ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #18

[giagreen]

But the sheriff presumably got his info from IR. So you don't believe the guy who said this as much as the person he said it TO? That doesn't make a lot of sense. MOO.

Sent from my Studio 6.0 LTE using Tapatalk

Well I don't beleive that SB just casually asked him this question and then moved on.
Its one thing to just say something without being interrogated and another when your actually being interrogated. Between SB and FBI I have faith that they picked apart IR's answers enough to figure out the truth. That doesn't mean that IR has to tell us the truth.

 

[Rayemonde]

Right!!! Like for a moment I was thinking maybe he didn't but if its just those two questions they failed then how is that not a possibility?
Maybe they did lie about some things like I stated before because they stayed up drinking or something but why does it absolutely have to be that they hurt him. And it has been that way from day one even when they were only poi oh but you dare bring up another poi and your told he is just a poi and how unfair it is but it sure wasn't for the parents all this time. I get it. And and I get exactly what you've been trying to say about that.

Yes, maybe he just wandered off. I've talked about that possibility before. This is a sleuthing forum, where we discuss all possibilities. Maybe the parents were just extremely negligent and allowed Deorr to wander off because they were drunk, as you suggested, and then lied about it. Lied to LE, to the Fbi, to their private investigators and to the public, and made up a story about a staring man... If that's the case then I still don't have a lot of sympathy for them
JMO.

 

[giagreen]

Well, the two questions they were less than truthful about weren't about what they were doing. They were; do you know what happened to DeOrr and do you know where DeOrr is. Those are pretty telling questions to not be truthful about.

Right but if he had wondered off while they were drunk, passed out or something then how would that make it so they don't know what happen and where he is? They would know exactly what happen and probably that he is on that mountain spmewhere. But still lie about the "how" it happen.

 

[Rayemonde]

[FONT="][URL="http://www.truecrimeradio.com/radio-archives/sheriff-lynn-bowerman-radio-archive-jan-2016/"]http://www.truecrimeradio.com/radio-...hive-jan-2016/[/URL][/FONT]


11:43
SB: You know, we had a couple alerts you know that were just kind of, we consider nothing major, but um a dog reacts unusual in a certain area and so we put more dogs in there and then the other dogs alerted so, um…you know.

Actually, it’s been not real positive from having those dogs in there.

We didn’t have anything that really led us to a certain place within our 3 mile radius.


Bessie: Well, Sheriff, we’d just like to know, are there plans for any further searches?

31:03
SB: You know absolutely. Right now the National Association for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) have expressed an interest in coming back up with dogs so we’re entertaining that.

[FONT="][URL="http://www.truecrimeradio.com/radio-archives/sheriff-lynn-bowerman-radio-archive-jan-2016/"] [/URL][/FONT]

I thought he said "and so we put more dogs in there and NONE of the other dogs alerted."

 

[haven71]

One thing I don't get is the 911 call. So, they looked for him about an hour they said? Why did they suddenly have to call urgently right then...DK was "hauling" down to get service, worrying that one bar wouldn't cut it. If they'd been searching for that hour, why did things change from them searching to speeding down the road just in case the cell phone service dropped the call?

 

[Midge Montana]

I thought he said "and so we put more dogs in there and NONE of the other dogs alerted."

I could swear I heard NONE too. I'll have to go back and listen again.

 

[Dee10]

I thought he said "and so we put more dogs in there and NONE of the other dogs alerted."

I'll go listen to the actual tape & if true, delete that post. Thanks

 

[MzOpinion8d]

What would make you think she DID call anyone at 2:36? Maybe she called her mom, Vernal's dad, any number of people. Why would a call at 2:36 or any time be suspicious?

I think she did because she says she called 911 at 2:36, but we know it was 2:28. I haven't seen a cell phone in a long time that required manual time setting, so it seems unlikely that her phone and he dispatch center would have such a discrepancy.

So, it seems 2:36 was an important call. Not necessarily suspicious. But you'd think she'd be trying to find her 2 year old rather than staying in the one lucky spot for cell reception talking to someone on the phone. Her mom already knew DeOrr was missing and due to the poor cell reception it seems logical that TC would be the one notifying other family members.

There may not be any call at 2:36, and maybe she was looking for her 2 year old while her mom called everyone else and got on her way to the campsite.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

What did I miss? What did TC post that is in question?

Someone said that TC "or whoever was posting under her account" said something. I didn't understand why there was any question that it was really TC. Apparently some thought maybe it was JM or DK under TC's account.

 

[Rayemonde]

I just thought, too... This is a true crime forum, not a search and rescue technique forum. A forum to discuss crimes. I'm a bit sick of being made to feel like a terrible person for entertaining the possibility that a crime has been committed here, and discussing the possibility that the named suspects were responsible for that crime.

 

[Dee10]

I thought he said "and so we put more dogs in there and NONE of the other dogs alerted."

I listened several times he said it very fast "none of" so we'll have to get the transcript changed and I deleted the post.

 

[LisaB]

I thought maybe they went off to smoke some pot at first or something. But idk I don't think I'd have a problem telling an officer I smoked some pot if it could help them better understand where I was and why. Idk to me whatever it may be its got to be worse then that.

But I have spent a lot of time thinking if there is any real reason they'd lie and it'd snowball out of control if it was an accident. The only thing I can think of is maybe DeOrr did really wonder off after all.

What if they got there Thursday and sat around a camp fire and got stupid drunk. Passed out and in the morning DeOrr woke up first and wondered off. Its the only thing I can think of why they would lie yet still be an accident that would also leave the parents without a clue. And me personally would rather tell the officer I took a hike to go get high rather then I got stupid drunk and lost my child on a mountain.

<modsnip>
As for admitting to having been smoking pot when your child wandered off, particularly if you expect him to be found safe, would invite Child Protective Services into your life. I do not know the circumstances surrounding JM's ex having custody of their children, but if drugs were involved, she might have known she was being irresponsible to leave Deorr unattended for a few minutes, and been afraid of losing him as soon as he was located.

I am not sure drugs were involved as Vernal's employment may be contingent upon clean drug tests.

I'd originally believed they either ducked out of sight to smoke pot or have "private grown-up time", but the drug testing and purchase of feminine products changed my mind.

If they also bought groceries/ice in town, who put them away? Where was Little Man then?

Sent from my Studio 6.0 LTE using Tapatalk

 

[Coolmomof4]

So is one of their stories that the adults all went to see where the fish were and they left DeOrr alone at the campsite and that's why the mom "kept looking back" to make sure he was still there?

I've read all of the threads and I'm caught up. But I'm still so confused. These people need to stop lying.

I'm beginning to wonder if the trip to town was to dispose of him. That's why he hasn't been found at the campground. And they're trying to confuse everyone by insisting he was with ggpa or that the store clerk saw him. Also, I keep seeing interviews where the other two are asked if DeOrr was at the campsite and they've said yes. Has anyone asked if DeOrr was alive at the campsite? Just sayin'.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

That hasn't been MY personal experience through years of fishing. When someone is catching fish, it is quite common for others to inquire not only where the fish are biting, but questions such as what are you using for bait, what pound line are you using, did you catch them on the top or on the bottom, did you use a bobber, etc. Very common indeed!

In other circumstances I may not find it absurd, but when just arriving from somewhere and if my toddler isn't really save (otherwise I haven't "to keep looking back" and I haven't to stress this statement for 3 times), then I think, looking from where a fish was catched is somehow implausible.

 

[Onebest]

Yes, maybe he just wandered off. I've talked about that possibility before. This is a sleuthing forum, where we discuss all possibilities. Maybe the parents were just extremely negligent and allowed Deorr to wander off because they were drunk, as you suggested, and then lied about it. Lied to LE, to the Fbi, to their private investigators and to the public, and made up a story about a staring man... If that's the case then I still don't have a lot of sympathy for them
JMO.

I went with baby Deoor wandered theory and still go back there from time to time but the lies make it impossible to stay there for me. They lied about the reward money being disallowed by LE. Why? Were they afraid someone knew what they did and would tell for money?

According to Vilt funds raised might have been mismanaged/stolen. Money can be a huge reason to lie.

FBI/LE says they lied about when and how baby Deoor disappeared. If they are lying the big question to me is why? I cant get past that one.

JMO

 

[ILOKAL]

Right!!! Like for a moment I was thinking maybe he didn't but if its just those two questions they failed then how is that not a possibility?
Maybe they did lie about some things like I stated before because they stayed up drinking or something but why does it absolutely have to be that they hurt him. And it has been that way from day one even when they were only poi oh but you dare bring up another poi and your told he is just a poi and how unfair it is but it sure wasn't for the parents all this time. I get it. And and I get exactly what you've been trying to say about that.

"Less than truthful" doesn't mean they lied. Had they lied, they would have failed their polygraphs. I keep reminding that those specific words, "less than truth" are used for a reason.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

There's just no reasonable explanation that I can think of that would explain JM and vDK's behavior at the time of the disappearance and since the disappearance.

They have actually actively limited efforts to find their son. Their families have done far more than they themselves have. A *complete stranger* put up the $4K to hire KIC. Another unrelated person was able to get some billboards done. They never got the incorrect eye color info corrected on one of his missing posters.

And seriously, who leaves their "mover and go-er" 2 year old at a large open campsite only a few yards from a steep embankment with a creek at the bottom, with an elderly man who has dementia and is oxygen dependent, and couldn't possibly catch little D if he took off? And supposedly did so without even verifying that GGP actually knew he was the only one watching D?

 

[haven71]

FWIW Raymonde I find your posts on topic, respectful, and thought provoking. So, I totally agree! The parents are suspects! This is a sleuthing forum! That is why most of us are here!

OR . . . . This? OR . . . . That? OR how about . . . . THIS!? Or, how about he wandered off and got lost?

I just thought, too... This is a true crime forum, not a search and rescue technique forum. A forum to discuss crimes. I'm a bit sick of being made to feel like a terrible person for entertaining the possibility that a crime has been committed here, and discussing the possibility that the named suspects were responsible for that crime.

 

[Groundwork]

Thank you so much!!!

<rsbm>

Here's a link to the transcription of Tricia and Bessie's interview with Sheriff Bowerman last night:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-**NO-DISCUSSION-quot&p=12319129#post12319129

 

[Midge Montana]

"Less than truthful" doesn't mean they lied. Had they lied, they would have failed their polygraphs. I keep reminding that those specific words, "less than truth" are used for a reason.

Again...he explained why he uses those words. They did TELL THE TRUTH on some questions. No matter how you spin it, less than truthful means less than truthful and when it applies to some VERY IMPORTANT questions (again, do they know what happened to the toddler and do they know where the toddler IS) those less than truthful answers are HUGE! If they hadn't been completely truthful about what they ate for dinner, eh, okay. But less than truthful on those two specific questions is crucial and why (along with other FBI analysis) they were upgraded to SUSPECTS rather than just POIs because of being there.
Let's also not forget...LE have other information they are not telling the public. That is standard with every case I've ever seen. When all is said and done, that's when we will know what all info they've been working with.