ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - # 25

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Blue Skies said:
What VDK said regarding this was the opposite of how I think I would feel in this situation. I wouldn't want to see, smell, eat or even be around my child's favorite food if they were missing. I can't imagine buying nuggets for nobody????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. When I lost a beloved friend a couple of years ago, I found comfort in things he liked - even when it didn't make any sense to do so. The mourning process can be strange and comforts may seem odd.

However, this doesn't mean I'm not suspicious of the parents because I do have big questions about what they say happened on that camping trip.

JMOpinion.
 
Hippie Heart said:
I haven't posted much on this thread, but I've been following it for a couple of months now. I too was taken aback by some of the things said in the interview.

#1 I don't feel there was any need for JM to explain her "crazy mom status" ( which was said in a very light tone to me) because every mother with a missing child would automatically search for their child's face in a crowded, listen for their voice, etc. My sister-in-law lost her first child at a few days old and heard phantom cries for months. that is a normal thing, no need to point it out. Ice Princess was a very good description of her. I also agree with other posters that her example of the baby comforting her is concerning.

#2 VK seems much more sincere than her, not saying he's not guilty or culpable of something, but I sense very different emotional responses between the two of them. it makes me wonder if she is the one responsible. His slip-up of saying "at least not in my eyes" (or something to that effect) to me was a veiled reference to JM as he was distinguishing his view of baby Deorr from hers. It was odd.

#3 The only scenario I can imagine regarding chicken nuggets is that you're somewhere ordering food and you think to yourself about ordering something for your little one, then have the sickening realization that they're not there with you. You would never actually order the food imho. To me that was embellishing so it was done to convince.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this came out of left field, I was not expecting it. On the one hand, you have him leaning over tearfully on her shoulder to comfort her but what he said did seem glaringly obvious it was directed at her. Doesn't seem like he'd intentionally throw that out there to hurt JM's image. Perhaps it's been observed by family or other witnesses that she is the disciplinarian, and he's apt to let him get away with a lot more, and that's soon to be public knowledge. JMO.
 
haven71 said:
Yeah, this came out of left field, I was not expecting it. On the one hand, you have him leaning over tearfully on her shoulder to comfort her but what he said did seem glaringly obvious it was directed at her. Doesn't seem like he'd intentionally throw that out there to hurt JM's image. Perhaps it's been observed by family or other witnesses that she is the disciplinarian, and he's apt to let him get away with a lot more, and that's soon to be public knowledge. JMO.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the one attorney will continue representing both suspects.
 
Inthedetails said:
I don't know about that. When I lost a beloved friend a couple of years ago, I found comfort in things he liked - even when it didn't make any sense to do so. The mourning process can be strange and comforts may seem odd.

However, this doesn't mean I'm not suspicious of the parents because I do have big questions about what they say happened on that camping trip.

JMOpinion.
Click to expand...

I think it might be different when 1.) it's your child and 2.) they are "missing" without closure, which is what they are claiming.

Also, I can see finding comfort in something that belonged to that child. I understand that, but to go buy food and gifts for the child? I THINK that would break my heart even more. Everyone is different though and we can't say for sure how we would react. That's just how I think I would feel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Blue Skies said:
I think it might be different when 1.) it's your child and 2.) they are "missing" without closure, which is what they are claiming.

Also, I can see finding comfort in something that belonged to that child. I understand that, but to go buy food and gifts for the child? I THINK that would break my heart even more. Everyone is different though and we can't say for sure how we would react. That's just how I think I would feel. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Vernal described it as if he purchased the gifts himself, not with JM. On the one hand, the gifts are possibly supposed to function as a sort of "physical proof" that he (they?) didn't kill/ disappear Deorr. On the other hand, you'd almost (well, almost) think that he truly doesn't know and that JM "dunnit" (notice how I wrote "you'd almost", distancing myself from my own credulity . . :thinking:)ALMOST, but then I remember the 9 different stories . . .
 
When LE first got to the campground it would be a matter of SOP to separate all four of the people there and get each individual's statement of what happened and when it happened. JMO, but the stories would conflict from the beginning and that would be a huge red flag for LE. The reason I don't think the four were separated at the beginning is Chief Penner's statement that the parents were 'solid', meaning they were telling the truth about what actually happened. Why would he even say this when it has turned out to be that they are lying?

The parents could have refused to answer any and all questions after the first statement given after the 911 call. Common sense would tell the parents that if they refused to cooperate with LE, it would point to deception and guilt. So the parents talked with LE, continued to be interviewed, and even took polygraphs all the while continuing to lie. They still continue the deception to this day, IMO.

The interview would have been much better if we could have seen Vernal and Jessica's face from the front instead of only the side. I wonder why it was set up this way? I have never in my life seen parent's who continue to lie as much as these two when their baby is missing unless they are guilty of something. I still think the parents either sold little DeOrr or staged an abduction (re-homing) for money. Maybe that is how they can come across as so very cold and unfeeling. Maybe they know he is okay or he is at least not dead. I seriously do not believe he is on that mountain at all and that there are others involved. Only time will tell, if at all.

I know I am alone in this thinking, but there I am. Even Sheriff Bowerman alluded to the possibility of it being something else, IIRC.

I place my faith in Sheriff Bowerman and the FBI. No one else.

JMO
 
I am leery of both parents at this point. I really don't think it's a good idea for them to be sharing an attorney. If I was JM I would want my own attorney that I was in charge of. I would never want to share an attorney with anyone, especially VDK who is also accused and throwing suspicion even more my way with his little comments here and there, while trying to appear innocent.
JM is cold acting for sure but VDK trying to act all sweetsy and innocent makes me look even harder at him. I'd be all cold shoulder to him, too, if I thought he was trying to make people point to me or my family member. He's got the one up on her. He or his family is the one that retained the attorney. My opinion is that attorney is going to look out for VDK first. Maybe that's why VDK and her are sharing attorney at this point. Maybe VDK is concerned she's going to implicate him. You know what they say-keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

JMO as always.

ETA: Removed quote
 
FWIW, here's my take on the "taco truck" (IMOO, JMO and all that)

If you listen closely, the key word to note is “like” a taco truck as well as the intonation when saying it, as if he is questioning if it is the right word(s) to use. Although he very well could have bought chicken nuggets from a taco truck, I didn’t take it literally based on the above.

10:02
I mean… I walked over to a…just a…um…(pause) like a taco truck ???

and picked up a little thing of chicken nuggets not even thinking about it…just…I start walking back with them going, “What am I going to do with these?” You do it still. It’s…(pause) It’s normal.

http://m.localnews8.com/news/exclus...nded-interview-with-chelsea-brentzel/38478346
 
menmo said:
I am leery of both parents at this point. I really don't think it's a good idea for them to be sharing an attorney. If I was JM I would want my own attorney that I was in charge of. I would never want to share an attorney with anyone, especially VDK who is also accused and throwing suspicion even more my way with his little comments here and there, while trying to appear innocent.
JM is cold acting for sure but VDK trying to act all sweetsy and innocent makes me look even harder at him. I'd be all cold shoulder to him, too, if I thought he was trying to make people point to me or my family member. He's got the one up on her. He or his family is the one that retained the attorney. My opinion is that attorney is going to look out for VDK first. Maybe that's why VDK and her are sharing attorney at this point. Maybe VDK is concerned she's going to implicate him. You know what they say-keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

JMO as always.

ETA: Removed quote
Click to expand...

First thing that entered my mind when I learned they were sharing legal counsel. May come back to bite someone in the proverbial (_!_)
 
great posts in this thread...lalaw, menmo, apparition, concernedcitizenid, jamaicamecrazy...

once again (broken record rabbit) we're all forgetting the human factor. doesn't matter what bowerman nor others said early on. they've corrected themselves. it's a non-admission of being wrong, and that's ok by me. this is not prime-time tv, these folks are small-town law enforcement. I'm not saying they're incompetent, they're just not used to seeing or fielding cases such as these nor the media and social frenzy that follows. IMO they've done a great job so far. but at the outset, they didn't have the wherewithal to separate and interrogate. in that part of the country, it's trust first and doubt later. which I admire. we're all jaded. and in my part of the country, we trust last. guilt comes before innocence. period.

go back to the early threads. a lot of you (and myself) thought that first interview put DK in the drivers' seat as he wouldn't "allow" JM to speak. in the past few threads I've noticed the pattern of many backpeddling to the point of putting JM in the spotlight and DK as the pawn.

just an interesting observation. either way I agree they're both lying. but re-read our posts (mine included). many of us have flip-flopped as to who's the more guilty (or innocent) party.

MOO...
 
At the beginning I thought they were both grieving parents but I was sitting on that fence reading all of the posts thinking what if. I fell backward off the fence when I found out about the lie detector tests (even though I'm not real trusting of who can pass those) and not only LE but FBI put the parents as suspects.

These parents need to step up. I would hope it would be the mother, because as a mother I can't imagine doing something to my child and not being a broken mess if something happened to my child, but knowing where he is and not being able to grieve openly. I know we all react differently to things in our lives but I want to scream.

JMO
 
agreed, menmo...agreed.

but we're not dealing with normal parents. IMO. and apples don't fall far so I'm discounting anything further up the ancestral food chain.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 113 more.
Total: 1,593 (members: 114, guests: 1,479)

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
1,479
Total visitors
1,593
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,829
Messages
18,193,076
Members
233,578
Latest member
Hyacintha
Back
Top