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

[K.L.Puyallup]

I would be more inclined to believe JM gave up custody of her children for selfless reasons, if she wasn't a primary suspect in the disappearance of the one child she does have custody of.

 

[K.L.Puyallup]

I know of two cases in my "family" where both mother's voluntarily gave up their rights.

I have an adopted daughter from Russia. She was found, severely malnourished and with pneumonia, at the age of 6 months in a cold apartment in Siberia. When neighbors found her, they called an ambulance. The police found the birth mother and basically told her...save yourself the trouble and just relinquish your rights now, because it's going to be a huge pain for us to do it legally but we WILL win and do so if we have to. Thankfully, she agreed to relinquish my daughter and she was placed in an orphanage. Yes, this was Russia, and not the US, but I believe something similar would have happened (exept the child would be placed in foster care, not in an orphanage of course).

The second instance involved my late husband's brother's child. My BIL had died of a drug overdose. When that was confirmed by autopsy, the mother was required to go in for drug testing. They found evidence of cocaine and other drugs in her system. We got temporary custody as she went to rehab and very slowly met the conditions to where she could parent her child again. She again lost custody, and he was returned to our home. She eventually recovered her rights to parent. However, not long after, she was caught drunk driving with the baby lying on the front seat of the car. This time, a meeting was held with CPS, a lawyer, a family therapist, our family, and the baby's mother. It was not very formal, but basically all the cards were laid out on the table. It came down to the same thing...relinquish your child for adoption, or go through a nightmare to have him taken away by the courts, who WOULD succeed. She agreed to adoption, and we agreed she could send letters to him, and that we would provide yearly pictures and updates to her on his life and how he was doing. (We did not end up adopting him as I filed for divorce from my husband, so his brother's family stepped in). Not surprisingly, she had 2 daughters who were around 7 and 8 years old at the time, who she'd lost custody of. She was allowed supervised visits ONLY if there was advance notice and permission granted by her ex-husband. Throughout this mess we talked to him a few times. She had only seen them a few times over the years but was pretty passive about it, knowing the deck was stacked against her. Several times she showed up drunk at his house, and was denied visitation. She however, did want her kids and cried all the time about not being able to see them. Yet she was unable to take care of herself let alone children. At times, she was homeless.

Just sharing two firsthand experiences. It will be interesting to see (and I hope we will) why she does not have physical custody of her other children.

Just a comment- THANK YOU for stepping up to take the role of a mother, when the birth mothers were unable to provide the care a child deserves. Huge kudos to you.

 

[bessie]

I'm sort of a newbie here. I've only ever commented on one other case that was local to me. I know that we're limited to MSM links as far as verified accusations/facts go. What's the accepted policy on seeing comments on links, and asking fellow sluethers if there's any accepted validity to them?
I hope it didn't appear that I was accusing JM of drug use. I did try to phrase my comments as questions, and was genuinely curious if the last 21 threads addressed the possibility of drug use, and if there was any conclusive appropriate evidence to support it.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by ignorance."

Reader comments and FB posts are considered rumor, and are off limits. See the Social Media Rule in the Rules forum.


http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12080508

 

[haven71]

Just curious...to anyone who might want to share, what was your initial theory about Deorr and how has it changed as new information came to light?

Initially, I knew of course it very well could be a child who wandered off and died of exposure, was taken by an animal, drowned in the creek...but from the get-go things seemed off to me (thanks to the infamous first interview). I wondered at the time if it was a planned abduction (remember Jessica saying "who would hurt us this way, knowing his much he means to us?". I envisioned a possible drug scenario where JM and DK released Deorr as collateral (a sickening thought) until they could cough up some dough to cover a drug debt.

The sheriff and Klein both seemed to dismiss any kind of drug involvement though.

When we all began to talk about accidents and cover-ups, I came up with the same theory I feel strongest about still today. Little Deorr may have been killed totally by accident/negligence or could've suffered a beating that lead to his demise. It has been my opinion that there was an accident of some sort and that it was covered up to hide signs of chronic abuse, possibly internal injuries, etc. that would be obvious if an autopsy were to be performed. Makes me sick, but this scenario makes the most sense to me, and nothing seems to contradict that it could happen. I am taking everything I've learned about into account. We have very little information to go on, and most of what we thought we had was taken away in an instant when SB revealed the poly results, pointed out the ever-changing stories, and named the parents as suspects.

JMO. What's yours?

 

[DatelineFan]

I would be more inclined to believe JM gave up custody of her children for selfless reasons, if she wasn't a primary suspect in the disappearance of the one child she does have custody of.

Yes, yes YES! A simple thanks wasn't enough!

 

[Trident]

Yes, if she had given DeOrr up for adoption he would still be alive and well...

That may or may not be. How often, after a child is abused or murdered, do posters say, "why didn't she give he/she up?" Yet, now, when we are speculating on it, I'm getting all kinds of bad, somewhat judgmental vibes. If she gave the children up, for her own reasons, I say good on her. As for DeOrr, well we don't know what happened to him, or if JM had anything to do with it.

Just my opinion here, and I'm enjoying the discussion, but methinks some are being a bit hard on her when we don't have any proof of anything.

 

[Rayemonde]

I would be more inclined to believe JM gave up custody of her children for selfless reasons, if she wasn't a primary suspect in the disappearance of the one child she does have custody of.

Thank you, you put it perfectly!

 

[courtneyb]

I know women who gave up physical custody of their children to the fathers. They did it in the best interest of the children. The women had no money to fight the father, knew that they would have to fight every month for support checks, the father retained the house the children grew up in, grandparents lived close by and the home was close to their school. The women were able to afford only a small 1 bedroom apartment as they were new to the working world. They all had visitation. One parent must have physical custody of the children and maintain the primary residence.

I also know women who left their kids behind when they left their husbands because they were no in a good place in their lives.

There is nothing wrong with fathers raising their children, everyone needs to look past the gender bias in custody matters. When moms get custody and fathers do not, no one thinks the dad is a bad guy. Why do the moms get such a bad response?

I am equally appalled when a father gives up their children. My oldest son (15) is from a previous marriage. We divorced when he was 18 months old. I was awarded sole custody. I was asking for joint custody, but he didn't want it. For 14 years, I allowed as much visitation as he wanted. 2 nights during the week, and every other weekend, plus any other time he wanted, unless we had something going on. I can't stand the man, but, as long as my son was happy, that's all that mattered. He paid none of the court ordered support and I never pursued it because I just wanted to make sure he had a good relationship with his Dad... I didn't care about the money. In hindsight, I realize that I've always known that his willingness to be around was tenuous. I practically BEGGED him (by not insisting he pay support, the liberal visitation, being nonconfrontational) to stick around and be in my son's life.

Last January, he lost his job and did not attempt to seek other employment. That was no matter to me... not like he was helping out financially anyway. In October, he stopped coming to get my son, stopped calling, texting, just dropped off the face of the earth. This is after having my son every Tues. and Thurs. and every other weekend from Friday evening until Monday morning, and half the holidays and ANY other time he asked to get him, as long as we didn't have anything important planned. For the last FOURTEEN years! My son has gotten one text saying, "Merry Christmas", and that's it. I attempted to call him a few times and never got a response. His mother told me it's because my ex "couldn't handle the responsibility" any more. What responsibility?? He never chipped in for anything, no support, no private school tuition, no health insurance.... I paid all of that.. all he had to do was spend time with his son. My son is hurt and angry and confused as to how his Dad could just walk away because he didn't want to deal with the hassle.

No gender bias here. I get equally incensed with Dads who throw away whatever little bit of a relationship they can have with their children as I do with Moms who do it.

 

[courtneyb]

I would be more inclined to believe JM gave up custody of her children for selfless reasons, if she wasn't a primary suspect in the disappearance of the one child she does have custody of.

Thank you. I was trying to say this but every way I typed it made it sound like I was being a jerk. [emoji4]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[courtneyb]

That may or may not be. How often, after a child is abused or murdered, do posters say, "why didn't she give he/she up?" Yet, now, when we are speculating on it, I'm getting all kinds of bad, somewhat judgmental vibes. If she gave the children up, for her own reasons, I say good on her. As for DeOrr, well we don't know what happened to him, or if JM had anything to do with it.

Just my opinion here, and I'm enjoying the discussion, but methinks some are being a bit hard on her when we don't have any proof of anything.

I wouldn't be talking about her giving her children up or even know who she is if she wasn't named a suspect in her toddler's disappearance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pepelepolecat]

Just curious...to anyone who might want to share, what was your initial theory about Deorr and how has it changed as new information came to light?

(rsbm)

JMO. What's yours?

Well.

At first, I wondered if he might not have died in a hot vehicle and his dad got rid of the body when hauling up the road. But the dogs would likely have responded to that.

I wondered if he might not have fallen in the water and drowned. But the sheriff said they searched every inch of the water and got no sign.

I wondered if he might have hidden underneath a vehicle in a game of hide-and-seek, and when dad went hauling off, he ran over him or dragged him or something similar. Or when his dad hauled off, he accidentally hit him on the road somewhere (because I can't help but think that if my child is lost, I wouldn't be "hauling" but rather driving quite slowly checking out every inch of road and land beside the road for my lost child). But that kind of accident would have left a lot of biological evidence, which seems to be lacking.

I was leaning towards lost child/accident or covered-up accident, but as time goes on, I have to lean more towards something more deliberate. Abuse is probably the most likely scenario in my mind. But I'm really at the point where I pretty much have no theory. Something really awful happened, but what? I don't know, and I'm beyond even speculating. There are too many things that don't make sense to me.

 

[pepelepolecat]

Sorry -- not sure why there were so many duplicates, and I can't delete!

 

[neesaki]

Babies get this quite often when teething. They drool, it irritates the face. Sometimes when sleeping their sheet gets wet from drool, rub on their face and it can make it worse. It can also be from sucking on a pacifier. Its very hard to put something on it that will help or stay on. Its quite normal and the parents should not be judged for this at all. JMO

Had some issues with the website so hope I'm not double posting. Anyway, I agree with you, Onebest. Sorry if it sounded like this is something I'm judging the parents on, it's not and whatever that is around his mouth is insignificant, IMO. I guess sometimes my posts are pointless, lol. :blush:

 

[MinnesotaMary]

I think the poor precious angel was snatched by some wild animal indigenous to that area. I always felt really bad for dad & mom & they sure seem to have loved that little boy. Did the grandpa ever appear in the press - on tv news, any quotes in newspaper from him???


I just learned from a Denver CO resident that each year the wolves are around in the city & will snatch a few babies & toddlers !!

I'm in Minnesota, & I'll never forget the time I was in a SE Minn. state park, MYOB, standing still, & a big, big deer ran right by me - so wierd, it was so huge & whisked the side of me, top to bottom - I didn't know deer were so smart & had such terrific coordination to be able to do that.

 

[K.L.Puyallup]

I think the poor precious angel was snatched by some wild animal indigenous to that area. I always felt really bad for dad & mom & they sure seem to have loved that little boy. Did the grandpa ever appear in the press - on tv news, any quotes in newspaper from him???


I just learned from a Denver CO resident that each year the wolves are around in the city & will snatch a few babies & toddlers !!

I'm in Minnesota, & I'll never forget the time I was in a SE Minn. state park, MYOB, standing still, & a big, big deer ran right by me - so wierd, it was so huge & whisked the side of me, top to bottom - I didn't know deer were so smart & had such terrific coordination to be able to do that.

Investigators- and I believe LE- have ruled out a wild animal as a potential cause of death for this child. It's noted that there were no screams heard, no clothing left behind, and no physical evidence whatsoever to support this circumstance. That said, I agree with you that the parents, or at least JM, have appeared to be pretty distraught over this whole thing. Whether that's grief, remorse, or a mixture of the two, I'm not certain.
However, Sheriff Bowerman and his team have really done a top-notch job with examining this case from all angles, and did not rush into naming the parents as official suspects. I do not think that the decision to do so was made hastily, and I believe that there is likely evidence to support their suspicions.

 

[neesaki]

Oh, I think JM's children are WAY better off with Dad. It was a good decision she made, but I don't think her good intentions were the primary motivator for that decision. I think she maybe didn't really want her kids (the responsibility, the hassle, the financial burden, the loss of freedom, especially as a single parent), and, as an added benefit, they'd be better off with Dad anyway. I'm not saying she doesn't love them, but I don't think she wanted them and all the burden and tying down that comes with them.

She was barely out of her teens when she made this decision, and WAS a teenager with 2 children and a busted relationship. I have a feeling she felt she was young enough to start fresh, and she had Dad who was willing to take the 2 biggest roadblocks in the way of that happening.

But, I'm glad she did, for the kids' sake.

I'm thinking that VDR may have been part of the reason, maybe he wasn't interested in being burdened with someone else's kids. Also perhaps financial, I think 50/50 joint custody requires equally sharing expenses, maybe she couldn't afford it. If she pays child support, it wouldn't be that much, and it wouldn't surprise me if her ex let her off the hook entirely. jmo

 

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

Well.

At first, I wondered if he might not have died in a hot vehicle and his dad got rid of the body when hauling up the road. But the dogs would likely have responded to that.

I wondered if he might not have fallen in the water and drowned. But the sheriff said they searched every inch of the water and got no sign.

I wondered if he might have hidden underneath a vehicle in a game of hide-and-seek, and when dad went hauling off, he ran over him or dragged him or something similar. Or when his dad hauled off, he accidentally hit him on the road somewhere (because I can't help but think that if my child is lost, I wouldn't be "hauling" but rather driving quite slowly checking out every inch of road and land beside the road for my lost child). But that kind of accident would have left a lot of biological evidence, which seems to be lacking.

I was leaning towards lost child/accident or covered-up accident, but as time goes on, I have to lean more towards something more deliberate. Abuse is probably the most likely scenario in my mind. But I'm really at the point where I pretty much have no theory. Something really awful happened, but what? I don't know, and I'm beyond even speculating. There are too many things that don't make sense to me.

BBM = Great thought, Pepe!

 

[Blue Skies]

I don't post much because I don't have a lot of patience getting my thoughts together; however, I do want to respond to all of the talk of JM relinquishing her other children to their father.

I DO believe JM and VDK are guilty of something. I HOPE it was an accident, but I also believe it could be related to punishment gone too far which in my eyes IS abuse and murder if he is deceased. There is something very wrong with someone who can get angry enough at a child to beat them to death whether intentional or not.

This is not really in defense of JM, but more in defense of mothers who are judged for this in general. I don't think it is fair to base our opinions of JM's care for Deorr on the fact that she allowed her other children's father to have full custody of them. Whether it was full custody or not, she STILL sees those children. I am not saying this is the ideal situation by far, but maybe this is the best she could do at the time. We have no idea what the circumstances surrounding that situation are. I have known GOOD mothers who have given up custody to the father because the father and his family had the means and the funds to fight, and the mother didn't have the means, the funds, nor the mental energy to fight anymore. Everybody has a breaking point. We just don't know the circumstances.

JM might be an abusive mother. I'm not saying she is not. I'm just saying it's unfair to base our opinion on the fact that the father has custody of the other children. It takes a cold hearted person (heartless IMO) to physically abuse a child. I know people with hearts of gold that have had to relinquish custody of their children.

Something is very off about this whole case. The first interview alone was enough to tell us that IMO. I think there might be an aspect that we have yet to discuss here.

 

[courtneyb]

I'm thinking that VDR may have been part of the reason, maybe he wasn't interested in being burdened with someone else's kids. Also perhaps financial, I think 50/50 joint custody requires equally sharing expenses, maybe she couldn't afford it. If she pays child support, it wouldn't be that much, and it wouldn't surprise me if her ex let her off the hook entirely. jmo

Sorry to sound like a country song, but "Ain't no man gonna ever be more important than my kids." [emoji57]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[courtneyb]

Well.

At first, I wondered if he might not have died in a hot vehicle and his dad got rid of the body when hauling up the road. But the dogs would likely have responded to that.

I wondered if he might not have fallen in the water and drowned. But the sheriff said they searched every inch of the water and got no sign.

I wondered if he might have hidden underneath a vehicle in a game of hide-and-seek, and when dad went hauling off, he ran over him or dragged him or something similar. Or when his dad hauled off, he accidentally hit him on the road somewhere (because I can't help but think that if my child is lost, I wouldn't be "hauling" but rather driving quite slowly checking out every inch of road and land beside the road for my lost child). But that kind of accident would have left a lot of biological evidence, which seems to be lacking.

I was leaning towards lost child/accident or covered-up accident, but as time goes on, I have to lean more towards something more deliberate. Abuse is probably the most likely scenario in my mind. But I'm really at the point where I pretty much have no theory. Something really awful happened, but what? I don't know, and I'm beyond even speculating. There are too many things that don't make sense to me.

Great point about him hauling up the road. Looking for DeOrr wasn't necessary and he knew it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk