ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #19

[Pretty Go Pale]

How do you think they ruled out an animal attack in the first place? Imo it's because the evidence points to the parents.

An animal attack could have been ruled out because of a lack of blood, drag marks, etc. in the search area. Those signatures of an animal attack would have almost certainly been present had such an attack occured.

 

[wondering25]

Are you saying there is no evidence to support LE stating the parents have changed their stories and no evidence that they are being less than truthful?

I was always under the impression that when a story is true little things, nuances etc DO CHANGE. if the suspects "recite" and there are no little "differences' most likely they have scripted it. SOOOOOOOOOOOOO, little changes dont worry me.. failed polygraphs do.

 

[kammiemc]

I didn't say the fact that the parents haven't been charged yet means there is no evidence against them. I said that if LE "absolutely" knew that the parents know where their son is, it would mean LE "absolutely" had evidence of such. And if LE had that evidence - evidence showing that the parents "absolutely" know where their son is - the parents would have already been arrested.

Lying about your child's disappearance and death is a crime.

When the sheriff says the parents couldn't tell the same story twice and answered "absolutely" when asked about whether the parents know where their son is, I fully believe he is right. The FBI seems pretty legit too in their conclusion that the parents are untruthful.

I agree with the investigators who have the most information on this case. It's no problem for you to choose disagree with us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hoosier952]

I have a question about lawyers. What is a ballpark figure for the retainer? Are we talking $100's or $1000's up front for VDK's lawyer?

One thing this family doesn't seem to have is money and I'm wondering if VDK having a lawyer and JM not is simply down to cost?

It depends. Around here, you might pay $500 to many thousands. I'm guessing in a possible murder investigation, it's likely in the thousands. However, lawyers are kind of like clothes. You have cheap ones that aren't the best quality or are trying to make a name for themselves and there are good ones that have a proven track record, and then there are those that you pay for the name on the tag.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

It depends. Around here, you might pay $500 to many thousands. I'm guessing in a possible murder investigation, it's likely in the thousands. However, lawyers are kind of like clothes. You have cheap ones that aren't the best quality or are trying to make a name for themselves and there are good ones that have a proven track record, and then there are those that you pay for the name on the tag.

I suspect that is a highly accurate analogy!

 

[Pretty Go Pale]

Lying about your child's disappearance and death is a crime.

When the sheriff says the parents couldn't tell the same story twice and answered "absolutely" when asked about whether the parents know where their son is, I fully believe he is right. The FBI seems pretty legit too in their conclusion that the parents are untruthful.

I agree with the investigators who have the most information on this case. It's no problem for you to choose disagree with us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi, kammiemc. I am quite certain the sheriff and FBI think the parents "absolutely" know where their son is. They very well may be right. My point, though, is the sheriff and FBI don't "absolutely" know the parents know where their son is. To "absolutely" know what the parents know in this specific instance, would be to have knowledge - not of conflicting statements, "less than truthful" polygraphs, etc. - but instead of the parents' thoughts themselves. Do you see what I mean?

My point is confirmed by Bowerman himself, who said, "They know something, I just don't know what they know. It causes me alarm. I believe they know where he is absolutely."

http://kboi2.com/news/local/report-sheriff-says-parents-of-missing-toddler-deorr-kunz-officially-suspects

Sorry - tried to provide the link to the story, but I'm a newbie here and not yet up to speed on setting hyperlinks.

 

[Paulas88]

I didn't say the fact that the parents haven't been charged yet means there is no evidence against them. I said that if LE "absolutely" knew that the parents know where their son is, it would mean LE "absolutely" had evidence of such. And if LE had that evidence - evidence showing that the parents "absolutely" know where their son is - the parents would have already been arrested.

I'm wondering if the LE got a tip (previous withheld info) to where DeOrr's remains could be located on the mountain? Maybe a witness (the other campers) saw VK/JM somewhere outside of the search area, and the LE have to wait till spring to search?
This could be why LE is waiting to make an arrest.

 

[Pretty Go Pale]

I'm wondering if the LE got a tip (previous withheld info) to where DeOrr's remains could be located on the mountain? Maybe a witness (the other campers) saw VK/JM somewhere outside of the search area, and the LE have to wait till spring to search?
This could be why LE is waiting to make an arrest.

Interesting thought, Paulas88. I guess anything is possible. In a case as high profile as this one, though, I'd be pretty surprised if LE had such a tip and put off checking into it until months later, even given the tough nature of Idaho winters.

 

[neesaki]

I vote your post as the best one out of all the other 18,000 here.

You are right. All we know for sure is the boy went missing and nobody can find him.

The "we" says it all. We have no idea what LE knows that we don't. I don't think I know of a case in which LE has released all the evidence they have to the public while an investigation is in progress. Do they ever do this?

That said, I hope the parents are innocent and Deorr just wandered away , or better yet that he's with someone in a safe place.

 

[pappa rob]

I'm wondering if the LE got a tip (previous withheld info) to where DeOrr's remains could be located on the mountain? Maybe a witness (the other campers) saw VK/JM somewhere outside of the search area, and the LE have to wait till spring to search?
This could be why LE is waiting to make an arrest.

If LE had a tip I doubt they'd wait till spring.

 

[kammiemc]

Hi, kammiemc. I am quite certain the sheriff and FBI think the parents "absolutely" know where their son is. They very well may be right. My point, though, is the sheriff and FBI don't "absolutely" know the parents know where their son is. To "absolutely" know what the parents know in this specific instance, would be to have knowledge - not of conflicting statements, "less than truthful" polygraphs, etc. - but instead of the parents' thoughts themselves. Do you see what I mean?

My point is confirmed by Bowerman himself, who said, "They know something, I just don't know what they know. It causes me alarm. I believe they know where he is absolutely."

http://kboi2.com/news/local/report-...issing-toddler-deorr-kunz-officially-suspects

Sorry - tried to provide the link to the story, but I'm a newbie here and not yet up to speed on setting hyperlinks.

I understand what you are saying am familiar with the quote. IMO, the information to date says the parents are lying about what they know about their son's disappearance and death, and I believe the sheriff is right in his absolute belief that the parents know where DeOrr is right now. I am glad he is taking his time to arrest then so that he can get the charges right. I hope that between him and the FBI he will get a confession from one of the two.

The writing is on the wall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pretty Go Pale]

I understand what you are saying am familiar with the quote. IMO, the information to date says the parents are lying about what they know about their son's disappearance and death, and I believe the sheriff is right in his absolute belief that the parents know where DeOrr is right now. I am glad he is taking his time to arrest then so that he can get the charges right. I hope that between him and the FBI he will get a confession from one of the two.

The writing is on the wall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You may well be right, kammiemc.

 

[Beezneez]

If LE had a tip I doubt they'd wait till spring.

This is completely based on my own paying attention to ski and snowmobile chatter from Eastern Idaho/Western Wyoming & Montana area, but the snow pack isn't set as well as it could be. Meaning that the layers of snow have sheets of ice between them. The mountains are packed with snow then a sunny day will melt the surface. That night it will freeze and then warm up enough to snow again, creating another layer. Because of this there is a general increased instability in the snowpack. Taking searchers up into areas with this type of snowpack is incredibly dangerous. They could very well be waiting, despite the heartbreaking possibility that the baby is up there. Here is a link that describes a bit what I am talking about.
http://www.fsavalanche.org/stability-tests/

 

[Eileen730]

I wasn't meaning to be offensive

Just noting that there are actually good reasons to say no to a reward.

I don't think it is indicative of guilt of itself - but perhaps in context Vilt might be correct.

Personally I think it is strange that Vilt and Klein are running to the media with facts that might be critical at trial.

What parent of a missing child says NO to a reward?

 

[Onebest]

If LE had a tip I doubt they'd wait till spring.

Sadly, I believe they would have to, there are several feet of snow and ice in a vast wilderness. Dangerous and you cannot see the ground. JMO

 

[desert-blue]

I think about how cautious and careful SB has been from day one. He has diverted suspicion away from the parents in almost every interview he's given (or at least he's been so vague that it wasn't clear he ever thought they were involved). Even now, it almost pains him to have to disclose that the parents are suspects. I think that SB does not take such accusations lightly and is very aware of the repercussions. I don't believe for a second that he would make a statement like that without a whole lot of evidence to back it up (as in, enough evidence to prosecute). I feel that Klein's arrival kind of sped things up and that if left to his own devices, that SB may have prolonged naming them suspects. I think SB was just observing everything and hoping/praying for someone to rat someone out, and in the meantime, he played "good cop" so as not to tip them off. Once it was obvious that they were the prime suspects (which became clear after Klein's statements), there really was probably little reason for SB to keep it secret any longer. At some point you just have to cut to the chase, so to speak.

As far as the parents' guilty knowledge, I think that when you look at the individual actions of the parents, there is always a way to explain their actions with some amount of credibility, but when you look at the sum of their actions, it really becomes clear, at least to me, that their collective actions are not indicative of parents who are really trying to find their toddler and/or who really have no idea what happened to him.

MOO.

 

[Onebest]

What parent of a missing child says NO to a reward?

Perhaps someone who doesnt want a person with information about them to have enough incentive to talk?

I dont think it could be because they sold their baby and dont the publicity. There are billboards and baby Deoors face is all over social media.

I think it would have to be someone who was afraid of something happening to them because of the money being offered. JMO

 

[Kairi'sMom]

SAR people....I have a question.

When a person goes missing do you ever have the dogs follow the trail of caregiver/parents/friends who are involved at the scene after you've searched for the missing person's scent?
It seems like a good idea, especially in cases like this since 1) small children don't put out much of a scent, and 2) it seems that in most cases there's a good chance the parents/caregiver/friend has disappeared the child.


I'm not an expert in any field helpful to the case, but IF statement analysis is reliable enough to get to the truth, I wonder if Deorr "was ready for a nap" and "they thought he'd be good with GGPa", but he wasn't. Maybe he wandered away from GGPa and was found and someone was so angry with him that it lead to someone "hauling" off and hitting him and causing his death. So the person(s), seeing he was "dead...panic" and concoct the wandering off story, etc.



Just a theory and my very LE-uneducated opinion.
As a parent, I can "see" this happening.

 

[Onebest]

I think about how cautious and careful SB has been from day one. He has diverted suspicion away from the parents in almost every interview he's given (or at least he's been so vague that it wasn't clear he ever thought they were involved). Even now, it almost pains him to have to disclose that the parents are suspects. I think that SB does not take such accusations lightly and is very aware of the repercussions. I don't believe for a second that he would make a statement like that without a whole lot of evidence to back it up (as in, enough evidence to prosecute). I feel that Klein's arrival kind of sped things up and that if left to his own devices, that SB may have prolonged naming them suspects. I think SB was just observing everything and hoping/praying for someone to rat someone out, and in the meantime, he played "good cop" so as not to tip them off. Once it was obvious that they were the prime suspects (which became clear after Klein's statements), there really was probably little reason for SB to keep it secret any longer. At some point you just have to cut to the chase, so to speak.

As far as the parents' guilty knowledge, I think that when you look at the individual actions of the parents, there is always a way to explain their actions with some amount of credibility, but when you look at the sum of their actions, it really becomes clear, at least to me, that their collective actions are not indicative of parents who are really trying to find their toddler and/or who really have no idea what happened to him.

MOO.

THANK YOU, great post, best one I have read in a long time.

 

[desert-blue]

I take a bit of offense to this since I do think I'm a rather sensible parent. If my child were believed to have been abducted and a month later there is nothing, then I do not see how a reward would cause a problem. I wouldn't care if LE had a flurry of calls, because one of those calls may just be the one that matters. I suppose some may see it as wasting time, but how do you explain that to a parent who is on the verge of a breakdown because their child is missing. LE never mentioned to them anything about it and I do not think they came to their senses and turned down the offer.

I agree that offering a reward too early might not be recommended because it could bring in a bunch of false leads. However, if the case is on the verge of going cold and the child has been missing for several months, I would think that reward money might be just the trick to get people talking. I cannot fathom innocent parents opting not to offer (donated) reward money on the basis it might bring in false leads. Their child is missing, for Pete's sake! Who cares if the PI or LE has to entertain a few nutty leads? Really? It makes no sense to me. MOO.