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

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

We don't know precisely where GGP's camper was parked but using Google maps and what I believe* to be the correct fire pit as reference (arrow below) then it is ~50 feet to the creek side and ~150 feet the other.

* I'm still unsure about the exact location of camp because of the use of upper and lower camp sites. I read and heard it said they were in the lower camp site but even Deorr Sr has said the reservoir was at a higher elevation? This is the opposite of what I thought/think it is?

If someone could clear up my confusion about upper/lower camp sites that would be great.

Thanks. I asked because if we follow Vilt's re-enactment I wondered how long it would take an abductor to vanish into the trees. We would also need to know how the trailer was parked; i.e., which side the door was on.

 

[ILOKAL]

I've always thought of a cougar attack as a possible scenario. But reading up on it, I learned the cougar kills by grabbing it's prey's neck and either snapping it, or causing suffocation. So really, it seems the cowboy boots would simply fall off of a limp body. Maybe with snowfall coming, hunters will see more animal tracks to follow.

I've not completely ruled out that he's in the water somewhere. Wish they would have drained the reservoir.

I've read where many believe that little Deorr's boots would have just slipped off if he was abducted (and struggled) or grabbed by a cougar and went limp. This conclusion has come about because he was wearing boots that were too big and he sometimes walked right out of them. When a person/child is walking, their feet are pulled up and down and it would be during the "up" movement of the foot that the boot/s would come off. However, if that same child was picked up or grabbed that would not be happening and I doubt very much if the boots would simply "fall off" in such a scenario. The next time my grandson comes over (Monday), I am going to do a test. He is 26-mos old and his dad recently bought him a pair of too big boots to wear to the local rodeo. Lots of children wear boots/shoes that are too big (at first) because parents want them to last a little longer and not outgrow them as fast. Small children, like Deorr, are often carried around while wearing those same too big boots/shoes and they don't just fall off their feet. Often when they ARE being carried they are asleep and their feet are limp. Maybe others could do the same experiment to see what actually happens rather than just assuming Deorr's boots would have fallen off in virtually every possible scenario. JMO

 

[ILOKAL]

I've always thought of a cougar attack as a possible scenario. But reading up on it, I learned the cougar kills by grabbing it's prey's neck and either snapping it, or causing suffocation. So really, it seems the cowboy boots would simply fall off of a limp body. Maybe with snowfall coming, hunters will see more animal tracks to follow.

I've not completely ruled out that he's in the water somewhere. Wish they would have drained the reservoir.

Also, from what I've read, when a cougar grabs the back of the neck, often the first thing they do is sever the spinal cord.

 

[Rayemonde]

Maybe the boots didn't fall off. Maybe the boots fell off far, far away from the campsite. Maybe they fell off within the search area but nobody spotted them (they were camo colour), and the dogs missed them. Maybe the boots fell off in the brook and were washed away. Maybe something ate the boots (I know, seems unlikely, but animals do eat some weird things... I remember seeing a picture of a catfish with a basketball wedged in its mouth).

 

[kammiemc]

Maybe the boots didn't fall off. Maybe the boots fell off far, far away from the campsite. Maybe they fell off within the search area but nobody spotted them (they were camo colour), and the dogs missed them. Maybe the boots fell off in the brook and were washed away. Maybe something ate the boots (I know, seems unlikely, but animals do eat some weird things... I remember seeing a picture of a catfish with a basketball wedged in its mouth).

I watched a show on animal planet dedicated to all weird stuff dogs have eaten--golf balls, big plastic sponge bob squarepants.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rayemonde]

I am inclined to think he was there too. But I don't think we ever heard that IR said the toddler was there, did we? At least not in his interview. Did the sheriff say IR said little DeOrr was there?
That bawling baby thing was specifically brought up by DK and JM as a "rumor" that they wanted to debunk. I can't recall that LE ever verified that it was actually reported. And even if it were true and not rumor, it was at 6 PM, several hours after the toddler disappeared, and we have no idea that it was him.. So that particular "sighting" wouldn't prove that the toddler had been at the campsite. However, if someone who sold the family fries said they saw the little toddler (which has not happened, at least not made public) that would kind of almost prove that he likely had been at the campsite and was about to go back. IMO, JMO all that stuff.

Yes, you're right. I don't think the sheriff would have made the statements he did about the family being "solid", or about being 99% sure Deorr was there etc, and focussing so many resources into searching the woods, if he'd been told by someone at the campsite that Deorr was in fact never there. But that could just be strategic, I guess.

 

[kammiemc]

W


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rayemonde]

I watched a show on animal planet dedicated to all weird stuff dogs have eaten--golf balls, big plastic sponge bob squarepants.

Pet dogs certainly eat all kinds of things which you wouldn't imagine would even fit down their throat, any vet can tell you that (and show you the x-rays to prove it ). I'm not sure if cougars, wolves etc are known for eating things like that, though.

Here's the catfish with the basketball, btw. If there were big fish like that in the brook or reserviour they could certainly have eaten any evidence such as boots.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/catchfish.asp

 

[ILOKAL]

Pet dogs certainly eat all kinds of things which you wouldn't imagine would even fit down their throat, any vet can tell you that (and show you the x-rays to prove it ). I'm not sure if cougars, wolves etc are known for eating things like that, though.

Here's the catfish with the basketball, btw. If there were big fish like that in the brook or reserviour they could certainly have eaten any evidence such as boots.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/catchfish.asp

Actually, mountain lion's use their bicuspids to shred their "food" which can result in them eating non-food sources. Leather and other clothing has been found in their stomachs during necropsy. IMO.

I don't believe the sheriff has given any reasonable explanation as to why he doubts a cougar attack on little Deorr. It's just not enough to say the dogs found nothing, searchers found nothing, infrared helicopter found nothing. Just WHAT was he expecting would be found from a cougar attack? Cougars pass through while hunting. They don't have permanent dens, per se. They use "day beds" in the places they hunt which is anywhere within their territory. A mother and young cubs will be more stationary and young males who have been kicked out by the mother cross into other cougars' territories while looking to find a territory of their own. They are not like wolves who habitate as a pack and stay together as a group. Cougars are solitary animals except during mating (approx 8 days) and a mother with her cubs. After mating, the male once again becomes solitary. There just is NO way, in good faith, that a cougar attack should not be looked at seriously. Prior attacks on children speak for themselves. What makes the sheriff "believe" that little Deorr is the exception. Everything, unfortunately, was in place for the ever so patient stalking and FAST moving cougar. Does it make more sense than the rest of the scenarios? Occam anyone?! IMO

 

[jessie]

I've only just realised how small his boots would be.
Two year old's only have tiny feet, so even one or two sizes too big still would be small wouldn't they?
Would his feet be about 3 inches?

Eta. - looked it up more like 5 inches or so.

 

[ILOKAL]

I've only just realised how small his boots would be.
Two year old's only have tiny feet, so even one or two sizes too big still would be small wouldn't they?
Would his feet be about 3 inches?

Eta. - looked it up more like 5 inches or so.

My grandson, age 26-mos wears a size 7 shoe but the boots my son bought are a size 8.

 

[ILOKAL]

Pet dogs certainly eat all kinds of things which you wouldn't imagine would even fit down their throat, any vet can tell you that (and show you the x-rays to prove it ). I'm not sure if cougars, wolves etc are known for eating things like that, though.

Here's the catfish with the basketball, btw. If there were big fish like that in the brook or reserviour they could certainly have eaten any evidence such as boots.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/catchfish.asp

That is TOO funny! I never thought I'd say this about a catfish, but there's something kind of "cute" about those pictures, LOL. Thanks for sharing!

 

[kammiemc]

Yes, you're right. I don't think the sheriff would have made the statements he did about the family being "solid", or about being 99% sure Deorr was there etc, and focussing so many resources into searching the woods, if he'd been told by someone at the campsite that Deorr was in fact never there. But that could just be strategic, I guess.

I agree. I am 99% sure he was there. And I have no reason or suspicion to think he wasn't. I can't really even imagine a scenario in which he was never there that makes any kind of sense at all on any level. But at this point anything is possible.
We have no idea what IR was doing or the interaction he had with the family upon arriving at the site and the family heading town and then coming back briefly before exploring. Or what kind of condition he was in! Except I think the sheriff said IR said he was fishing at some point (seemed like that at least overlapped with when the parents went exploring).
I guess, depending on all that, it's possible that he couldn't confirm whether little DeOrr was there. But far more likely is that he did tell LE he saw him.
(But I have a feeling that no matter what IR said or didn't say the sheriff would have gone just as full-throttle looking for the toddler and brought in the same resources. However, upon not being able to find him, a non-confirmation from IR might become more important in the investigation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[iluvmua]

The smart thing for JM and DK to do would be to lawyer up as well.

jmo.

 

[ILOKAL]

I agree. I am 99% sure he was there. And I have no reason or suspicion to think he wasn't. I can't really even imagine a scenario in which he was never there that makes any kind of sense at all on any level. But at this point anything is possible.
We have no idea what IR was doing or the interaction he had with the family upon arriving at the site and the family heading town and then coming back briefly before exploring. Or what kind of condition he was in! Except I think the sheriff said IR said he was fishing at some point (seemed like that at least overlapped with when the parents went exploring).
I guess, depending on all that, it's possible that he couldn't confirm whether little DeOrr was there. But far more likely is that he did tell LE he saw him.
(But I have a feeling that no matter what IR said or didn't say the sheriff would have gone just as full-throttle looking for the toddler and brought in the same resources. However, upon not being able to find him, a non-confirmation from IR might become more important in the investigation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it must be unlikely that the sheriff didn't get confirmation from all four POIs that little Deorr was indeed there. If all four didn't confirm, the sheriff couldn't be 99% sure he was there, yet he is. IMO

 

[haven71]

I've read where many believe that little Deorr's boots would have just slipped off if he was abducted (and struggled) or grabbed by a cougar and went limp. This conclusion has come about because he was wearing boots that were too big and he sometimes walked right out of them. When a person/child is walking, their feet are pulled up and down and it would be during the "up" movement of the foot that the boot/s would come off. However, if that same child was picked up or grabbed that would not be happening and I doubt very much if the boots would simply "fall off" in such a scenario. The next time my grandson comes over (Monday), I am going to do a test. He is 26-mos old and his dad recently bought him a pair of too big boots to wear to the local rodeo. Lots of children wear boots/shoes that are too big (at first) because parents want them to last a little longer and not outgrow them as fast. Small children, like Deorr, are often carried around while wearing those same too big boots/shoes and they don't just fall off their feet. Often when they ARE being carried they are asleep and their feet are limp. Maybe others could do the same experiment to see what actually happens rather than just assuming Deorr's boots would have fallen off in virtually every possible scenario. JMO

Is it wise to say that you believe that a cougar took him? Or are you open to other possibilities?

I'm not sure how your "test" would prove much. I don't think we have any idea how much bigger in size than Deorr's foot. 4 or 5 inches is different than 1, for instance, and until we knew his actual shoe size and size of the boot I don't think your experiment will provide a lot of insight.

But I am interested to hear the details and results.

 

[ILOKAL]

The smart thing for JM and DK to do would be to lawyer up as well.

jmo.

Sure . . . . How well would it sit with you if they did? JW

 

[Rayemonde]

Is this where they were - the Salmon-Challis National Forest?

The Salmon-Challis National Forest covers over 4.3 million acres in east-central Idaho. Included within the boundaries of the Forest is 1.3 million acres of the Frank Church-- River of No Return Wilderness Area, the largest contiguous wilderness area in the Continental United States

http://www.fs.usda.gov/scnf/

 

[ILOKAL]

Is it wise to say that you believe that a cougar took him? Or are you open to other possibilities?

I'm not sure how your "test" would prove much. I don't think we have any idea how much bigger in size than Deorr's foot. 4 or 5 inches is different than 1, for instance, and until we knew his actual shoe size and size of the boot I don't think your experiment will provide a lot of insight.

But I am interested to hear the details and results.

Although it seems "unreasonable" (IMO) to think Deorr's boots were 4-5 inches/4-5 sizes longer than his normal size (after all, they are HIS boots-bought for him) they may have been two sizes bigger. I would guess the experiment would render the same result in that case. Since IMO I seriously doubt his boots were 4-5 sizes/4-5 inches bigger than he wore, I'll let someone else take on that experiment.

I'll post the results.

Yes, I am open to other possibilities, as I have stated.

 

[ILOKAL]

Is this where they were - the Salmon-Challis National Forest?


http://www.fs.usda.gov/scnf/

Yes, they camped within the Salmon-Challis National Forest.

ETA: here's a link to some photos of cougars at Salmon-Challis National Forest. They're so much bigger than some think. Some of the photos (obviously) are of other wildlife from the forest.

http://www.google.com/search?q=moun...0CDwQ7AlqFQoTCLuh3qaahMgCFUhyPgodOZAF_Q&dpr=1