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

[kammiemc]

I'm so sorry that happened to you!

That's also the first thing I looked at when this case started, was past photos of him. He seems like a happy little guy and well taken care of. That doesn't mean an accident with a cover-up couldn't have happened, of course, but kind of dismissed the whole adoption two years later for me.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Over the past six months I have read so many posts from people who have never met this family saying how clearly loving they were toward their son based on pics. I tortured myself by going back through cases of moms who killed their children to see if I could tell anything from their pics. (Not saying at all that I think this was homicide!) Based on pics, Casey Anthony looked like the sweetest, cutest, most loving mom there could possibly be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ava Adore]

Over the past six months I have read so many posts from people who have never met this family saying how clearly loving they were toward their son based on pics. I tortured myself by going back through cases of moms who killed their children to see if I could tell anything from their pics. (Not saying at all that I think this was homicide!) Based on pics, Casey Anthony looked like the sweetest, cutest, most loving mom there could possibly be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. I wasn't saying the pics have convinced me of their innocence, just that we couldn't deduce from pictures that he was being abused or not loved because they don't show that (was responding to someone else's post).

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[Sillybilly]

Numerous online links indicate it was Vilt who offered the initial ten thousand reward in September.

from:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...lers-disappearance/+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

Vilt is offering a ten thousand dollar reward for information that leads to DeOrr.

 

[neesaki]

I can't remember exactly what Vilt thought happened, but I think maybe he thought a relative of Jessica would actually hide behind a tree at the campsite and grab Deorr whilst Jessica kept Vernal out of the way off fishing. Hence a "planned abduction".

Just catching up, this is an interesting theory. I had thought of the trafficking angle a while back, but had pretty much discounted it. Now this. Interesting too that Klein didn't state he had ruled out "abduction". He stated he had ruled out "forced abduction". Apologies if I'm repeating something already posted, I'm pretty far behind.

 

[Ava Adore]

When did DeOrr senior obtain a lawyer? Is it possible someone advised him that nationwide attention wasn't needed yet for the reasons stated by Arnie?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[Midge Montana]

Hi Midge ... maybe my post #627 will answer a few questions. thanks.

Specific to your question there is much more to the reward money issues

Rewards are almost never offered right away

--- remember police and searchers and the general public are already on the lookout , no reward money required
--- besides it would be foolish to offer a big reward early in a case that is expected to be solved right away.
--- typically witnesses come forward because they are good people trying to help , they do not do it for money
--- typically rewards are offered if a case starts to go cold , it gives the public a heads up to keep looking
--- in crime and missing person cases police are already inundated with hundreds of pest tips , but they must listen to them all for the one good one in there somewhere
--- when a reward is offered the hundreds of pest tips becomes thousands of pest tips.
--- having said that , there is a time and place where rewards are offered right away , and usually are advertised nation wide , during serious known abduction cases or kidnappings when urgency is required.

Hope that makes sense. And even thought the DeOrr case is becoming a "cold" one (unsolved after 6 months) I dont think any big rewards are offered . I could be wrong. best wishes.

.

Hmm...I still don't think those are good reasons for parents to be AGAINST free reward money being offered to find their precious child. I'm simply trying to, as a mom, put myself in their shoes. I would welcome any and all legitimate forms of help. They were not adverse to accepting money from various campaigns and whatnot.
I guess I could *maybe* understand them not wanting to take out a bank loan for it, but to have it donated would be no skin off their noses.
I don't see how any of your reasons would harm the case whatsoever. From a LE perspective maybe they would be inundated with tips, but that would be LE's problem and WAS LE against the reward being offered?
Also, do you know when this offer was made? As for getting nationwide exposure...wasn't it the parents' suggestion that an abduction had taken place? (Excuse me if I'm mistaken I only picked up on this case three days ago and do have some confusion about a few things.) Did they strongly feel that the person(s) that had abducted the child were staying very close to that area, not going out of state, etc.? What would lead them to believe that?
Thank you for your answers.

 

[ZooSleuth]

When did DeOrr senior obtain a lawyer? Is it possible someone advised him that nationwide attention wasn't needed yet for the reasons stated by Arnie?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

He got a lawyer Monday when the news that the parents are suspects broke. Deorr Sr. claimed to Vilt that the sheriff told him not to do the reward and get national attention. That was most likely a lie.

 

[TeaTime]

I have a few very dear friends that voluntarily gave physical custody of their children to their ex-husbands and retained only rights of visitation. They did it for all the right reasons; the father made much more money; the father owned the house which was in the school district, in which the children were raised thus far, in a neighborhood full of their friends and even parental grandparents; the mothers had no money to pay for litigation of custody issues and knew that there would be a monthly battle over child support payments; the mothers could afford only to rent a studio apartment and had no means to provide suitable housing for their kids; the fathers loved the kids and they him; he was also a great parent. It didn't make them bad mothers any more than it makes the fathers bad parents when the tables are reversed and the mother has physical custody and dad gets visitation. Society needs to get over this sexist prejudice. I was painful for my friends as people always looked sideways at them. No one looks sideways at the dads though.

I think Jessica could not have fought for custody anyway and therefore surrendered those rights. Good grief, she wasn't even 22 yet, probably unemployed and had no way to pay the hourly rate of an attorney for a long and drawn out legal battle. I think it is smart for a 22 year old woman, already the mother of 3, to have her tubes tied. Why should she take BC pills which have horrible side effects for many women and are known to cause cancer later in life? There is no crime in not wanting MORE children. There is no crime in not wanting ANY children.

It proves nothing and was despicable of Vilt to announce this to the world as if there was anything relevant to it.

Furthermore, isn't it nice that Vilt has a letter stating all sorts of nasty things about these two? I mean they had no say in what he wrote. He could write anything to them, it proves nothing.

Self-serving letters are not reliable.

Just who was going to put up the money for a reward? Someone had to put it up. You can't just offer a reward and not pay if the child is found. It doesn't work that way. I can say with 100% certainty that neither DK, JM or any of their families could come up with a $20K reward fund. Not many people can.

If Vilt was so discouraged by the behavior of the parents, he should have just walked off the case and kept his mouth shut. So what if the parents said they fired him? Did that change the outcome of his investigation? I hope not, but it seems to have flavored his opinion of them. He has no facts that point to criminal activity, his letter simply reveals that he doesn't like or believe the parents. Oh well, stand in line Vilt.

I have been thinking about Kleins' 4 hour statement and have no idea what to make of it.

Who was that young woman in TX that said she handed her 10 month old baby over to a couple in a park and it was arranged by another woman? She is in prison right? How about the child in Chicago that was given to a couple that came to the door and asked for him? This is a common story among child murderers but, there is not one case of it being true. I guess this was just one theory Vilt had, not one he lingered over.

 

[Ava Adore]

I have a few very dear friends that voluntarily gave physical custody of their children to their ex-husbands and retained only rights of visitation. They did it for all the right reasons; the father made much more money; the father owned the house which was in the school district, in which the children were raised thus far, in a neighborhood full of their friends and even parental grandparents; the mothers had no money to pay for litigation of custody issues and knew that there would be a monthly battle over child support payments; the mothers could afford only to rent a studio apartment and had no means to provide suitable housing for their kids; the fathers loved the kids and they him; he was also a great parent. It didn't make them bad mothers any more than it makes the fathers bad parents when the tables are reversed and the mother has physical custody and dad gets visitation. Society needs to get over this sexist prejudice. I was painful for my friends as people always looked sideways at them. No one looks sideways at the dads though.

I think Jessica could not have fought for custody anyway and therefore surrendered those rights. Good grief, she wasn't even 22 yet, probably unemployed and had no way to pay the hourly rate of an attorney for a long and drawn out legal battle. I think it is smart for a 22 year old woman, already the mother of 3, to have her tubes tied. Why should she take BC pills which have horrible side effects for many women and are known to cause cancer later in life? There is no crime in not wanting MORE children. There is no crime in not wanting ANY children.

It proves nothing and was despicable of Vilt to announce this to the world as if there was anything relevant to it.

Furthermore, isn't it nice that Vilt has a letter stating all sorts of nasty things about these two? I mean they had no say in what he wrote. He could write anything to them, it proves nothing.

Self-serving letters are not reliable.

Just who was going to put up the money for a reward? Someone had to put it up. You can't just offer a reward and not pay if the child is found. It doesn't work that way. I can say with 100% certainty that neither DK, JM or any of their families could come up with a $20K reward fund. Not many people can.

If Vilt was so discouraged by the behavior of the parents, he should have just walked off the case and kept his mouth shut. So what if the parents said they fired him? Did that change the outcome of his investigation? I hope not, but it seems to have flavored his opinion of them. He has no facts that point to criminal activity, his letter simply reveals that he doesn't like or believe the parents. Oh well, stand in line Vilt.

I have been thinking about Kleins' 4 hour statement and have no idea what to make of it.

Who was that young woman in TX that said she handed her 10 month old baby over to a couple in a park and it was arranged by another woman? She is in prison right? How about the child in Chicago that was given to a couple that came to the door and asked for him? This is a common story among child murderers but, there is not one case of it being true. I guess this was just one theory Vilt had, not one he lingered over.

[emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106]

Yes.

Also, I felt Vilt was spewing a bit of vitriol over the "being fired" comment.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[bessie]

Trying very hard to think of a plausible explanation for the parents not wanting Vilt to take this case nationwide for exposure and also why in God's green earth would they be against him putting up $20,000 of his own money as a reward?!?!

Can someone PLEASE help me out with that?

Per Vilt:

I offered a $20,000 reward, and they did not want me offering the reward. They said that the Sheriff didn’t want it. They said the Sheriff didn’t want to go public, and the Sheriff never mentioned that to me and so… I started finding little…little things that they were inconsistent.

Perhaps there is some truth in this statement, and the Sheriff did discourage them from offering a large reward. I've always felt that was a possibility because it's not an uncommon stance among LE agencies. We know that since late July, SB was convinced there was no abduction. And if, as some have suggested, he suspected the parents early on -- at least by August -- he might have had concern about wasting resources, and leading the investigation off track. Just a thought.

Be prepared to meet resistance from law enforcement. Some law enforcement agencies disapprove of reward offers because they can result in a torrent of false leads. Keep law enforcement informed of any decision you make regarding a reward, and if you sense concern or resistance, point out that all it takes is one solid lead to recover your child. Also, the desire for reward money could motivate an abductor to keep a child alive.

http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/childismissing/ch6.html

 

[Arnie M]

Vilt was going to use his own funding for the 20K reward right? I don't think it was expected for Deorr Sr to pay for that unless I am mistaken.

Hi SweeT .... hopefully my posts #627 and #641 will help , but you also bring up a good point

At first Vilt said HE wanted to post a reward , and even to me , it sounded like his own money and I thought that was pretty amazing and generous , and I gathered that he did it based on saying Vernal had fixed a car for him , he liked Vernal , and jumped in to help.

However , he was also asking that expenses be paid back , gas money , phone calls , things like that.

Something does not add up here.

It is like holding out a generous $25,000 in one hand and also be a tightwad asking for a few hundred back in the other hand

But there is more. Mr Vilt wanted to post a $25,000 reward , be paid expenses to investigate , presumably to find DeOrr , then what ??? .... find DeOrr and claim his own reward ?????

Something does not add up here.

That is like saying hire me to solve your case but I cannot solve your case unless a reward is offered to bring the public in to solve your case.

I am being cynical of course , But if I was to make a guess I bet Vilt was counting on maybe go-fund money to pay him plus cover the reward , which to me would have been fine.

I would have no problem with Mr Vilt being paid , nor Mr Klein being paid. It is just ironic that those 2 PI's have lit more wildfires than some of the wild stuff on Facebook

.

 

[Midge Montana]

He got a lawyer Monday when the news that the parents are suspects broke. Deorr Sr. claimed to Vilt that the sheriff told him not to do the reward and get national attention. That was most likely a lie.

Good question for the sheriff!
Personally, I think Vilt should have put up the reward regardless of the parents declining the offer. ANYONE can put up a reward, I don't think parental permission is needed. I may be wrong though.

 

[Ava Adore]

Good question for the sheriff!
Personally, I think Vilt should have put up the reward regardless of the parents declining the offer. ANYONE can put up a reward, I don't think parental permission is needed. I may be wrong though.

I believe they can, so maybe this proves he was expecting them to fund it in some sense ?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[bessie]

Nate Eaton's interview with Sheriff Bowerman, August 18, 2015

9:27
Nate Eaton:
“Where do you guys go from here?”

9:30
Sheriff Bowerman:
“Well, we wait until we get our report from the FBI. That’s going to be critical…and…uh…We’re still asking the public, uh, to help us if they have any information to identify a 2 ½-year-old with blonde hair. I’m not sure that’s a positive thing for our office because every 2 ½ –year-old with blonde hair looks just like Deorr, and so I’m asking the public if they know a family and they didn’t have a 2 ½-year-old prior to this time period, that’s what I want to look at closely, but if it’s somebody they don’t know, to contact their local law enforcement and have them follow-up for us, because this is overwhelming for our small office.”

10:20
Nate Eaton:
“Yeah, have you guys just been bombarded with tips?”

Sheriff Bowerman:
“Absolutely! Absolutely!”

10:24
Nate Eaton:
“What are your thoughts about the private investigator? Is that just something the family is doing on their own to…?

Sheriff Bowerman:
Yep! Yep! Totally uh…Kuddos to them for, you know, looking for more help. Um, I can only do so much, and maybe he can turn up something that we’ve missed, uh, but I think, you know, he primarily thinks it’s an abduction, and I think that’s very remote

 

[gliving]

So anxious to hear Tricia's interview with Sheriff Bowerman.

The PIs are annoying static. I really don't want to hear anything more from them. Their 15 seconds are up.

 

[neesaki]

I think some people who really wanted to hold on to hope that the little guy is alive read that into Klein's statement. So Klein was asked to clarify and he did, very clearly, by saying he has ruled out all forms of abduction and that there is no evidence of adoption.

I think Frank's heart is in the right place, but it seems a leap to take the info that some states allow moms to adopt out their children without bio dads' knowledge/approval to thinking it's probable in this case. And regardless of my suspicions of the mother, I think that the fact that a woman takes measures to not have an endless number of children does not mean that she doesn't want the ones that she has. (His point about her giving up custody of her other children is less of a stretch for me.)

Klein ruled out all forms of abduction and adoption ? Well I sure missed that. I should go back and delete my last post, LOL.

 

[Midge Montana]

point out that all it takes is one solid lead to recover your child. Also, the desire for reward money could motivate an abductor to keep a child alive.

RSBM.

Bingo.

 

[Elle*Bee]

...Just who was going to put up the money for a reward? Someone had to put it up. You can't just offer a reward and not pay if the child is found. It doesn't work that way. I can say with 100% certainty that neither DK, JM or any of their families could come up with a $20K reward fund. Not many people can.

(Snipped by me) It's been reported that Vilt was putting up the reward money. I've always wondered whether he has the ability to raise funds or has them on reserve. I have no idea whether the family would be expected to repay the reward money.

As JM apparently not wanting more kids, doesn't necessarily mean she doesn't want the kids she has. (If it's revealed that she has NO relationship with her older two, then that might give me pause. But I'm just not ready to color her with a kid-hating, bad mom crayon. Am I suspicious of her and DK? Yeah, because of all the twists and turns and holes.)

 

[bessie]

RSBM.

Bingo.

Yes, but large rewards can be a double-edged sword.

 

[wodalo2]

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.