eyeline view.

<modsnip>

 

[kammiemc]

Per Sheriff Bowerman interview re: GGP/Parents/Deorr

1, Parents supposedly thought they were turning over Deorr to GGP.
2, Parents went down to the crick/creek right next to the campground.
3, Within 10-15 minutes they go up to find their child to show him some fish in the stream and he's nowhere to be found.
4, GGP assumes he went down to them because they were in line of sight and wasn't too far from campground.

Paraphrased from video.

Thanks much! So it sounds like it's possible that in this scenario GGP might have turned his head and when he turned it back he realized that DeOrr was gone, but assumed he had gone down to and met his parents because the parents were close and (possibly?) he thought that they could see him from they were. (Not sure whether the line of sight lingo means that the parents were in GGP's line of sight, or that he believed that little DeOrr was in the parents' line of sight.) I guess it's also very possible that he went into the trailer after that since he would have thought the toddler was with his parents.

 

[Mickshawn]

Because if they were just going off to look for fishing spots you'd think they would have taken Deorr with them, and not just assumed that GGP would watch him. Or at least checked with GGP that he would take care of Deorr whilst they were gone. And they said that you can see the whole area from where they were, so you'd think they would have noticed something if there was an abductor or animal, unless they were very distracted.

But...over the bank down in the creek area: Wouldn't you then NOT be able to see what's going on at the campsite?? How far of a drop is it to the creek? A foot? Two feet? 4 feet? I mean what can you actually see from down in the creek?

 

[ILOKAL]

But...over the bank down in the creek area: Wouldn't you then NOT be able to see what's going on at the campsite?? How far of a drop is it to the creek? A foot? Two feet? 4 feet? I mean what can you actually see from down in the creek?

There's a video where Nate takes us on a tour of the area and shows how steep the embankment is going down to the creek. I don't think the parents could see the campsite from down at the creek shoreline.

 

[katydid23]

There's a video where Nate takes us on a tour of the area and shows how steep the embankment is going down to the creek. I don't think the parents could see the campsite from down at the creek shoreline.

If so, why would GGP allow a 2 yr old to go down that bank alone? Why wouldnt he call out and make sure someone met him safely down there? I do not understand the way it is being explained. Isn't that total negligence to allow a toddler to walk over an embankment towards a creek and not check on him?

Saying " I thought he found his parents" does not seem sufficient. JMO

 

[Mickshawn]

I wonder..... If the parents really believe DeOrr was abducted, do they have any idea(s) specifically of WHO abducted him? Like somebody they know or are acquainted with?

 

[kammiemc]

If so, why would GGP allow a 2 yr old to go down that bank alone? Why wouldnt he call out and make sure someone met him safely down there? I do not understand the way it is being explained. Isn't that total negligence to allow a toddler to walk over an embankment towards a creek and not check on him?

Saying " I thought he found his parents" does not seem sufficient. JMO

I honestly think it had to have happened differently than what we have heard. I can't see anyone ever letting a toddler go toward an embankment without following up. Especially if the person understood that the toddler was in their care. (Even if that person thought that the care was being transitioned--I think they would make sure!)

 

[ILOKAL]

I honestly think it had to have happened differently than what we have heard. I can't see anyone ever letting a toddler go toward an embankment without following up. Especially if the person understood that the toddler was in their care. (Even if that person thought that the care was being transitioned--I think they would make sure!)

I agree. I don't think we're seeing the picture as it actually happened. Perhaps, after the re-enactment, everyone will have a better understanding. IMO

 

[KayCherry]

How about his voice, his little voice would be crying, screaming, i have had 3 kids, I know what this age is like -- especially when they don't get what they want.. (following mom & dad) -- this story is too unbelievable for me personally. Did you watch the video of the bumpy road and how long it took to get there. Could someone just explain how GGP got there, I read and read and still can't find it.

Thanks a bunch!! Keep up the great sleuthing....