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

[Niner]

I totally respect your opinion/theory, but it does make me want to ask (hope this is okay) how do you reconcile that the parents haven't been able to tell the same story twice and that they consistently and repeatedly both failed the questions asking if they know what happened to DeOrr and where he is? (And this part is just my impression, but I know a lot of others share it, but I will add to the lying the lack of panic and concern for their son, or getting the word out, all while they were claiming he was abducted?)

To me, the above doesn't seem to be in line with DeOrr wandering off and the parents innocently discovering him missing. And I don't think they would pull a mass 7-month charade to hide what they know if it was only that they were doing something slightly neglectful or embarrassing when he wandered.

Do you think LE/FBI/Klein are incorrect in their determination and analysis? Or that the parents have been lying but for reasons other than that they had involvement or knowledge of what happened?

I'm open!!! Thx in advance.

Sorry - it took so long to post - been busy reading Juan Martinez book thread and his book!

Okay - re same story - I was thinking that at first, they were both in shock and just didn't remember the "little" things, i.e. who made breakfast... and just continued to "add" to their story as time went on. And Sheriff Bowerman, at the beginning, did say he believed them, so there must have been something there as to why he said that.

repeatedly both failed the questions asking if they know what happened to DeOrr and where he is?
this part... did the test show "failed" or "inconclusive" ?? I don't recall; but if "incolnclusive" - then I would think - "what happened to DeOrr" - confusion on their part, because they really don't know "what happened", as he wandered off or did someone snatch him and "where he is?" - they both don't really know "where he is". I don't know "how" lie detectors work, so if I was asked, say the "where he is" question, my mind would be racing thinking all the places he "could" be. Am I making sense? LOL!

I don't think they would pull a mass 7-month charade to hide what they know if it was only that they were doing something slightly neglectful or embarrassing when he wandered.
Maybe it is "too" embarrassing...

Do you think LE/FBI/Klein are incorrect in their determination and analysis?
Well, I don't really know "what" they have determined as I haven't seen much of their analysis, facts of this case or even a Timeline of events. If they could give us a Timeline (it would be interesting to see if LE and Klein's Timelines are different or the same!) - maybe that would actually change my mind on IF they had anything to do with little DeOrr "disappearing".

BUT! reading further along on this thread - I would have to change my mind on all this. I really would like to see a "real" Timeline...

especially this:

• Incident happened on Federal land
• KIC investigating as a death case
• Still determining accident vs homicide with intent
• Closely approaching the Prosecutorial phase
• Everyone on the same page to include FBI, Bonneville, Lemhi, Klein
• There “is” evidence that shows what happened
• physical evidence obtained early in the case matched out later into the case
• Waiting on more lab tests to come back
• Couple more items taken into custody yesterday (1-27-16) already on the way to East Coast
• Quantico is coming in to decipher information (1-28-16)
• nothing to indicate there was any other person involved
• 2 POI's w/ 2 axillary persons that we’re still vetting out
• not a matter of whether charges will be filed, it’s what charges

Unless there has been movement on this case - and I just haven't read about it - I'm only on Feb. 21st posting... like you said later in a post - "anything could have happened".

okay - posting this and have 3 more pages to read to catch up with you all! cguru:

 

[courtneyb]

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 their 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 gave 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 it 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.

I agree with a lot here. It would be unfair to start at the point she gave up her kids and say, "She probably isn't a great mom and shouldn't ever have any more kids." But I'm starting from the point where she was named a suspect in her child's disappearance and going backwards to where she gave up her kids and saying, "maybe there were signs that she isn't a great, dedicated mom."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[courtneyb]

Sorry - it took so long to post - been busy reading Juan Martinez book thread and his book!

Okay - re same story - I was thinking that at first, they were both in shock and just didn't remember the "little" things, i.e. who made breakfast... and just continued to "add" to their story as time went on. And Sheriff Bowerman, at the beginning, did say he believed them, so there must have been something there as to why he said that.

repeatedly both failed the questions asking if they know what happened to DeOrr and where he is?
this part... did the test show "failed" or "inconclusive" ?? I don't recall; but if "incolnclusive" - then I would think - "what happened to DeOrr" - confusion on their part, because they really don't know "what happened", as he wandered off or did someone snatch him and "where he is?" - they both don't really know "where he is". I don't know "how" lie detectors work, so if I was asked, say the "where he is" question, my mind would be racing thinking all the places he "could" be. Am I making sense? LOL!

I don't think they would pull a mass 7-month charade to hide what they know if it was only that they were doing something slightly neglectful or embarrassing when he wandered.
Maybe it is "too" embarrassing...

Do you think LE/FBI/Klein are incorrect in their determination and analysis?
Well, I don't really know "what" they have determined as I haven't seen much of their analysis, facts of this case or even a Timeline of events. If they could give us a Timeline (it would be interesting to see if LE and Klein's Timelines are different or the same!) - maybe that would actually change my mind on IF they had anything to do with little DeOrr "disappearing".

BUT! reading further along on this thread - I would have to change my mind on all this. I really would like to see a "real" Timeline...

especially this:


Unless there has been movement on this case - and I just haven't read about it - I'm only on Feb. 21st posting... like you said later in a post - "anything could have happened".

okay - posting this and have 3 more pages to read to catch up with you all! cguru:

[emoji4] I get what you're saying about the polygraph, but I believe they would phrase the question in a definitive way. "Do you KNOW or have knowledge of what happened..." Or "Did you kill your son?" It would be a yes or no. No room for confusion, I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pepelepolecat]

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.

bbm -- generally speaking, I agree with the bolded statement. imo, kids belong with the person who can provide them with the highest quality care and maintain continuity and stability for them. At the same time, JM now has a missing (presumed dead? per Klein) child and has been named a suspect, primary POI, in that case. So I think it's natural that people are asking *why* she relinquished custody so seemingly easily.

imo

 

[Blue Skies]

I agree with a lot here. It would be unfair to start at the point she gave up her kids and say, "She probably isn't a great mom and shouldn't ever have any more kids." But I'm starting from the point where she was named a suspect in her child's disappearance and going backwards to where she gave up her kids and saying, "maybe there were signs that she isn't a great, dedicated mom."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I certainly agree that they were named as suspects for good reason and there is obviously substantial evidence pointing to their guilt. I believe they are guilty of something. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear.

I just haven't seen enough evidence to form an opinion of whether there was or wasn't prior abuse. Prior abuse would lead me to believe they did something directly to Deorr to cause his death, as opposed to more of a neglectful death which could even be attributed to ignorance IMO.

I've seen parents that made me cringe because they didn't watch their children closely enough and sometimes it's been out of sheer ignorance. For example: Parents who say, "I rode in the back of a pick up truck, and I'm still alive" or parents who truly believe a 12 year old sibling is responsible enough to babysit an infant. This DOES NOT excuse them in any way shape or form and they are still guilty IMO, but it's not the same kind of person nor the same mentality of a person who can beat a child to death whether intentional or not.

I completely agree that VDK and JM's behavior lacks the remorse of what I would expect from a grieving parent. I'm not defending them.

 

[Blue Skies]

bbm -- generally speaking, I agree with the bolded statement. imo, kids belong with the person who can provide them with the highest quality care and maintain continuity and stability for them. At the same time, JM now has a missing (presumed dead? per Klein) child and has been named a suspect, primary POI, in that case. So I think it's natural that people are asking *why* she relinquished custody so seemingly easily.

imo

I replied to most of your post as well as courtneyb in a prior post where I quoted cournteyb.

I understand about speculating due to the circumstances. I'm not criticizing anyone for that, just stating how I felt about that particular aspect.

 

[kammiemc]

Sorry - it took so long to post - been busy reading Juan Martinez book thread and his book!

Okay - re same story - I was thinking that at first, they were both in shock and just didn't remember the "little" things, i.e. who made breakfast... and just continued to "add" to their story as time went on. And Sheriff Bowerman, at the beginning, did say he believed them, so there must have been something there as to why he said that.

repeatedly both failed the questions asking if they know what happened to DeOrr and where he is?
this part... did the test show "failed" or "inconclusive" ?? I don't recall; but if "incolnclusive" - then I would think - "what happened to DeOrr" - confusion on their part, because they really don't know "what happened", as he wandered off or did someone snatch him and "where he is?" - they both don't really know "where he is". I don't know "how" lie detectors work, so if I was asked, say the "where he is" question, my mind would be racing thinking all the places he "could" be. Am I making sense? LOL!

I don't think they would pull a mass 7-month charade to hide what they know if it was only that they were doing something slightly neglectful or embarrassing when he wandered.
Maybe it is "too" embarrassing...

Do you think LE/FBI/Klein are incorrect in their determination and analysis?
Well, I don't really know "what" they have determined as I haven't seen much of their analysis, facts of this case or even a Timeline of events. If they could give us a Timeline (it would be interesting to see if LE and Klein's Timelines are different or the same!) - maybe that would actually change my mind on IF they had anything to do with little DeOrr "disappearing".

BUT! reading further along on this thread - I would have to change my mind on all this. I really would like to see a "real" Timeline...

especially this:


Unless there has been movement on this case - and I just haven't read about it - I'm only on Feb. 21st posting... like you said later in a post - "anything could have happened".

okay - posting this and have 3 more pages to read to catch up with you all! cguru:

Thx, Niner!

I think you might have missed (not a bad thing!) the whole convo about whether or not SB said the the tests were inconclusive. It was only said that he used that word in an article, in which the reporter interpreted what another reporter had said (seemingly incorrectly, since that reporter never said SB that about the parents' poly's, on the two other two POI's. SB actually said that the parents were "deceptive" on their poly's, then changed that to "less than truthful" because, while they "failed" the questions about whether they had knowledge of what happened and the location of DrOrr, they were truthful in some other parts of the test.

When I referred to LE's determination, I just meant their determination that the parents know what happened to their son and where is, haven't been able to keep their stories straight and that they are suspects in his disappearance. Tats the framework I am working in. For me, anything is possible within that framework. (And also within the framework that Klein has provided, which is that DeOrr is deceased.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mickshawn]

Wow...I was just trying to imagine what things would be like now for JM's other kids if they HAD been living with her and then all this happened. I'm sure it's really hard for them to understand and make sense of this whole thing, but at least they do have their dad, their home, their school, family and friends....some stability, at least.

 

[neesaki]

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

I'm with you on that

 

[pepelepolecat]

Wow...I was just trying to imagine what things would be like now for JM's other kids if they HAD been living with her and then all this happened. I'm sure it's really hard for them to understand and make sense of this whole thing, but at least they do have their dad, their home, their school, family and friends....some stability, at least.

Yeah, they are so young -- losing their little brother must have been terribly hard on them, and there are no answers for them.

 

[renarde]

DeOrr's case reminds me a bit of Colton Turner's, mostly because of the discussion about pictures. In Colton's case, his mother had posted photos of him, bruises and all, on her FB:

"An Austin Police warrant affidavit released Monday requesting a search of Work’s Facebook page contends CPS ‘was advised’ of photos showing bruises and injuries on Colton’s back and face."

http://kxan.com/2014/09/25/medical-examiner-body-not-referred-to-as-colton-turner/

Photos of his abused body, taken by someone else while he was still alive, had also been passed around on Facebook. This is what got relatives and friends wondering about his welfare. No one had seen him in months by the time he was officially reported missing...

http://kxan.com/2016/02/23/plea-deal-possible-in-colton-turner-case/

 

[MBK]

I wonder the last time anyone outside the immediate family saw Deorr before the trip up to the campsite on "Thursday".

 

[TeaTime]

I wonder the last time anyone outside the immediate family saw Deorr before the trip up to the campsite on "Thursday".

I would think that this would be GP Kunz since the family lived and as far as we know, still live with him. This is speculated because GP Kunz called baby DeOrr his 'nap buddy'.

 

[renarde]

I wonder the last time anyone outside the immediate family saw Deorr before the trip up to the campsite on "Thursday".

Klein's response to that question was... less than clear.

 

[Mickshawn]

This is my first WS case.....Is it "normal" (maybe there is no such thing) for a case to go on so long for a supposed (OK, SUPPOSED) roughly 17ish hour "event"??

 

[MBK]

I would think that this would be GP Kunz since the family lived and as far as we know, still live with him. This is speculated because GP Kunz called baby DeOrr his 'nap buddy'.

Huh. I thought I read here that they didn't live with him at the time of the trip? That would be important to know.

 

[kammiemc]

It seems to be!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kammiemc]

I would think that this would be GP Kunz since the family lived and as far as we know, still live with him. This is speculated because GP Kunz called baby DeOrr his 'nap buddy'.

I agree that this means that GPA K did take naps with DeOrr when they all lived together.

I think some other things that might be important to know to figure out who last saw DeOrr would be whether DK and JM had moved out of GPA K's place right before the camping trip (were they living in Montpellier or IF when they went on the camping trip?), whether JM went to her mother's house the day before the camping trip to clean out the camper, whether she stayed there that night, whether JM and DeOrr had dinner the night before with her, and if not, when did friends living nearby last see DeOrr, and when did other extended family members (aunts, grandparents, etc.) who typically saw DeOrr last see him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kammiemc]

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

Thank goodness she didn't end up with responsibility over any children beyond the one that she is suspected of disappearing, regardless of whether she lost custody or willingly gave it up! I wish she would have either lost custody of DeOrr or had given him away to someone in her family. It might have given him a chance of growing up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pepelepolecat]

DeOrr's case reminds me a bit of Colton Turner's, mostly because of the discussion about pictures. In Colton's case, his mother had posted photos of him, bruises and all, on her FB:

"An Austin Police warrant affidavit released Monday requesting a search of Work’s Facebook page contends CPS ‘was advised’ of photos showing bruises and injuries on Colton’s back and face."

http://kxan.com/2014/09/25/medical-examiner-body-not-referred-to-as-colton-turner/

Photos of his abused body, taken by someone else while he was still alive, had also been passed around on Facebook. This is what got relatives and friends wondering about his welfare. No one had seen him in months by the time he was officially reported missing...

http://kxan.com/2016/02/23/plea-deal-possible-in-colton-turner-case/

Boy, a quick google search of that case left me with some really awful feelings re: this case. :cry: