ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #15

[TxJan1971]

NANCY GRACE TRANSCRIPT
Tuesday, December 15, 2015

http://www.hlntv.com/shows/nancy-grace/articles/2015/12/15/deorr-kunz-missing

NG: Good evening. I’m Nancy Grace. I want to thank you for being with us. Bombshell tonight – to Idaho. A beautiful 2-year-old boy goes missing from a family camping trip. Please, let’s bring him home for Christmas. Take a look at this little boy. The family there – they insist the child has been kidnapped. To Nate Eaton, reporter with East Idaho News.com, take me to the moment we learn Baby Deorr Kunz is gone.

00:32
NE: Well, Deorr’s parents had gone a couple yards away from the camping site “to look inside the reservoir”… They assumed that little Deorr would be safe “with his grandfather and a friend of grandpa.”

00:42
NE:
They get back. They say to grandpa, “Where’s Deorr?” He says, “I thought he was with you.” They say, “we left (??) him with you” Panic ensues. They search for the little boy. They can’t find him. They call 911. Search crews arrive, and for weeks and weeks and months and months, no sign of this little boy.

01:00
NG: Nate Eaton, I don’t quite understand the logistics of what you’re saying. NE is joining us from the East Idaho News. Um…you’re saying the parents walked a couple of yards. Those were your words. A couple of yards from the campsite. Now, a couple of yards … a yard is three feet. So that’s…a couple would be six feet. Six feet from the camping site and he goes missing?

01:27
NE: A little bit more than six feet, Nancy. So this is a really remote campsite, I mean rocky terrain to get into this campsite. There’s trees all around. The campsite is secluded, and the parents, they were just gonna’ “go up this trail around to see the reservoir” will be gone – they say they were gone for about 20 minutes & when they came back the child was missing.

 

[SweetT]

WHAT? The reservoir that they didnt know you could see their campsite from till later? Doesn't make sense. You know its stuff like this that makes me suspect the parents when I know they are supposedly not suspects..Frustrating! 20 minutes now? Nothing makes sense...are these people being purposely deceptive or does NE have this wrong.?

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

Although there is added detail in this latest Nate interview it is consistent with the early July 16th video where Nate shows the camp site (except it was 10/15 minutes the parents were gone) and the later drone footage.

It does make me wonder after all this time why the one journalist that has spoken to the parents the most is still stuck with questioning how far and how long the parents were gone.

 

[Rayemonde]

I don't think NE got that info from the parents. I think he's just doing it from memory - and misremembering everything. JMO.

 

[iluvmua]

WHAT? The reservoir that they didnt know you could see their campsite from till later? Doesn't make sense. You know its stuff like this that makes me suspect the parents when I know they are supposedly not suspects..Frustrating! 20 minutes now? Nothing makes sense...are these people being purposely deceptive or does NE have this wrong.?

you and me both...........

And NOW it is JUST coming out that it was the resivoir they went to and not the creek?


:gaah:

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

you and me both...........

And NOW it is JUST coming out that it was the resivoir they went to and not the creek?


:gaah:

My interpretation of the July 16th Nate video and the later October drone footage video is that the parents did walk toward the reservoir.

 

[iluvmua]

So why are the parents not wanting to get out the correct information???? their child is missing?????

I truly don't get why they don't bother to have things like this corrected.

jmo

 

[iluvmua]

If they were at the resivior then why not say we walked towards the resivior instead of we walked toward the creek like it's been reported for the last 5 months?

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

So why are the parents not wanting to get out the correct information???? their child is missing?????

I truly don't get why they don't bother to have things like this corrected.

jmo

They have never claimed they went to the reservoir did they? But if it turns out they did then it makes the very early scent trail to the reservoir and back to camp more interesting.

 

[iluvmua]

They have never claimed they went to the reservoir did they? But if it turns out they did then it makes the very early scent trail to the reservoir and back to camp more interesting.

Not that I know of....... But it would be very interesting if in fact they did actually go to the resivior.

Didn't someone dump cremains at the resiviuor too?

 

[ClaireNC]

I don't think NE got that info from the parents. I think he's just doing it from memory - and misremembering everything. JMO.

I agree. Another case of horrible reporting. It's obvious that Nancy Grace doesn't do any fact checking before she runs with a story.

 

[iluvmua]

maybe this is the reason why LE is so quite about all off this.

maybe they know that they were actually at the resivior and not the creek like they have claimed all along?

jmo

 

[SweetT]

If they went to the reservoir and not the creek, it would make sense then that the scent dogs went to the reservoir and back...it would mean that the baby did follow mom and dad to the reservoir, before I thought it was odd the dogs would go there, but now it could make some sense. But why not state that up front (parents)?
Again just frustrating that after all this time we still do not seem to have all the pieces.

 

[kammiemc]

If they went to the reservoir and not the creek, it would make sense then that the scent dogs went to the reservoir and back...it would mean that the baby did follow mom and dad to the reservoir, before I thought it was odd the dogs would go there, but now it could make some sense. But why not state that up front (parents)?
Again just frustrating that after all this time we still do not seem to have all the pieces.

Nate has to be mistaken, right? The parents said in their first interview that they were gone 10 minutes and 50 yards away. There is no way they would lie where they went when their child went missing. Nate has been confused before. Hopefully there will be a clarification.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

Yeah, the cremains incident threw up more questions than answers. Apart from anything else just how cagey LE have been about the incident.

Which to be fair could be said about many things in this case.

I know a lot here don't rate Nancy or Nate very highly and I agree when it comes to consistency of facts, but with Nate actually being at the scene and talking with those involved extensively, he must know a lot more than us. Which is why I wonder why he still seems to be bothered about where and how long the parents were gone.

Must be a reason.

 

[Niner]

It's hasn't been updated in a while, but there is a timeline in the media thread: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...ISCUSSION-quot

I made a more detailed one, but I guess Bessie didn't want to post that one... and I deleted it from my files... :dunno:

I keep checking back and hoping a big "FOUND" will be added to the title. This situation is so sad.

Me three...

If they went to the reservoir and not the creek, it would make sense then that the scent dogs went to the reservoir and back...it would mean that the baby did follow mom and dad to the reservoir, before I thought it was odd the dogs would go there, but now it could make some sense. But why not state that up front (parents)?
Again just frustrating that after all this time we still do not seem to have all the pieces.

And that's why I believe my Timeline wasn't posted. I had the times down for that Friday, and than the different times of "when" they arrived - Thursday or Friday!!??!! became a mystery!

I too wondered about the dogs going to the reservoir - now it DOES make sense, as you say.

raying: for DeOrr! Where are you little boy??!!!

 

[SapphireSteel]

I agree. Another case of horrible reporting. It's obvious that Nancy Grace doesn't do any fact checking before she runs with a story.

Anyone who watches NG gets the accuracy they deserve imo

 

[ReadySet]

So...someone can try to contact NG or Nate to ask for clarification, but I don't remember, it's against the rules to post about that here, right?

My understanding is that the only way to get to the reservoir from the campsite is to either 1) cross the creek 2) walk through the stand of trees at the south end of the campground 3) go back to the entrance of the campground where the roads fork, and go on either the east or west roads to the reservoir. Isn't that correct? That's why I've never been able to see little Deorr walking to the reservoir on his own, among other reasons.

*****************
OT: I've posted recent interviews with Shasta Groene in the serial killers joseph duncan thread.

 

[SweetT]

10 minutes to 20 minutes 50 ft or so to 1/4 of a mile are huge differences IMO when a baby is missing.
I haven't watched every interview etc but what I was believing for quite some time was that Mom and dad went to the creek no more than 50 ft/yds? Not sure on that one at this time but that they went to look around, found some minnows and went straight back to camp to get Deor. Now if they went to the reservoir there is so much more place/time for a baby to get lost to than what was originally stated.
Is this Nate guy muddying the waters on purpose? I just dont get it.
A quarter mile walk to the reservoir and back would be easily done in 20 minutes if you went there and pretty much straight back. But Why is it now they walked to the reservoir and before they only knew about the reservoir and it's view of the whole campground when LE was called?

 

[SweetT]

Anyone who watches NG gets the accuracy they deserve imo

I can honestly say I've watched Nancy Grace only 2 times in my life..and that was enough. So I'm only getting any of my info right now off this site and what is being stated here.