ID - DeOrr Kunz, Jr., 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #26

[persimmon]

Reading the FB commentary on the case as anything other than low comedy will cause your iq to drop by 20 points. The fact that it is adults commenting, fighting, and pulling information out of the air is frightening and depressing to me. At this point, anybody who starts a DeOrr page must genuinely enjoy crazy because those pages are fully stocked with it and little else. Some of the more serious pages that have DeOrr posts need to delete or moderate the comments to some degree because they really are ignorant. Jmo

 

[CoverMeCagney]

What are you guys all still doing awake at silly o'clock in the morning?! I've just got up, having my first cuppa of the day and catching up on all my threads, not used to seeing my transatlantic friends still online at this time!

 

[Tr.]

You are not delusional ... Other people are .... they have resurrected the non-existent filthy bawling baby for the hundredth time .

The whole thing came out during one of the interviews .... Vernal was commenting about some of the wacky witness reports .... such as someone said they saw a filthy bawling baby at the store at 6:00 pm Friday

And Vernal was correct .... it was wacky because the baby was missing since early afternoon and the parents had been at the campsite along with all the other searchers and it is wacky to suggest the parents and the boy could have been at the store at 6:00 pm.

Vernal was correct , the false tip is plain wacky wacky wacky wacky wacky wacky

And we must remember that Vernal also said if anyone claims to have information they should bring it to the Sheriff or FBI.

So we are to believe what Vernal says now ??? O.K....<modsnip>

Klein has stated that his investigators have found a 6pm witness sighting of Deorr.

 

[Tr.]

I know what you mean as it really stood out during the interview how he quickly tried to squash it. He wanted to squash it so badly that it became very obviously suspicious.

Because lets think about it from a missing boy perspective. If you are a parent and a reporter tells you that they think they saw the boy with someone at the store then wouldn't you want to pursue and dig into that to get as much information about it as possible. You surely would not want to just squash it.

Exactly...JM was asked if there was anything she wanted to bring up..anything important.
She brings up the supposed sighting but not as a means to explore it in hopes that someone saw her son with his alleged kidnapper...but rather with VDK's help, as a means of debunking the story all together or editing it to suit their own timeline.

 

[persimmon]

Preaching to the choir, but I hope LE has an indication of where to search due to evidence we aren't aware of. To watch these two clowns somehow beat the system so far on dumb luck is irritating. Mostly, it's such a shame that DeOrr is out there and their in warm beds at night, free, and even though they failed at life, they were given a chance.

 

[Tr.]

Why though? Why make that up? If the purpose was to make people believe Deorr was there, why not just say the clerk saw them at the day and time he actually claimed they were there? Why say the clerk said one time, yet it was actually another. What did he benefit by adding that twist?

ETA: Either way, it would have been easy to prove he was lying. I don't mean to drag it out. I would really like to hear some reasoning as to why he would add the mixed up times to his lie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think the parents made up the sighting rumor. JM brought it up to debunk it and VDK decided to play it as a morning sighting in Leadore when they should have had a living breathing Deorr with them but actually did not.
"It was me..but it was earlier when we all went down there as a family". -VDK

Imo the only possible sighting would have had to be the day before.

 

[Tr.]

I think those pics should be sent to LE and the blanket with the dots and character pointed out. Then LE could ask the parents if they still had that blanket. If they do not, then oh man!!!!

Yeah..that first interview left me with a thousand questions. The possible leakage by VDK referring to the blanket (JM is holding) as a "replica" is peculiar.
I imagine when Deorr is finally located he will have his blanket with him.

 

[Mickshawn]

I made a comment last night regarding not quite understanding the blanket conversation (I blamed it on being tired)..."JUST" as I was awakening this morning, it came to me in an AHA moment.....I get it now.

 

[Tr.]

But in the meantime, we do have the media thread. I could break that out into more topic specific threads. I could create an entire subforum such as I and others have done for so many other cases. Yet, still, the same problem persists. You can drag a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

Our media thread is like an excyclopedia of every fact known about this case (sans the FB rumors). I've posted the link probably one hundred times througout the threads, as have others. Claire and Jan, and so many others have diligently kept the media thread up to date. A member only has to click on the tag "deorr kunz" at the bottom of each page, or go to the opening post of each thread to find the media thread link.

How many do it? Judging from the daily parade of hackneyed, repetitive comments and questions, the answer obviously is very few. Why? Because it's too much work, something we old time sleuthers relish. There's nothing more satisfying than rolling up your sleeves and poring over every document and news article you can find to connect the dots.

Nowadays, it's so much easier and more titillating to jump into the FB, he said/she said, fray, and adopt the judgment du jour.

Farewell critical thinking! Grab the torches and pitchforks. I read it on FB, so it must be true.

:rant:

Look around on your desk..somewhere there should be an "OFF" switch for FB ..lol

 

[Rayemonde]

Yeah..that first interview left me with a thousand questions. The possible leakage by VDK referring to the blanket (JM is holding) as a "replica" is peculiar.
I imagine when Deorr is finally located he will have his blanket with him.

From what I have read about ground-penetrating sonar, a blanket buried with the remains could make them easier to find. However, if the remains are securely wrapped in a blanket I think it could make them more difficult for cadaver dogs to find.

 

[Purplepixii]

Now that time is spent perusing FB, dontcha know.

BTDT It's all speculation. I've found the most intriguing posts from IF locals on the "mommy boards". :thinking:

Nowadays, it's so much easier and more titillating to jump into the FB, he said/she said, fray, and adopt the judgment du jour.

Farewell critical thinking! Grab the torches and pitchforks. I read it on FB, so it must be true.

I doubt if anyone here has come to the conclusion that they have just because they "read it in FB, so it must be true".

Reading the FB commentary on the case as anything other than low comedy will cause your iq to drop by 20 points. The fact that it is adults commenting, fighting, and pulling information out of the air is frightening and depressing to me.

Look around on your desk..somewhere there should be an "OFF" switch for FB ..lol

Wow, logged on to see lots of new posts only to find that the thread's turned into a FaceBook bashing frenzy. I can appreciate that some don't like FB and that's fine - it obviously doesn't float your boat. Others do like FB and that's fine too. Then there are those in the middle who see it as a "tool" and for some situations, like investigating crimes, it certainly can be (why else do some LE's have person(s) dedicated to it!)

If you're smart enough to spot a fake account from a legit one FB can be useful. Because of some people's need to post everything they say/think/do for the world to see you can learn a lot about the person (and their friends & family) such as how they think & behave. (I'll never understand such behaviour but maybe I'm from the wrong generation).

I respect the WS rule that if it isn't in MSM or on an MSM FB page then we can't mention it here - that helps keep out some of the crazyness. But at the same time I sometimes think that we're missing a trick by ignoring it completely. I read a while back someone suggested a thread being made in the Parking Lot (I think it was the PL) so that FB stuff could be discussed - perhaps this isn't such a bad idea because something gleaned from FB (or other social media tbh) could just be the thing that makes one of us have a lightbulb moment.

In other words, yes FB contains its fair share of crazies - but as with any source of information if one does some due diligence and applies critical thinking it can be useful. "FaceBook" and "critical thinking" are not mutually exclusive.

:moo:

 

[CoverMeCagney]

I agree, Pix. FB definitely has it's uses but sometimes things have to be taken with a pinch of salt. It's the first place I go when I want to check someone out and I know I'm not alone in that.

I also agree a Parking Lot thread would be useful in this case (like Kyrian Knox's), I've asked a couple of times before and not heard anything.

 

[Susjay]

It does get frustrating when old tired topics are brought up again. Even if one just reads the media thread to catch up, it would be helpful. For example - A comment made saying it wasn't known they arrived at the campground on Thursday evening. Then a comment that the fact they were there the day before didn't come out for months, then it somehow becomes a fact that JM & VDK must have lied about when they got there. Going to back to the media thread cleared it up for me within a few minutes of reading.

I am not calling anyone out, just making an observation.

Maybe re-hashing is a symptom of the desperation everyone feels to move forward. Wracking our brains to work this all out. I have read every thread since January and it's still confusing to get everything straight because of the moving feast of information that's been a feature of this case. She said, they said, LE said and so on. I know we are all desperately waiting to hear of a breakthrough!
I keep checking the snow depths and local weather online. Does anyone local in Idaho or Montana know how close we might be to a thaw and a search?

 

[Susjay]

We'll, I've been lurking for months and I'm finally coming out....
This case has captured my heart, I'm not quite sure why, and I honestly had never even heard of websleuths before I started obsessing about sweet little Deorr, since I first heard on July 11. I completely agree that it would be impossible to jump right in and have any grasp of what's going on, or gone on, so reading through EVERYTHING is a definite must! I was talking to my husband about it the other night (going over my theories with him, trying to come up with anything that makes sense) and he looked at me like I was crazy..bringing up all these names and circumstances...he said it was like these are people I know (I feel that way sometimes, since i can't seem to get him out of my mind). Anyhow.....that's why I'm commenting on your post. Your comment "everyone named Deorr, good grief"... haha...that's what my husband said!

Hi all, thanks for all your sleuthing and great input. It's so informative to hear things from different perspectives.

Snap - everything you said. I check the inter-tube several times a day to check if there has been a breakthrough. I too appreciate the opportunities here.

 

[12madelyn]

Do you have a link to where Bowerman says this? I'm sure he never said anything about "comprehension of questions" or anything like that.

Do you comprehend the meaning of "paraphrase"? It generally means I am using my own words to relay something. So I don't know why you say I am using "comprehension of questions" as a direct quote.

What I can give you is the following.

Fox4News Posted 8:04 pm, January 25, 2016, by CNN Wire
Bowerman says polygraphs administered to Reinwand and Walton have been inconclusive, but those results were expected because of both men’s mental states.

I have heard this several times. I am unable to give you a link to SB's EXACT words regarding IR's lack of understanding of poly questions.

HOWEVER, is that a big leap from the quote above? Aren't they actually saying the same thing? If SB has stated his expectation of IR's poly to be inconclusive because of his mental state, what else is there to conclude? To me it only means he's not capable of understanding the questions. If you draw other conclusions from it, what are they?

 

[sassyblue]

I keep checking the snow depths and local weather online. Does anyone local in Idaho or Montana know how close we might be to a thaw and a search?

I'm not familiar with the campground area nor eastern Idaho but I would hazard a guess that we have another month or so to wait for a total thaw in that area. And my guess is only based on comparing the snow melt on the peaks here in the Boise area with similar elevation to the Timber Creek Campground. When I first moved here I was told the rule of thumb is to never plant tomatoes without protection until the snow was gone from Bogus Basin and/or the Owyhees. And I have found that is a good rule to follow and sometimes that doesn't occur until the end of May.

 

[courtneyb]

Wow, logged on to see lots of new posts only to find that the thread's turned into a FaceBook bashing frenzy. I can appreciate that some don't like FB and that's fine - it obviously doesn't float your boat. Others do like FB and that's fine too. Then there are those in the middle who see it as a "tool" and for some situations, like investigating crimes, it certainly can be (why else do some LE's have person(s) dedicated to it!)

If you're smart enough to spot a fake account from a legit one FB can be useful. Because of some people's need to post everything they say/think/do for the world to see you can learn a lot about the person (and their friends & family) such as how they think & behave. (I'll never understand such behaviour but maybe I'm from the wrong generation).

I respect the WS rule that if it isn't in MSM or on an MSM FB page then we can't mention it here - that helps keep out some of the crazyness. But at the same time I sometimes think that we're missing a trick by ignoring it completely. I read a while back someone suggested a thread being made in the Parking Lot (I think it was the PL) so that FB stuff could be discussed - perhaps this isn't such a bad idea because something gleaned from FB (or other social media tbh) could just be the thing that makes one of us have a lightbulb moment.

In other words, yes FB contains its fair share of crazies - but as with any source of information if one does some due diligence and applies critical thinking it can be useful. "FaceBook" and "critical thinking" are not mutually exclusive.

:moo:

I agree. Great post. I use Facebook mainly to communicate with my family and friends. I don't really have time to do much else with it, such as scour all the related pages, reading each comment. I will, however, go check out a page or a post if I "hear" that there is something interesting there. For the most part, it's apparent that a lot of the people posting there frequently are keyboard superheros.... people who feel the thrill of what they perceive as relative anonymity (though the opposite is true), safety (being able to say whatever they want without having to say it to the person's face) and bravery that comes from their misguided beliefs regarding the former two things. These people lose all inhibitions, filters, and grace and are obviously getting a kick out of *finally* getting to say whatever they want to or about whomever they want, without immediate threat of physical retaliation or a face to face confrontation.

I am fairly certain that the vast majority of members, at least on this thread, can differentiate between the garbage on FB and the information that is worth taking a further look at, if for nothing other than to glean a bit of insight into how "the public" feels about the case. Almost everything on FB is at least embellished, or ends up that way, if not flat out untrue. I've read posts before that seem honest and by the time the conversation is filtered through the comments on the post, it inevitably gets bits of untruths stuck in it, and it is a different animal than in the beginning. And, the more people involved and "contributing", the more convoluted things seem to get.

But, I think we are all aware of that.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Sometimes people may join this forum many, many threads into the case, IMO, for quite a few reasons. Maybe just joining WS or had an emergency that kept them from reading up on this case after there were many threads.

When little DeOrr disappeared, my mother was in intensive care for 10 days and then passed away. It was August before I started reading. I gradually got caught up but it was hard.

If I were just joining this forum I would die of old age before getting caught up after this many threads. I don't see why anyone would mind answering questions for a new member of the forum. I joined WS early July in 2008 and never remember it being a requirement of reading every single post before posting or asking a question.

I did, however, skip over a lot of the animal speculation because it was going round and round in circles. (and polygraph circle)

After several months, it is inevitable that things are repeated and old questions are asked again.

Sorry, but I just wanted to comment on this. It took me by surprise. I absolutely love WS and it has become a part of my daily life. When I retired it became something I spend quite a lot of time on.

JMO

 

[ann.in.illinois]

I am new at posting on Websleuths (2[SUP]nd[/SUP] post on this thread). I have read the media threads as suggested and googled the thread for this question which I cannot find discussed. So here goes, and take pity if I am off track&#8230; I&#8217;m a little gun-shy about posting this with this morning&#8217;s discussion, but here goes&#8230;
My question: Is it possible that some other person(s), (friends or family) arrived at camp WITH the four other adults (as well as Deorr Jr.) in a THIRD vehicle, and departed the campsite/crime scene, with either an alive, severely injured, or deceased Deorr Jr.? Everyone appears to have questions about the truthfulness of the parents and the two other POI. Where did the information that LE states of only &#8220;four adults&#8221; come from? The parents and two other POI? Comments have been made about minimal scent if any for the scent dogs. Comments have been made about if Deorr Jr. was ever at the campsite. Comments have been made about if the child was ever alive at the campsite. Comments have been made about if it was an abduction, how could the 4 adults not hear an &#8220;abductor&#8221;. How could 4 adults lose sight of Deorr Jr.in an &#8220;instant&#8221;? How was the child not found with the large search? So&#8230; Could the child have been removed from the crime scene prior to LE arrival? Would this lean credence to all of the failed/inconclusive polys? Could the group be protecting themselves and someone else? I don&#8217;t know, but at the beginning, it is stated that there were FOUR adults at the campsite with Deorr Jr. Who states there were 4? The Four who were there when LE arrived. Is that basic FACT really a FACT? When all else fails, sometimes it helps to go back to the beginning. If this has been speculated/discussed before, I couldn&#8217;t find it. It just keeps nagging at me. If I'm off track, I apologize.

 

[CDB]

Maybe re-hashing is a symptom of the desperation everyone feels to move forward. Wracking our brains to work this all out. I have read every thread since January and it's still confusing to get everything straight because of the moving feast of information that's been a feature of this case. She said, they said, LE said and so on. I know we are all desperately waiting to hear of a breakthrough!
I keep checking the snow depths and local weather online. Does anyone local in Idaho or Montana know how close we might be to a thaw and a search?

I am not exactly local to that area, I live on the other side of the state, but I do watch our mountains as I have spring activities I participate in that require a snow melt and it is incredibly variable. From one week to the next small differentiation in temperature can mean a melt or a freeze cycle. Generally, this area would be melting off between April 1 and May 1. I am watching very closely an area about 100 miles away from there and about 800 feet higher in elevation. I am thinking I will not have decent roads (meaning not mud up to the axle) until mid April. However, in my area we would still have large areas of snow at the base of rocks or trees, I do not know how much melt off searchers would need in order to feel they could complete a thorough search. If you need minimal snow it will likely be May.