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

[CoverMeCagney]

Are we allowed to repeat what TC said about Grandpa's current health situation for those not on FB? I have a feeling her comments were once deemed acceptable to paraphrase and I think it explains why we've not heard much about him.

 

[CanadianWells]

Are we allowed to repeat what TC said about Grandpa's current health situation for those not on FB? I have a feeling her comments were once deemed acceptable to paraphrase and I think it explains why we've not heard much about him.

Any time anyone has referred to it, or even talked about personal experience with people with similar issues the posts get deleted, so I'm thinking no, unless something has changed.

 

[jnblsm]

Any time anyone has referred to it, or even talked about personal experience with people with similar issues the posts get deleted, so I'm thinking no, unless something has changed.

He has been diagnosed with another illness. I'll pm a mod

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using Tapatalk

 

[neesaki]

Are we allowed to repeat what TC said about Grandpa's current health situation for those not on FB? I have a feeling her comments were once deemed acceptable to paraphrase and I think it explains why we've not heard much about him.

I'm not sure, but I haven't been able to read there other than the first few posts at the top, it won't let me scroll further down and wants me to 'sign in'. :gaah:

 

[desert-blue]

I'm not sure, but I haven't been able to read there other than the first few posts at the top, it won't let me scroll further down and wants me to 'sign in'. :gaah:

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=153258318385893&id=106121853099540

does that help?

 

[Lilibet]

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.

Great post! Your point about looking at the sum of their actions/their collective actions is excellent, as individual actions can possibly be explained, but the collective actions can't as easily IMO.

I do agree that SB has been very cautious about naming them suspects. The only part I disagree with is that people wouldn't be named suspects without there being enough evidence to prosecute. Having a lot of evidence, enough to name a suspect, and having enough to ensure a conviction, isn't the same thing.

I've seen this in the case of Stephanie Warner featured in my signature. There is no body, a firm suspect and no arrest...yet. As in DeOrr's case, it's not known (publicly) whether her death was premeditated or an accident covered up. If SB or the detective in Steph's case had enough evidence to decide which charge to make, I think he'd do it. These things can drag on, sadly.
JMO

 

[neesaki]

I have wondered if LE naming the parents suspects when they really aren't, is done as a strategical move of some sort. If so, I would think the named 'suspects' would have to be let in on the strategy, or maybe not. Does anyone know if LE does that in some cases?

 

[LisaB]

"D : 2.36 when she called and I was in the truck hauling down to the road trying to get service because I didn't think one bar would get it. So I, she got very very lucky. I was blessed that she was able to get service because I didn't think, i didn't want to try and risk getting half way through my talking to 911 and have it cut off. So I went down to where I knew I could get a little service, about a half mile down the road. Uh, we searched for - after about twenty minutes in a dead panic, not knowing where he was in such a small area, and not knowing, never being there, I knew I was in trouble. Um, so we decided to call search and rescue, uh, and that's when I drove down. She tried getting a signal out - um, as soon as I got a hold of the,, I kind of, they told me that she was on the other line with them and they had our location, and they were on our way. They, they were amazing..."

"Never being there???" This almost sounds like he slipped up and said DeOrr was never there?

 

[desert-blue]

Great post! Your point about looking at the sum of their actions/their collective actions is excellent, as individual actions can possibly be explained, but the collective actions can't as easily IMO.

I do agree that SB has been very cautious about naming them suspects. The only part I disagree with is that people wouldn't be named suspects without there being enough evidence to prosecute. Having a lot of evidence, enough to name a suspect, and having enough to ensure a conviction, isn't the same thing.

I've seen this in the case of Stephanie Warner featured in my signature. There is no body, a firm suspect and no arrest...yet. As in DeOrr's case, it's not known (publicly) whether her death was premeditated or an accident covered up. If SB or the detective in Steph's case had enough evidence to decide which charge to make, I think he'd do it. These things can drag on, sadly.
JMO

As far as prosecuting, I think they probably do have enough evidence for certain charges or they wouldn't have named them suspects. I think that's why they are waiting to charge them, though. Al Capone went down for tax evasion.... I think there are a multitude of potential charges for DK and JM, so they must assess what evidence they have (or potentially might have) and what will make the strongest case(s) and go from there. That's my thinking anyway....

 

[wondering25]

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.

Why give the parents 4 polygraphs? Does this give them every chance to pass? I dont agree that LE knew early on the parents were involved. Furthermore, and this is just my opinion, the public right to know that potentially dangerous people were out and about makes me less than a Bowerman supporter. The parents were solid.. bla bla..They are only POI because they were there bla bla. 3 weeks for the FBI to come in...I could go either way on this. Why would I believe Bowerman now?

No arrests have been made...While I always thought the mom seemed broken- hearted and didnt know what happened I always thought one of the parents knew more. IMO, no one is going to confess to anything. A jury would absolutely weigh in on the side of a baby who wandered off and whose body has yet gone undiscovered in the wilderness. It is a very reasonable doubt. Polygraphs are nor admissible and behavior analysis is hocus pocus to most people.

Do I think the parents or at least one of them know? yes, i do. Now try to prove that to a jury with no body found, no cause of death, "witnesses" with various mental and physical impairments and a "crime scene" of thick woods, creeks, reservoirs, animals and LE who backed the family for weeks and weeks.

Anything i write is just my opinion

 

[LisaB]

Sorry but my BS meter was going off big time - wouldn't any genuinely distraught parent just keep trying to get through to 911 regardless of how much signal they had? Can't you make an emergency call anyway, regardless of signal strength/phone credit etc?

You can make a 911 call without any "minutes" on your phone, (one interpretation of the term "no service") but NOT when there is not tower to connect to (the OTHER interpretation of "no service").
That was the case here, apparently. Like trying to get a wifi signal when you are not near a wifi router, you can not get a call out on a cell phone if there is no "dial tone" (which I realize is a mixed metaphor since cell phones do not have a "dial tone") but it is the same idea as unplugging your landline from the wall and trying to make a call.

 

[haven71]

I find it ironic that SB says IR has been very truthful, yet he gets a free pass when his polygraphs came back (expectedly) inconclusive? SB is not a living breathing lie detector.

*scratching my head*

 

[neesaki]

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=153258318385893&id=106121853099540

does that help?

Yes, that works. Thank you desert-blue.

 

[giagreen]

"Never being there???" This almost sounds like he slipped up and said DeOrr was never there?

I think he ment as in he's never been there before so he didn't know the area well.

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk

 

[LisaB]

So sad. Such a twisted case. While I don't believe Deorr is still alive, I'm not set on what happened. I still wonder if he isn't somewhere near that campsite, possibly right outside the perimeter that was searched. Or maybe even in the area that was searched. It seemed to be so many obstacles in that area, the downed trees, the water, the mountainous terrain. I just hope he will be found soon, and it was a complete accident. That's what my heart wants to believe even if my mind says otherwise.

I just had a horrible, sick, awful thought... What if they dug a hole, buried the child, covered it up, and then built a campfire on that spot. Nobody was going to put the fire out to dig, because they would assume the fire had been burning all along.

 

[neesaki]

Why give the parents 4 polygraphs? Does this give them every chance to pass? I dont agree that LE knew early on the parents were involved. Furthermore, and this is just my opinion, the public right to know that potentially dangerous people were out and about makes me less than a Bowerman supporter. The parents were solid.. bla bla..They are only POI because they were there bla bla. 3 weeks for the FBI to come in...I could go either way on this. Why would I believe Bowerman now?

No arrests have been made...While I always thought the mom seemed broken- hearted and didnt know what happened I always thought one of the parents knew more. IMO, no one is going to confess to anything. A jury would absolutely weigh in on the side of a baby who wandered off and whose body has yet gone undiscovered in the wilderness. It is a very reasonable doubt. Polygraphs are nor admissible and behavior analysis is hocus pocus to most people.

Do I think the parents or at least one of them know? yes, i do. Now try to prove that to a jury with no body found, no cause of death, "witnesses" with various mental and physical impairments and a "crime scene" of thick woods, creeks, reservoirs, animals and LE who backed the family for weeks and weeks.

Anything i write is just my opinion

I do find it a little unusual that if someone is guilty, they would agree to take multiple polygraphs.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

"Never being there???" This almost sounds like he slipped up and said DeOrr was never there?

Allowing for having to do some linguistic gymnastics to account for the Idahoan way of speaking, it is clear to me what he's explaining here and I'm in middle England!

 

[Lilibet]

As far as prosecuting, I think they probably do have enough evidence for certain charges or they wouldn't have named them suspects. I think that's why they are waiting to charge them, though. Al Capone went down for tax evasion.... I think there are a multitude of potential charges for DK and JM, so they must assess what evidence they have (or potentially might have) and what will make the strongest case(s) and go from there. That's my thinking anyway....

Thanks. I see what you're saying. Following your reasoning, the potential lesser charges may add up to a strong suspicion about what actually happened, but not be enough to charge them for the more serious action. For example, hypothetically, there may be evidence of neglect and lying which could add up to a suspicion that there was an accident covered up, but not enough evidence to make a charge that will hold up in court. They may have to pick the strongest lesser charge, as in your Capone example, if they can't come up with enough evidence for a more serious charge.
JMO

 

[Aeronomy]

I find it ironic that SB says IR has been very truthful, yet he gets a free pass when his polygraphs came back (expectedly) inconclusive? SB is not a living breathing lie detector.

*scratching my head*

I don't remember this. Do you have a link?

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

I do find it a little unusual that if someone is guilty, they would agree to take multiple polygraphs.

That does make you think, right? SB did make a point that they have been very cooperative so it does surprise he also says they absolutely have knowledge they're holding back on.

I don't know if they have done 2 polys each (=4) or 4 each (=8) but either way that would take some confidence to do if in fact they are "being less than truthful".