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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am not giving credit to anything VDK says

I am dis-crediting folks who brought it back up again.

That is the point I was trying to make .

But I have failed . I woke up the monster again. hehe

Uh oh, sorry. I don't want to be the monster!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Is that his cup he doesn't go anywhere without in the picture? It looks new there, as a parent of three I can say that none of mine stayed looking that way for long. The spouts get chewed and the cup part itself starts looking tatty from repeated washing, getting dropped and rolled about etc

ETA I'm a parent of three children, not three sippy cups!

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk

How old are your darling sippy cups? [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji4]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
How old are your darling sippy cups? [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji4]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My dsc's (darling sippy cups) are 7, almost 4 and 13 months, two pink ones and the middle ones blue [emoji23]

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk
 
They've all been dropped at some point or another too *cringe*

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk
 
every time i watch that initial interview with the parents, all i want to do is give VK a paper bag and ask him to breathe into it slowly in the hopes he will stop talking like a machine gun going off
 
ok I give up. where's the transcript of IR's interview...Jamaica I think you posted it for me once...TIA!
 
Yes, maybe she is just smart enough to believe what LE, the FBI, and Klein have said. I don't think it means she knows what happened. She might just believe what the evidence is pointing to, like most of us do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. I think the comments alluding to his clumsiness, his "moving and going", the too big boots, etc., don't necessarily mean that their families know exactly what happened. But I think they fully accept that those two are likely responsible for his disappearance and are preemptively offering up info that would support an accident.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
i've no idea if there's been some kind of official verification that IR is mentally deficient in any way so I can't comment on that. What I can comment on is that people with average and below average IQs certainly can and do pass rigorous interrogation and can hold up lies for a very long time. Gary Ridgeway was tested at one point to have an IQ of 82 and he was interrogated by law enforcement many times and slipped through their net for decades allowing him to murder dozens of women, all while lying to his wife back home. Not saying IR is in any way a Gary Ridgeway, but you don't have to be smart or even of average intelligence to get around the police.
SB said he did not do a poly because of his mental aptitude. It was said something like - "you can only poly someone who understands the questions."

Case in point - how have VDK amd JM been doing recalling their lies?
 
RE: all The theories about IR being involved in a stage kidnapping… don't forget he is still a POI in the case as stated by LE, but RW was listed, at least by Klein, as someone with "direct knowledge".

In terms of IR being "mentally deficient" I've never heard that term used by LE but I have gotten the impression (or maybe there is a direct quote somewhere) that he is below average IQ. That was apparent when he answered NE's question the way he did about what were the last six months like.

He seems simple for lack of a better word but I think he has a mind of his own and doesn't seem like the type to be coerced into something crazy and illegal IMO.
 
I wonder if they will use ground-penetrating radar after the thaw.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...police-dig-Dinky-car-leading-missing-Ben.html[/QUOTE

Saw this a while ago when researching cadaver dogs. The links include informative videos within news articles:
Ground penetrating radar is used in conjunction with dogs to find very old graves.
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article10068794.html

Also this one shows cadaver dogs being trained
http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...-and-handlers-behind-the-nsw-police-dog-squad

I'm hoping the snow has preserved evidence.
 
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...2-vanishes-idaho-campground-article-1.2291690

"If somebody has him, please don’t hurt him, just bring him home safely to us, where he belongs,” Mitchell told East Idaho News. “He doesn’t go anywhere without his blanket, his cup or his monkey and all three were left at the campground.”

Thank you. Sorry to send everybody on a wild goose chase. I really thought she said LOST.

Darn it , I am going to have to beat myself up again .... haaaa.
 
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.

Maybe just as an excuse to bring it up, since Nate asked if there were any rumours they wanted to clear up. It seemed to be something the parents had discussed in advance, so maybe they'd planned to bring it up in the interview to make it seem like Deorr was still alive at the store. Then they changed the time as an excuse to bring it up - they're correcting a rumour, they're not just randomly informing the world of their (false) alibi even though no one asked about it, which would look very suspicious.

Yes, it's a stupid thing to do and could easily be proven false (as I believe it has been, as the clerk didn't remember seeing a boy), but claiming that someone in the store was playing with DeOrr was stupid too - Klein said they tracked down the witness and he didn't remember even seeing a child. Maybe it's just a case of Vernalization, where the parents get carried away and think their story sounds more convincing if they add loads of details - not thinking at the time that it will easily be proven false.

Either they made it up themselves, or there was a genuine rumour going around that the clerk saw a man at 6pm with a filthy, bawling boy (even though the clerk said no such thing), in which case why would Vernal be so quick to say Yep, that was me and DeOrr but the got the time wrong, rather than No, that didn't happen; or Holy Smoke, that could have been my son with his abductor!
 
May the luck of the Irish smile upon little DeOrr and may today be the day something breaks so he can be properly laid to rest. :please::lepsmilie::shamrock:
 
I am puzzled as to why LE & FBI have stated that they think JM & VDK are lying and reckon that JM & VDK know what happened to Deorr and then in the latest interview DVK states that if anyone has any proof that they did something to Deorr that LE & FBI would love to hear from them. Makes no sense.
 
May the luck of the Irish smile upon little DeOrr and may today be the day something breaks so he can be properly laid to rest. :please::lepsmilie::shamrock:

That's only if he is in fact deceased which no one really knows 100% yet as no one has found him yet? What if something else happened and he is still alive somewhere? Surely there is a very slight chance of that until his death is confirmed one way or the other? Maybe i'm just too optimistic.
 
I am puzzled as to why LE & FBI have stated that they think JM & VDK are lying and reckon that JM & VDK know what happened to Deorr and then in the latest interview DVK states that if anyone has any proof that they did something to Deorr that LE & FBI would love to hear from them. Makes no sense.

Why wouldn't they want proof, if someone has proof? I don't see how it doesn't make sense.

Especially in the absence of little DeOrr's body, they want all the proof they can get. It only makes sense.
 
many of us saw comments early on (first week) by the family stating that they arrived on thursday night, is there any direct comment from LE stating that they did not disclose that they arrived on thursday night for several months?

No. Nor is there a comment from the parents stating they arrived on Friday instead of Thursday. Nor a question from a reporter (Nate Eaton) asking the parents which day they arrived. Journalism 101, start with a timeline and keep the interview on track until you nail it. You don't allow two distraught, nerve-wracked parents to run amok, and then sit back while the viewing audience shakes its collective head, clucking its tongues at the interviewees who must be guilty, because listen to how crazy they sound. That's sensationalism, and it stinks, imo.

LE says they're lying, so I choose to accept their word because far be it for me to argue with a sheriff and the FBI Behavioral Sciences Unit. But as for the rest of the garbage that's been spewed all over those infamous Facebook groups for eight months now, POPPYCOCK! For all of the empty promises made, to this day, STILL we await evidence.

JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
150
Guests online
1,195
Total visitors
1,345

Forum statistics

Threads
600,555
Messages
18,110,478
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top