ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #22

[Lillahazel]

The story about the minnows is "shaky at best", because minnows are not a common site in Idaho. Yes, they do exist, but typically are not seen in the trout streams here.

I know people are going to contradict my opinion here, but it's true. Just the fact the parents said that reeks of a lie. If they had said baby fish or something, it would ring much truer to me.

I completely agree that everything coming out of DK's mouth screams lie I will say I disagree about there being minnows in ID. Growing up I always remember going in the forest with my dad as a kid and trying to catch minnows in the streams throughout the ID forest. Our kiddo's also enjoy trying to catch them in the shallow parts of the St. Joe river. They can get several in one Solo cup. Maybe they are small fish but I guess I have always called them minnows.

 

[forsaken]

bbm red
As I said already: JM and VDK were to the campground for the first time ("to go fishing/exploring/hiking"), therefore they were to the shop at Leadore for the first time. Why would an unknown (to the parents) salesperson remember a talk about their child, if it not had been very out of the ordinary???

The parents could be talking extra loud or in a manner that was intended to make the shopkeeper remember the encounter. I should assume by this time DeOrr was already deceased (they really wanted to push this sighting, "talking about their child" in front of the shopkeeper). They could be going to the shop solely for this purpose.

Agree. He was emphatic about a few strange things, and offered a lot of strange "why's" that didn't really seem appropriate/necessary. Particularly, he offered a few different "why's" surrounding leaving in the truck to call 911.That said, if my child went missing, I can't say for sure that I would be presenting as perfectly and normally as I would hope. That's not to say that he's innocent, but I don't think that semantics necessarily point towards a conclusive answer when there's a possibility the person is very distressed.

Be careful, usually someone will ask for "The Behaviour Guidebook for Parents with Missing Kid".

 

[forsaken]

Double post.

 

[K.L.Puyallup]

The parents could be talking extra loud or in a manner that was intended to make the shopkeeper remember the encounter. I should assume by this time DeOrr was already deceased (they really wanted to push this sighting, "talking about their child" in front of the shopkeeper). They could be going to the shop solely for this purpose.

I wouldn't doubt that you're right, here. With the confusion over what day they arrived at the campsite, and the diesel purchase, I think it's possible that this was their second trip to the campsite in a different truck than the first trip, and that DeOrr, Jr. didn't even accompany them on this second trip. It's possible the whole trip may have been intentionally planned as a sloppy cover-up for something that happened either on the first trip, or maybe even at a different location. The trip to the store could have served dual purposes of both creating a witness out of the shopkeeper, and providing a receipt for food items purchased for DeOrr, Jr., to further convince LE that he was there with him the whole time.
Complete speculation, obviously. The lack of honesty from these parents leave a pretty wide open area for what-if's.

Be careful, usually someone will ask for "The Behaviour Guidebook for Parents with Missing Kid".

Ha! I should start studying this book now. Think it'd be fishy if it showed up on my Amazon order history?

 

[TxJan1971]

The story about the minnows is "shaky at best", because minnows are not a common site in Idaho. Yes, they do exist, but typically are not seen in the trout streams here.

I know people are going to contradict my opinion here, but it's true. Just the fact the parents said that reeks of a lie. If they had said baby fish or something, it would ring much truer to me.

Well go ahead and throw tomatoes at me because...
I don't remember where I read it, but I remember that out of all the sadness I have felt since the beginning of this case and the realization that this beautiful little boy is most likely no longer with us, I actually found an occasion where I was able to smile when I read someone’s post about the "absurd fish tale.”

Paraphrasing the post:

Whoever it was, I remember this person was pretty angry we were expected to be so gullible as to believe that DK Sr. saw some little minnow(s) and then hiked on up back to the campsite from the creek to show little Deorr, grabbed little Deorr and hikes back on down and over the bank, back to where he last saw the little minnow(s), expecting us to believe that the little minnow(s) would all still be there patiently waiting for DK Sr. to return, right where he had last seen them! The visual, together with the descriptive rant, was too much for me and I busted out laughing at the image painted. It allowed me to have something to smile about, if only for a brief moment, appropriate or not. So there...I'm guilty for having a moment.

 

[Onebest]

I'm not sure where the information came from exactly.

VK has several different trucks on his Facebook. What he currently owns or owned at the time of the disappearance...I'm not sure and I can't find anything non-SM to link to. So maybe the two trucks should fall under speculation/rumor.

There are actually three on his FB, a blue posted 2011, a grey/silver posted 2013 and black posted 2011. The black one looks closest (to me) of the pics I have seen before of the truck up at the campsite. I know nothing about pickup trucks. The silver one is posted as a diesel, dont know about the others. JMO

 

[redlandb]

I completely agree that everything coming out of DK's mouth screams lie I will say I disagree about there being minnows in ID. Growing up I always remember going in the forest with my dad as a kid and trying to catch minnows in the streams throughout the ID forest. Our kiddo's also enjoy trying to catch them in the shallow parts of the St. Joe river. They can get several in one Solo cup. Maybe they are small fish but I guess I have always called them minnows.

The reason there are not minnows, is about 99% of the fish in the streams are planted there by the fish and game. I would venture to say this reservoir and stream was no different. Maybe it was different when you were a kid, but the fish in Idaho can't reproduce sustainably because of the roll of water being used for irrigation.

 

[persimmon]

Jmo but the two trucks theory is getting really complicated. Also, if there was something highly unusual about the diesel purchase then I think LE would have kept that underwrap. It seems as though they may have purchased diesel for the truck and that was it. I know it leaves us with nothing new to consider but some facts are just simple facts. There would be a lot of variables involved in returning home and switching trucks. Neighbors could have seen them. They could have been spotted on camera etc. Jmoo but I think in the absence of new information we might be reaching.

 

[TxJan1971]

bbm red

Family v. family now?

Perhaps!

Here are some scenarios to consider:

1. A misspeak by Klein. (Reluctantly, since it's a given Klein/Vilt/SB/Nate/MSM/Nancy Grace and any and everyone else you can think of is always said to be misspeaking, I’m putting it out there as the first option to consider to get it out of the way!)

2. Transcription error. (That would be moi! My average accuracy rate last time measured a few days ago (LOL) was only 99%, so with a few added years of aging and the need for bifocals, I reckon I deserve a little fall from grace down to a 98.9% I could be guilty, and premeditated at that!)

3. There were 2 different meetings (two different times) and both families were present at both meetings held on the same day so nothing unusual there.

2. Klein (on his own or via advice from LE and/or FBI) planned it that way on purpose. Keep everyone separate for a reason. Two separate meetings with two separate families

3. Grandpa Kunz (DK Sr's dad) who signed the contract was the "family" at the Kunz meeting(s) with or without DK Sr and/or his attorney. Unsure if contract provides him with a separate meeting? This meeting may also may or may not have included DK Sr and/or his atty, but unsure.

4. DK Sr. w/ his attorney only (and/or including GPA Kunz) in one meeting, and one could assume his atty would have no reason to want to sit with JM and her side since he doesn't represent them or maybe he requested a separate meeting. The attorney, if in attendance, may have had a scheduling conflict that necessitated two separate meetings (or not).

5. JM, her mom, maybe even GGP attend a separate meeting possibly due to work restraints or if GGP attended, unsure if he had any issues requiring a separate meeting. Unsure what the contract states, but if GPA Kunz signed it, what kind of information is Klein required to provide JM and her side vs what info. he provides the name on the contract? (My guess is it's pretty much the same information but who knows?).

6. Up for rent and/or debate!

 

[K.L.Puyallup]

Sorry- this may be a bit off-topic and/or mentioned elsewhere in a different thread. But do we have an answer as to why the 2 1/2 year old was brought on this camping trip, but not the two older kiddos?

 

[persimmon]

Sorry- this may be a bit off-topic and/or mentioned elsewhere in a different thread. But do we have an answer as to why the 2 1/2 year old was brought on this camping trip, but not the two older kiddos?

JM does not have custody of the other two children. They reside with her ex husband.

 

[TxJan1971]

Sorry- this may be a bit off-topic and/or mentioned elsewhere in a different thread. But do we have an answer as to why the 2 1/2 year old was brought on this camping trip, but not the two older kiddos?

My guess is because Baby Deorr was the child of JM and DK Sr. and lived with them (up for debate where they actually lived - with DK Sr's dad and/or elsewhere).

JM's older two children live with their birth father who is not Deorr.

Therefore, it seems understandable to me that the trip may have only included DK Sr/JM's child and not JM's older two.

JMO

 

[K.L.Puyallup]

Ah, thanks!

 

[persimmon]

Perhaps!

Here are some scenarios to consider:

1. A misspeak by Klein and there was meetings (plural). (Reluctantly, since it's a given Klein/Vilt/SB/Nate/MSM/Nancy Grace and any and everyone else you can think of is always said to be misspeaking, I’m putting it out there as the first option to consider to get it out of the way!)

2. Transcription error. (That would be moi! My average accuracy rate last time measured a few days ago (LOL) was only 99%, so with a few added years of aging and the need for bifocals, I reckon I deserve a little fall from grace down to a 98.9% I could be guilty, and premeditated at that!)

3. There were 2 different meetings (two different times) and both families were present at both meetings held on the same day so nothing unusual there.

2. Klein (on his own or via advice from LE and/or FBI) planned it that way on purpose. Keep everyone separate for a reason. Two separate meetings with two separate families

3. Grandpa Kunz (DK Sr's dad) who signed the contract was the "family" at the Kunz meeting(s) with or without DK Sr and/or his attorney. Unsure if contract provides him with a separate meeting? This meeting may also may or may not have included DK Sr and/or his atty, but unsure.

4. DK Sr. w/ his attorney only (and/or including GPA Kunz) in one meeting, and one could assume his atty would have no reason to want to sit with JM and her side since he doesn't represent them or maybe he requested a separate meeting. The attorney, if in attendance, may have had a scheduling conflict that necessitated two separate meetings (or not).

5. JM, her mom, maybe even GGP attend a separate meeting possibly due to work restraints or if GGP attended, unsure if he had any issues requiring a separate meeting. Unsure what the contract states, but if GPA Kunz signed it, what kind of information is Klein required to provide JM and her side vs what info. he provides the name on the contract? (My guess is it's pretty much the same information but who knows?).

6. Up for rent and/or debate!

My SM voyeur senses tell me that the two families are still on the same side. I'm guessing an issue of logistics was the reason for two meetings. Or, perhaps just to keep things smaller and more orderly. There are a lot of extended family that seem to be in the thick of this so shear numbers perhaps?

 

[K.L.Puyallup]

So, I'm obviously jumping in late, here. It seems like it's generally accepted that these parents are not being truthful, and that there's evidence they had something to do with either this child's death, or the aftermath. It also seems like a lot of people suspect the child was either not on this trip, or didn't make it to the convenience store. Are there any semi-solid theories on what actually happened to DeOrr? Where? When? Any "who's" aside from the parents themselves?

 

[ReadySet]

Wow. Lots of great posts and good thinking.

Regarding the issue of an incident occuring "on federal land;" I agree that it is likely that something happened in the vicinity of the campground, in the Salmon Challis National Forest, which is federal land. But for those who are interested, it's hard to find an area that isn't public land. So if you were being technical about it, it opens up a lot of areas where something could have happened. Below is a map of federal lands in Idaho. The white areas are the only areas that aren't public (federal) land. Even the pale peachy color is Bureau of Land Management.

Find Idaho Falls in the lower right; then go up and to the left to where it says Salmon National Forest. That's about where Leadore is. See all the pretty colors? All federal land!

https://www.worldofmaps.net/typo3temp/images/idaho-federal-lands-indian-reservations-map.png

 

[TxJan1971]

Wow. Lots of great posts and good thinking.

Regarding the issue of an incident occuring "on federal land;" I agree that it is likely that something happened in the vicinity of the campground, in the Salmon Challis National Forest, which is federal land. But for those who are interested, it's hard to find an area that isn't public land. So if you were being technical about it, it opens up a lot of areas where something could have happened. Below is a map of federal lands in Idaho. The white areas are the only areas that aren't public (federal) land. Even the pale peachy color is Bureau of Land Management.

Find Idaho Falls in the lower right; then go up and to the left to where it says Salmon National Forest. That's about where Leadore is. See all the pretty colors? All federal land!

https://www.worldofmaps.net/typo3temp/images/idaho-federal-lands-indian-reservations-map.png

Thanks for the great map! Fascinating!

Since Klein said it would be prosecuted by Lemhi County (Radio show of 1-28-16), I would think (?) one could then r/o any federal land not in Lemhi County? (I don't know how big Lemhi County is compared to this map - I'm not familiar at all with the state, area, or counties and have to take a much closer look at some other maps to have it make any sense to me).

I do appreciate you sharing this map though! Thanks much!

 

[Tr.]

Okay - I haven't been here for 5 days and noticed on the last thread I have 600 more posts to read - :gaah: cguru:

Is there anything "important" back there, or is it just re-discussion of stuff we've covered?

:tyou: in advance!

lol..bessie got rid of all the good stuff last night but we've finally made it to the "scenerios" portion of these discussions

 

[ReadySet]

Something I haven't seen discussed recently, unless I missed it, is SB's comment about VDK and JM "getting out on the driver's side" when stopping to get fuel. It's in TxJan1971's transcript of SB's October interview with Tricia.

Why do you think he mentions that? Why point out that they got out on the driver's side? To imply there was a car seat on the passenger's side? I don't think it's unusual for both the driver and a passenger to get out on the same side...but it's just one of those things that has stood out to me. And if they both got out, that means they left little Deorr in the vehicle? I believe this is the same incident where someone thought they might have seen "a child in the back seat." Does it bother anyone else that SB mentions they got out on the same side? If someone saw a child in the "back seat?" Does that mean the jump seat? Did the passenger door not work correctly and that's why they both got out of the same side? Just late night obsession I guess. LOL

03:48
SB: Absolutely no video from the time they left Idaho Falls where they fueled up and…and you know their vehicle was seen and someone seen them getting out of the driver’s side to fuel up, but uh no child was ever seen so we don’t have any video.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?286501-ID-Deorr-Kunz-Jr-2-yr-old-Media-Timelines-and-Maps-**NO-DISCUSSION-quot/page2

 

[persimmon]

So, I'm obviously jumping in late, here. It seems like it's generally accepted that these parents are not being truthful, and that there's evidence they had something to do with either this child's death, or the aftermath. It also seems like a lot of people suspect the child was either not on this trip, or didn't make it to the convenience store. Are there any semi-solid theories on what actually happened to DeOrr? Where? When? Any "who's" aside from the parents themselves?

I believe he was on the trip but others do not see enough evidence to see it as fact. LE has made it very clear the parents have repeatedly lied and their story is fluid. LE also has stated they believe without a doubt that the parents know where DeOrr is.

Theories range from passed off to another individual to accident turned and illogical coverup to abuse and beyond. Personally, I fall somewhere in between accident/coverup and abuse leading to death. As for the details, I have no idea. I have suspected drug use as a possible variable or catalyst to whatever occured, but PI has rejected that idea as relevant.

I think the majority of us believe that when weather permits searching will resume and likely cover new terrain. Also, i think we may be kind of split on opinions as to whether or not LE has additional critical evidence that could lead to an arrest in the near future.