ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #13

[desert-blue]

Most EMT bags are large duffle bags that are bright orange in color (google EMT bags). There could be variations but that seems to be the norm. It's my opinion that if there were a lot of SAR folks up there, it probably wouldn't be unusual to see someone carrying one, so it wouldn't be suspicious or memorable, especially if the person carrying it was wearing SAR clothing (usually also bright orange). I think it would be relatively easy to steal one without being noticed. It doesn't sound like the theft was investigated very thoroughly, and with all the unchecked traffic coming in and out (searchers, family, friends, other campers, cremain-spreaders, etc.), it's likely to remain a mystery for now. The vehicles of the POIs were searched and the sheriff hasn't indicated that anything from the EMT bag was found, although we have no idea what evidence was turned over to the FBI (outside of the PI's statement about the ax and coveralls). I think it's kind of strange that the person off-camera kept asking them to address that "rumor" during their interview. Maybe I'm kind of dense, but I'm not sure what they would have said to clear things up? Just that a bag was stolen and they knew nothing about it, or was there some rumor that related the theft to them? Just trying to make sense of things. All MOO.

 

[PowMom01]

Deorr's story brought me to WS and I cannot believe he is still missing. I honestly didn't expect this to go on for so long without ANY clues. I hope hunting season brings SOMETHING. No parent should have to endure years without knowing, even though many must.

My friend and I starting reading the Missing 411 books. I find them fascinating and frustrating at the same time.

Where are you Deorr??

 

[lindugh]

I find it odd that in the parents interview they said they went exploring. SB says they went with IR to check out a fishing hole. Why 2 different stories?

SB didn't say who went into the store that day. Was it mom, dad & deorr or just mom & dad or just dad. If mom & dad went into the store, where was deorr? Left in the truck alone? Was the store the same place they pumped gas? If I understand SB correctly, they have video of someone pumping gas, so maybe they have video of who got out of the truck to go into the store. I'm just speculating here cuz this story is really bothering me and time is of the essence. Daddy begins his interview with the 911 call and really never speaks about the happenings at the campground when deorr went missing.

I would like to know when was the last time anyone saw DeOrr other than the 4 at the campground?

This is just me speculating. JMO. My hinky meter is off the charts.

 

[ILOKAL]

I find it odd that in the parents interview they said they went exploring. SB says they went with IR to check out a fishing hole. Why 2 different stories?

SB didn't say who went into the store that day. Was it mom, dad & deorr or just mom & dad or just dad. If mom & dad went into the store, where was deorr? Left in the truck alone? Was the store the same place they pumped gas? If I understand SB correctly, they have video of someone pumping gas, so maybe they have video of who got out of the truck to go into the store. I'm just speculating here cuz this story is really bothering me and time is of the essence. Daddy begins his interview with the 911 call and really never speaks about the happenings at the campground when deorr went missing.

I would like to know when was the last time anyone saw DeOrr other than the 4 at the campground?

This is just me speculating. JMO. My hinky meter is off the charts.

If you're looking for places to fish, that IS exploring, no? That store does not sell diesel. They stopped for diesel between home and the campground. There are no surveillance cameras at the store. They don't have a video of someone pumping gas.

 

[Popeye'sMom]

This is all my own opinion.
I feel like initially, the Sherriff’s department thought that this was simply a toddler that wandered into the woods and the parents were panicking. I don’t think they did everything at the onset that was comprehensive and would have included investigating the possibility of foul play/abduction.
Some of the things that have led me to that conclusion is the fact that it took so long for the first SOs to even arrive. The information that there were campers there but that they left and were only checked out afterwards. Just those two things make me think they weren’t treating the area as a potential crime scent.
The stories we keep getting have more/different details. I don’t think the POIs were initially questioned as if there might have been a crime. I think the SOs got the bare bones details and figured time is of the essence and started the ground search. I think the details have come out much later and a little different because it took the Sherriff a long time to come to the conclusion that something other than “getting lost” might have happened. Therefore, the real questioning happened much later, after the fact, and it appears, in pieces. That would explain the comment, “We learned during the investigation that they arrived on Thursday.” It would appear, they didn’t get all of the facts, stories and evidence as soon as they arrived.
Another comment that made me think the Sherriff had a preconceived notion and didn’t consider anything else is when he said “We should have found him there.” To me that statement means I know he wandered off, I can’t believe we can’t find him.
To be clear, I think abduction is the least likely scenario but I do think that when you go into a situation with the “answer” already in your head you are likely to miss things that don’t align with that.
Of course, this is all my own opinion.

 

[desert-blue]

This is all my own opinion.
I feel like initially, the Sherriff’s department thought that this was simply a toddler that wandered into the woods and the parents were panicking. I don’t think they did everything at the onset that was comprehensive and would have included investigating the possibility of foul play/abduction.
Some of the things that have led me to that conclusion is the fact that it took so long for the first SOs to even arrive. The information that there were campers there but that they left and were only checked out afterwards. Just those two things make me think they weren’t treating the area as a potential crime scent.
The stories we keep getting have more/different details. I don’t think the POIs were initially questioned as if there might have been a crime. I think the SOs got the bare bones details and figured time is of the essence and started the ground search. I think the details have come out much later and a little different because it took the Sherriff a long time to come to the conclusion that something other than “getting lost” might have happened. Therefore, the real questioning happened much later, after the fact, and it appears, in pieces. That would explain the comment, “We learned during the investigation that they arrived on Thursday.” It would appear, they didn’t get all of the facts, stories and evidence as soon as they arrived.
Another comment that made me think the Sherriff had a preconceived notion and didn’t consider anything else is when he said “We should have found him there.” To me that statement means I know he wandered off, I can’t believe we can’t find him.
To be clear, I think abduction is the least likely scenario but I do think that when you go into a situation with the “answer” already in your head you are likely to miss things that don’t align with that.
Of course, this is all my own opinion.

I agree that initially, this was just a search and rescue effort. I think for at least the first couple of days everything was focused on finding the little boy alive. Getting searchers out there looking for him was priority number one and things like securing the scene and/or checking vehicles would have seemed strange and hindering at the time. Hindsight is always 20/20. Who knew at the time that he'd still be missing three months later? In retrospect, it's easy to say how things should have been done, but I really think that everyone thought he just wandered away and would be found (not necessarily alive, but at least found). Even now, the campsite is still not a crime scene and LE have not indicated they suspect foul play.

 

[Rayemonde]

Deorr's story brought me to WS and I cannot believe he is still missing. I honestly didn't expect this to go on for so long without ANY clues. I hope hunting season brings SOMETHING. No parent should have to endure years without knowing, even though many must.

My friend and I starting reading the Missing 411 books. I find them fascinating and frustrating at the same time.

Where are you Deorr??

There' s an interesting thread about the Missing 411 books, here in the basement:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...issing-411-People-Vanishing-in-National-Parks

 

[Onebest]

I agree that initially, this was just a search and rescue effort. I think for at least the first couple of days everything was focused on finding the little boy alive. Getting searchers out there looking for him was priority number one and things like securing the scene and/or checking vehicles would have seemed strange and hindering at the time. Hindsight is always 20/20. Who knew at the time that he'd still be missing three months later? In retrospect, it's easy to say how things should have been done, but I really think that everyone thought he just wandered away and would be found (not necessarily alive, but at least found). Even now, the campsite is still not a crime scene and LE have not indicated they suspect foul play.

It must be a massive challenge to launch an all out SAR effort for a missing toddler and at the same time treat it like a crime scene. JMO

 

[katydid23]

It must be a massive challenge to launch an all out SAR effort for a missing toddler and at the same time treat it like a crime scene. JMO

Yes. I don't think it is even possible in a small town with very few officers available.

 

[Dee10]

Yes. I don't think it is even possible in a small town with very few officers available.

I agree and within the first week the sheriff did call in the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). Article dated July 16th - http://www.ktvb.com/story/news/loca...ty-sheriffs-office-calls-in-experts/30213577/

POIs' named approx. July 28th - http://www.ktvb.com/story/news/loca...-search-deorr-kuna-persons-interest/30799181/

FBI came in around July 31st - http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/31/us-usa-idaho-toddler-idUSKCN0Q52OP20150731

 

[desert-blue]

It must be a massive challenge to launch an all out SAR effort for a missing toddler and at the same time treat it like a crime scene. JMO

Agreed - I'm not sure what's normal protocol for a missing child - are there certain time frames and/or red flags that would alert LE to start considering other options? Or, are they supposed to consider that from the very start? I honestly don't know. Regardless, it would be a challenge to do both, especially given the limited resources available in such a sparsely populated area.

 

[SuperTmo]

I think after the first search with the helicopters that very first night, they should have started considering something else happened when they didn't find the boy. I personally believe a crime took place and whoever did it will get away with it because nobody considered alternatives beyond what the parents told LE. By the time they did, it was too late.

 

[katydid23]

When a child goes missing in a campground, imo, one has to treat it as if the child is lost. It is imperative that the search begins immediately for a child walking away and lost in the woods. It is the only way the chid can be saved if that is what happened. The other options can be investigated later. If a child was abducted then it is sad it takes a bit longer to check that situation out. But it is much less likely that the child lost scenario, imo.

 

[SuperTmo]

When a child goes missing in a campground, imo, one has to treat it as if the child is lost. It is imperative that the search begins immediately for a child walking away and lost in the woods. It is the only way the chid can be saved if that is what happened. The other options can be investigated later. If a child was abducted then it is sad it takes a bit longer to check that situation out. But it is much less likely that the child lost scenario, imo.

I agree with this. But how long should they search before they start saying, "hmmm... maybe he's not lost?"

Do we know at what point the parents said they thought he was taken? I know they said it in their interview, but I wonder if they told the first responders that as well.

 

[gliving]

Agreed - I'm not sure what's normal protocol for a missing child - are there certain time frames and/or red flags that would alert LE to start considering other options? Or, are they supposed to consider that from the very start? I honestly don't know. Regardless, it would be a challenge to do both, especially given the limited resources available in such a sparsely populated area.

There were four adults at the scene who all said Deorr suddenly disappeared. I suppose once LE heard all their stories is when they began to look at it a different way. Calling in other agencies including the missing and exploited children's group.

 

[ILOKAL]

Yes. I don't think it is even possible in a small town with very few officers available.

I've never heard it mentioned if any of the forest rangers and other employees were involved with the search and securing the area.

 

[ILOKAL]

It must be a massive challenge to launch an all out SAR effort for a missing toddler and at the same time treat it like a crime scene. JMO

Onebest, I asked you a question at my Post #655 because of your expertise with SAR. I'm afraid you may have missed it. If you have the time, perhaps you could educate me a bit. Thanks so much.

 

[neesaki]

Wouldn't that have put him at the upper campground and he would see that other people were there?

Anyway, I don't think the elderly couple camping had people coming and going before Deorr disappeared, I think that the adult children came up to help search. Some of the posts make it sound like this couple had a revolving door on their campsite and that one of their visitors could have taken the baby. But I don't think that is what SB was meaning at all.

I just listened to Tricia's interview with Sheriff B. again, and he stated there was "a family" camping in the upper campground, specifically, "an elderly couple" and "some of their children" who came up to join them. So apparently they were there camping out as a family, and just happened to join in the search the first and "maybe the second day" (he wasn't sure) before they "disappeared".

The fact that there were several people in separate vehicles at different times would lead one to believe that there was some activity in and out of the campground via that same road that is only 20-30 yards from the lower campground where Deorr and his family were camping. No, they weren't actually going into the lower campground, but they were going beside and past it to reach the upper campground.
Revolving door or not, this is quite different information than what we had known prior to Tricia's interview.

Someone else posted earlier re: Deorr Sr. being concerned about that upper campground and the road that went up to it, that they couldn't see it or anyone up there, but someone up there could see them, (paraphrasing). I had forgotten this statement he made back then, which now takes on a whole new meaning for me after learning there were actually people up there. JMO

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Agreed - I'm not sure what's normal protocol for a missing child - are there certain time frames and/or red flags that would alert LE to start considering other options? Or, are they supposed to consider that from the very start? I honestly don't know. Regardless, it would be a challenge to do both, especially given the limited resources available in such a sparsely populated area.

Normally, two types of investigation start at the beginning of a missing child/adult case (missing person and criminal). They will run parallel investigations until it is decided which way they are led by the evidence and other factors then they will lump it together under the same heading. They don't want to miss critical steps for a criminal proceeding by ignoring the possibility.

We know this was happening because of the reference SB gave about the drones being used to photograph the area:

Sheriff Bowerman also confirmed that drones are being brought to the Timber Creek/ Stone Reservoir area but doesn't believe they will be used in the search. Instead the drones will be used to document the area for evidence if a trial in connection to DeOrr's disappearance is ever convened.

http://www.localnews8.com/news/new-details-on-search-for-deorr-kunz-jr/34281340

BBM

 

[Mickshawn]

OneBest....The info you posted about tracking dogs and scents is fascinating!!!