ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #17

[Rayemonde]

He said "solid" very early on. Cops change their minds as evidence accumulates, the same as we do.

Plus, I think he'd be more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt and say they were "solid" to the public when he wasn't sure... Than he would to say that they "absolutely" know where he is where he wasn't sure.

I think it would be a terrible thing for him to say they "absolutely" know where DeOrr is without some decent evidence that we don't know about. I'm giving Bowerman the benefit of the doubt - I think he feels certain they know, and he is basing this certainty on evidence we don't know about. I don't think he'd say it in such strong terms otherwise. JMO.

Anyway, didn't we think that the time that "solid" was a strange choice of words... He never said "honest" or "truthful". He *did* say he thought IR was was being truthful, though, and we did discuss at the time whether it meant anything that he didn't say that about the parents.

 

[ILOKAL]

Bowerman said that the parents "absolutely" know where DeOrr is. That's hardly a minor discrepancy.

OTOH, I would say, Bowerman "said" that the parents absolutely know where DeOrr is. I think everyone (though maybe not) realizes there is no evidence that the parents know anything ABOUT little DeOrr's disappearance. As definitive as "absolutely" SOUNDS, it's really just Bowerman's take on what the parents know. IMO

 

[Trident]

I've always felt like "a trace" meant nothing physical... No clothing, or tracks or anything like that. a dog alerting wouldn't count as them finding a trace of DeOrr IMO because it could be a false alert.

I've never felt certain that the dogs failed to find any scent of DeOrr anywhere, although I know this idea led many people to conclude that he was never there in the first place...

We know that the dogs did indeed alert at the reservoir, or by the reservoir, but Bowerman put that down to the cremations that were scattered. How do we know that Deorr didn't perish at the reservoir, and then his body was removed from the scene? :thinking:

We don't know DeOrr didn't perish at the reservoir, the dogs did lead up there. All we have is Bowerman's word that the cremains scattering confused them. Did we ever learn who??? was scattering the cremains? Maybe we did, but I do not remember.

:cow:

 

[ninij9]

When I read the interviews with Bowerman he calls the parents "persons of Interest" and puts them "higher on the list" then the other two. Also he says something about not arresting them because things could change when the child is found. IMO, POI and suspect aren't always the same thing. Gramps and IR are also still POI according to the article. I think he's folding under pressure to jump on the crucifixion bandwagon. Im still waiting for one single shred of evidence that shows me this baby didn't wander off. It's been proven time and time again that children are found in areas already searched. As for the dogs, wasn't it just on baby Noah's thread we were informed how hard it is to track toddlers scent? It has me very worried that we could all be barking up the wrong tree. I want DeOrr found so bad, but if his parents are guilty, its from leaving him untended and he bolted. That's just my opinion and impression. I respect all of the theories here as I know everyone's hearts are breaking for this adorable little guy. I hope we have answers soon.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[kammiemc]

I wonder if the family has been under surveillance?

I am guessing heck yes. In the repository, when JM was picked up for Driving Without Privileges (actually kind of a serious-ish crime in ID with two days min to six months max jail time) there was no accompanying charge like speeding. That did make me wonder if they were watching her, and the second she got behind the wheel, they took advantage of having a reason to bring her in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rayemonde]

I feel like some people are casting doubt on Bowerman here... I really don't think that Bowerman has just randomly decided to name the parents as suspects after all this time out of desperation, or to please the public or whatever. I mean, give the man a little credit. Apart from anything else, he's not in this alone - I think the FBI will have agreed it was time to name them as suspects, if it wasn't their idea in the first place. JMO. Plus we know that LE have recently received "previously withheld" information. We don't know what I is, but I feel certain that it incriminate the parents.

At the beginning Bowerman was accused of being a relative of the parents who was covering up for them, and now he's being accused of making them a scapegoat... Guy can't catch a break...

 

[Midge Montana]

Thanks for pointing this out. My daughter doesn't want children, says it all the time. However if she was to become a mother, I've no doubt she would be brilliant, and wouldn't kill her child. I've yet to read anything besides innuendo to convict these parents. I find it disturbing to say the least.


Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Exactly. When I was 23 I knew I didn't want more children, for various reasons. My hubby took steps to ensure we didn't have any more. My son, who was 2 years old at the time was and continues to be my whole wide world. The reasoning behind that theory is poppycock in my opinion.

 

[Rayemonde]

OTOH, I would say, Bowerman "said" that the parents absolutely know where DeOrr is. I think everyone (though maybe not) realizes there is no evidence that the parents know anything ABOUT little DeOrr's disappearance. As definitive as "absolutely" SOUNDS, it's really just Bowerman's take on what the parents know. IMO

I disagree. I think there is evidence that the parents know something about DeOrr's disappearance. I think it just has not been released to the public.

 

[ninij9]

I feel like some people are casting doubt on Bowerman here... I really don't think that Bowerman has just randomly decided to name the parents as suspects after all this time out of desperation, or to please the public or whatever. I mean, give the man a little credit. Apart from anything else, he's not in this alone - I think the FBI will have agreed it was time to name them as suspects, if it wasn't their idea in the first place. JMO. Plus we know that LE have recently received "previously withheld" information. We don't know what I is, but I feel certain that it incriminate the parents.

At the beginning Bowerman was accused of being a relative of the parents who was covering up for them, and now he's being accused of making them a scapegoat... Guy can't catch a break...

I can't seem to find the article where he uses the word "suspect". I did find the article where he says the are " persons of interest" as well as GGP and IR. If you could point me in that direction I will amend my previous post. Also, I give him great credit. He seems to be sincere and dedicated. Even a professional can sometimes be swayed to release information due to public pressure though.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Rayemonde]

We don't know DeOrr didn't perish at the reservoir, the dogs did lead up there. All we have is Bowerman's word that the cremains scattering confused them. Did we ever learn who??? was scattering the cremains? Maybe we did, but I do not remember.

:cow:

According to the parents, it was random strangers from out of town...

 

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

I disagree. I think there is evidence that the parents know something about DeOrr's disappearance. I think it just has not been released to the public.

Exactly!

 

[Rayemonde]

I can't seem to find the article where he uses the word "suspect". I did find the article where he says the are " persons of interest" as well as GGP and IR. If you could point me in that direction I will amend my previous post. Also, I give him great credit. He seems to be sincere and dedicated. Even a professional can sometimes be swayed to release information due to public pressure though.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

http://m.localnews8.com/news/Parent...-as-suspects-in-missing-toddler-case/37626200

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sheriff...in-disappearance-of-idaho-toddler-deorr-kunz/

 

[razzledazzle]

If I had to guess, I would say for the same reason you would praise a search and rescue team that had not found you missing son... this was an answer to why say no to the $20,000 reward...

Also, I saw in the "re-enactment video" that dad had a holstered sidearm. Surely he would have also worn it camping. And if so, surely he would have had it while the three slept in the back of the Suburban and surely would have taken it off. Did he have a lockbox? Has this been checked or discussed? Was it checked to see if it had been fired by LE?
I'm not suggesting the child might have gotten a hold of it, because then you'd have to haul to town to try to get him to a doctor. Unless it was too late, then you might need to haul to a store to get something to clean any blood, something that wouldn't be questioned for having blood on it like, I don't know, female items? Then haul all the way back to clean the Suburban.

Sounds pretty out there. I'm grasping at straws. If some crazy, unthinkable thing like that happened, imagine what other campers would thing seeing a truck haulin' all over the place, and how surprised you would be to find out there were traveled roads above, that you could clearly see the whole campsite from.

Has this been discussed? I will now go back to keeping my opinions to myself.

Nice catch! Surely, someone would have heard a gunshot? IMO

 

[Trident]

I feel like some people are casting doubt on Bowerman here... I really don't think that Bowerman has just randomly decided to name the parents as suspects after all this time out of desperation, or to please the public or whatever. I mean, give the man a little credit. Apart from anything else, he's not in this alone - I think the FBI will have agreed it was time to name them as suspects, if it wasn't their idea in the first place. JMO. Plus we know that LE have recently received "previously withheld" information. We don't know what I is, but I feel certain that it incriminate the parents.

At the beginning Bowerman was accused of being a relative of the parents who was covering up for them, and now he's being accused of making them a scapegoat... Guy can't catch a break...

You're probably referring to me. Bowerman had no right, in my opinion, to come out and say the parents were "solid", then go on to take umbrage with negative posts on SM. I don't believe SM is part of his job, sounds more personal to me.

Now, he comes out with "the parents know absolutely where DeOrr is". Is this HIS opinion, or the opinion of the FBI?

He also stated in the beginning that HIS dogs would have tracked little DeOrr and found him. Then we find out HE, SB, wasn't even there, someone else was working the dogs.

This whole thing is a bit confusing, and pardon me if I don't go along with the program. I'm eagerly awaiting SB's interview tonight.

My opinion only

 

[kammiemc]

Re Occams razor - let's make sure we invoke it correctly!

<modsnip>

So for example, in the McCann case, invoking a gang of eastern europeans who steal children to order and ship them to wealthy families (or worse) violates the principle because there is no evidence such gangs exist. The theory is essentially founded on urban myth.

In the present case, the police sensibly start with the following theories.

1. Wandering

2. Occultation

3. Abduction

4. Animal attack.

The point of pursuing a "theory of the case" is that as evidence is gathered, a correct theory will be supported.

So theories 1 and 4 have been ruled out because evidence that should have been discovered was not discovered.

Theory 3 is difficult to disprove because of the difficulty of disproving a negative. Yet as no evidence of abduction emerges the theory is overtaken by theory 2.

We do have evidence of Occultation (apparently). So this is the "last theory standing".

So returning to Occam - Given Occultation - how can it have occurred?

A) In the truck. This is a good theory as it does not invoke anything extra. Also the fact that the child is missing supports the idea that a reason for occultation existed.

B) In a 3rd party's car. This theory of itself does not actually violate Occam. It's an efficient explanation for why the child is not in the search zone.

Also "if not in the truck" then theory B must be correct in the alternate.

The stuff about adoption I agree might amount to wild speculation, but I think the theory that someone else picked the kid up in collusion is not actually far fetched.

Reading between the lines my feeling is the Sheriff is saying that at least one other person in the extended family knows the truth.

See, I would think a third party's car would add an assumption of something we don't know exists. So, say, for Vilt, Occam's razor might mean the child was handed off to a third party. For me, that seems like a stretch. So the theory with the least assumptions seems to be unique to the mind of the theorist.

I dunno. I have just seen people invoke Occam's razor (pretty smart people) and be wrong. So it's certainly not foolproof.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Trident]

According to the parents, it was random strangers from out of town...

Really? The parents? From what I recall it was Bowerman stating it was an elderly person spreading the cremains of a loved one in a spot beloved by them.

Talk about shifting, whispering smells, scents, and days. The answer to the cremains is blowing on the wind to get in the noses of SB's top-notch dogs.

:cow:

 

[Dee10]

I could be wrong, but I am thinking the 4 hours unaccounted for time refers to the cash register receipt time until the lst responders showed up at the campsite. There is no way the parents would know when responders or a ranger somewhere in the park would show up though.

 

[bessie]

I've always felt like "a trace" meant nothing physical... No clothing, or tracks or anything like that. a dog alerting wouldn't count as them finding a trace of DeOrr IMO because it could be a false alert.

I've never felt certain that the dogs failed to find any scent of DeOrr anywhere, although I know this idea led many people to conclude that he was never there in the first place...

We know that the dogs did indeed alert at the reservoir, or by the reservoir, but Bowerman put that down to the cremations that were scattered. How do we know that Deorr didn't perish at the reservoir, and then his body was removed from the scene? :thinking:

Trace was my word.

TRACE:
a : a mark or line left by something that has passed; also : footprint
b : a path, trail, or road made by the passage of animals, people, or vehicles

To a dog, that would be a scent trail.

Here's what SB said:

SB: Exactly! We had&#8230;we&#8217;ve had a total of uh I believe 18 dogs in there and those dogs should have alerted, you know even after the fact, after the length of time that we&#8217;d been looking should alert should that child be in there, but my two scent dogs that were in there initially, they should have found that child. They really should have.

TG: And so are there any more plans to use those cadaver dogs or any search dogs at the moment?

SB: You know, I&#8217;m still getting calls from volunteers from all over the United States offering to come in with their dogs. I&#8217;m not sure at this point we&#8217;ve uh&#8230;We&#8217;ve covered every inch literally 20-30 times
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-**NO-DISCUSSION-quot&p=12122056#post12122056


Nate Eaton: So they called 911. You guys arrive and begin searching.

Sheriff Bowerman: &#8220;Correct.&#8221;

Nate Eaton: &#8220;And, um, at this point were their vehicles searched, the tents, I guess everything out there was probably searched?&#8221;

Sheriff Bowerman: &#8220;We did a&#8230;I think a very thorough investigation. We uh took two initial track dogs in. Uh, one of them being mine and one being Salmon Police Department. They&#8217;re trained to search for people who are lost. Um, they were given a scent. They went from the campground up to the reservoir and then back to the campground and we&#8230;we searched everywhere a small child could easily hide or climb into or fall into.&#8221;

Nate Eaton: &#8220;But nothing&#8230;&#8221;

Sheriff Bowerman: &#8220;And we found absolutely nothing.&#8221;

Nate Eaton: &#8220;Talk a little bit about the cremains that were dumped into, because the dogs were getting a scent&#8230;&#8221;

Sheriff Bowerman: &#8220;Right! Unbeknownst to us while we were doing our grid search, someone came in and wanted to deposit cremains of a loved one at that site, and I&#8217;m assuming it&#8217;s a favorite site of their loved one, and without thinking, they deposited cremains, not realizing they were in the middle of a crime scene and what it would do. Within a couple days our dogs were telling us we need to spend more time up at the reservoir, and so we dove it for 2-3 more days and put side-scan sonar, and then we find out from one of our BLM (?) Rangers that they stopped this individual coming out and were informed they had deposited some cremains in the reservoir.&#8221;

Nate Eaton: &#8220;Had he&#8230;had Deorr been in the reservoir, his body would have been recovered by now?&#8221;

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-**NO-DISCUSSION-quot&p=12007596#post12007596

Note that he says within a couple of days the dogs were leading them to the reservoir. That sounds to me like the cadaver dogs were present and working for a day or two before they led them back to the reservoir. But I certainly could be wrong. Maybe he'll clarify tonight. To get back to my original point, whatever the order of events, SB is confident that the dogs searched thoroughly, and detected nothing of relevance.

 

[ninij9]

http://m.localnews8.com/news/Parent...-as-suspects-in-missing-toddler-case/37626200

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sheriff...in-disappearance-of-idaho-toddler-deorr-kunz/

Thank you Raymondo. I still don't see a direct quote from him using the word "Suspect" I see it in the title of article, but he uses the words "top persons of interest" I still think the media are playing with words. They have been POI for awhile. I do agree that they have been "less than truthful" but that could be attributed to many different things up to and including murder for sure, but it could also be that they did drugs during the timeframe that the child disappears. I'm not trying to argue with you, your posts are always good and informative, I'm just not seeing this angle yet. Thank you for finding the articles for me. [emoji4]

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Inthedetails]

lately it seems like you'd be in the majority in that hinky vibe, from what I can tell. Trying to distract myself from the debate over women's rights here, I'm going to point out that she may just have BRF syndrome (google it, it's inappropriate for me to describe here). I have BRF syndrome badly, so maybe that's why she doesn't set mine off with her looks so badly. I have countless candid pictures of myself looking as though I'm about to murder my dog, husband, a plate of fries, etc. So her face seems normal to me. DKsr, however, set mine off in that first interview badly. Yes, this is humour. If you want none of that, ignore this post please.

OMG, I love WS so much. I know people make fun of people who diagnose themselves on the internet, but sometimes the web can be a good doctor, as in this post. I too have BRF (aka RBF), but never had a name for it until today! Thank you so much.

I have it a bit tough because I'm married to a man with TES (Twinkle-eye Syndrome), who always looks on the verge of some charming laugh-inducing mischief, though he's really quite serious. Our photos together look "off" sometimes, and I avoid the camera.

Thank you thank you thank you for sharing. This post means the world to me, despite the scowl on my face as I post this. I'm actually thrilled.

Sorry for the tangent.