ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, some info is missing. Personally, I would like to find out if great-grandpa knew that he was supposed to watch little Deorr because based on the interview it looks like he did not know but then during the vigil the father talks about a mistake, an adult (indirectly, great-grandpa) turning his head for a minute and our little boy vanishing. It is confusing, I want to know who saw Deorr last.


This is what I keep coming back to as well, that GGP was unaware that either A. he was supposed to be watching the boy or B. That the parents left the area... except for the comment about GGP looking away and when he looked back the boy was gone. The fact that LE has been very clear that GGP has never been a suspect. He is the only one that they have said has NEVER been a suspect so does this somehow qualify this statement allegedly made by GGP? If so its pretty much the only thing in this whole case. But then they go and throw in the possibility that he was never there, and then I just want to pull my hair out...lol :pullhair:
 
This is what I keep coming back to as well, that GGP was unaware that either A. he was supposed to be watching the boy or B. That the parents left the area... except for the comment about GGP looking away and when he looked back the boy was gone. The fact that LE has been very clear that GGP has never been a suspect. He is the only one that they have said has NEVER been a suspect so does this somehow qualify this statement allegedly made by GGP? If so its pretty much the only thing in this whole case. But then they go and throw in the possibility that he was never there, and then I just want to pull my hair out...lol :pullhair:

This is my last post:


In one of the articles (can't remember which now)... it said that the SAR dogs circled the camp and kept returning back to the camp instead of venturing out into the wilderness. I find this interesting because the latest article the Idaho Fish and Game Investigator Tony Latham made the remark, "Latham said some theories investigators may be considering include 1.) Deorr walking away on his own, 2.) the possibility of him being abducted, 3.) the idea that he was never at the campsite in the first place or 4.) that a wild animal was involved in his disappearance." In my opinion: 1.) If he walked away the dogs would have caught the trail. 2.) If he were abducted there would not be a trail. 3.) If he were never there to begin with the dogs would return to the camp due to the belongings and scent from the parents car. 4.) If there was a wild animal attack there would be some blood or something and the dogs would have caught the trail. What is your opinion?

This article talks of the possibility of him never being there.

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07...-a-resolution/
 
And tons of blood. And the mother saw a dingo leaving the tent dragging something. Drag marks, paw prints and blood was every where. People heard the dingo growl right before the child was found missing.





Not true. The baby's torn and bloody jumpsuit was found a few weeks later near a dingo lair.



I regularly encounter coyotes in the canyon where I run and occasionally in my very residential neighborhood. I've never seen more than one at a time but in the canyon, which I've often run at dusk, I hear packs yipping and howling. Once, a large pack was split into two, all howling and the only way we could get back to the car was through the middle of the two parts of the packs. I was very scared! It sounded like 9-10 coyotes. There were other people in the park who seemed unnerved as well.

Sarx makes a ton of sense when saying that a wild animal attack is much more likely close to a residential area than far out into the wilderness. But given that they can be stealthy and run fast and far, I won;t rule it out.

The lack of blood bothers me though.

And I still can't get over the fact that someone would take a toddler camping in camo. I mean for goodness sake, that is clothing meant to obscure the person wearing it and blend in with the foliage. How could such clothing ever be appropriate for a toddler in the wild?

Partially true.... The jumpsuit was found weeks later, the cardigan was found buried and folded up YEARS later...

I never believed the dingo story, but I discount it could have happened, the dingos in that area aren't pure and are generally crossed with dogs (whatever breed they've mated with)

The dingoes on Fraser Island (QLD) are the ONLY pure dingoes in the world, they are not crossed with anything due to Fraser Island people / national parks team being very particular about conserving the purest strain of dingo..

The problem with the Fraser Island dingoes in recent years are at the hands of.... HUMANS.... Specifically humans that feed them, disregarding all the signs located every 5 feet pretty much.. Back in 2005 I experienced these dingoes, first hand... Even have a photo somewhere of me patting one, and one with its head rested on my lap..

Sorry to get sidetracked, the dingo stole my baby story never gelled with me...

A coyote or wild dog yes I believe would take a child... But there'd be blood...
 
Here is just 1 possible way that everything we have learned could still be right and yet the boy was never there.

Assuming 2 vehicles were taken and assuming it was common for the boy to go with grandpa sometimes...

We have been told there was a "mixup".

So what if the "mixup" happened at the store or even before they left their houses. Both vehicles would have thought the other vehicle had the boy.

Then lets say parents get there last and as soon as they get there they are anxious to quickly explore the area. Everything looks fine to them as they take a quick look around and they are still assuming the other 2 people had the boy so they take a 10 minute look around and come back and all heck breaks loose when they realize he is not there.

Im not sure how likely this scenerio is but just providing an example of how the mixup could have happened before they even left for the campground.
 
Does anybody know why the other 2 children weren't camping with the family?
 
I stand corrected:
http://www.fishingnotes.com/fishing-report/id/Stone-Reservoir

It's only an estimate but it says 37 degrees on this site.

That is the wrong Stone Reservoir. There are two in Idaho. The one posted on fishingnotes.com is south of the one DeOrr went missing from, down near the border with Utah. The Latitude is 42.079623 and Longitude, -112.689232. The place DeOrr disappeared from is 44.58087, -113.46596. If you go to Google maps you can map them to see the difference. There are also two Timber Creek Campgrounds.
 
I don't know what the temp is but IMO there's no way that the temp is anywhere near that cold in the reservoir at this time of year.

If they're fishing for trout in it, as the forest service website mentions, it can't be much warmer than that. Mountain trout only live in very cold water. But the fish and game dude said he expected a body to surface soon if it's there, so it's probably in the upper 40's.
 
I think there was never a directive or formal agreement about Grandpa watching the baby. I think as the dad said, little DeOrr was playing, (in my mind I can see him happily pushing his little car in the dirt near the camp fire).

If the parents wanted to leave they might have decided to sort of sneak off quickly like parents sometimes do when a child is sensitive to separation and might cry when they leave.

I think when dad says he saw the baby was "good with grandpa" it indicates to me that it was an opportunity to leave before putting him down for his nap and it sounds like it was not a verbal confirmation with grandpa...just thinking if they left, grandpa would notice and take responsibility for little Deorr's care...perhaps by habit.

All of course, just assumptions on my part as I try to make sense of how this might have happened.

As a retired teacher of young children I have seen many times parents (especially younger ones) just assume someone else is watching their child. In my own experience, I have had parents just walk off and leave their child with me at a school function to go look after another child, etc without ever asking me to watch their child, just assuming I would.

It always would seem so cavalier and casual to me, and even sometimes irresponsible. But frankly, it is not all that unusual.

If Deorr and mother (not sure about father) were living with her other grandfather, they may be used to abdicating responsibility to other relatives informally.

Just today I was watching two very young children running around my large grocery store, just toddlers, chasing each other and picking things up off the shelves. The mother was on another aisle and finally came back to collect them, but within 10 minutes the pair was off running around again..it is just way some people parent. It is all okay until something bad happens.

All of this is just to say nothing sounds to me like the responsibility for watching the Deorr was addressed in a more formal way..dad never said in the interview "I asked grandpa to watch him" or anything like that. He just says DeOrr was "good" with grandpa, meaning to me that all was well, baby was happy and the parents just decided to take the opportunity to go "explore".

I can imagine Grandpa thinks Deorr is with them because perhaps GP was preoccupied, possibly talking to his friend, and was not aware they ever intended him to watch him or perhaps he just noticed him toddling off and assumed he was joining mommy and daddy.

Casual parenting style, lack of communication, no one assuming responsibility for watching him, a fast moving stream, and an active mobile toddler all leads me to still believe falling into the creek and being rushed away in the water is a logical assumption at this point. JMO of course.
 
That is the wrong Stone Reservoir. There are two in Idaho. The one posted on fishingnotes.com is south of the one DeOrr went missing from, down near the border with Utah. The Latitude is 42.079623 and Longitude, -112.689232. The place DeOrr disappeared from is 44.58087, -113.46596. If you go to Google maps you can map them to see the difference. There are also two Timber Creek Campgrounds.

I saw that after I made the post. I wonder how many other duplicate landmarks Idaho has lol
 
But didn't dad say in the interview that DeOrr was "good with grandpa by the fire"??
You would think even if DeOrr drove with GGP, his parents might want to see him at the actual campsite...Hard to believe they wouldn't want to connect with their little guy upon arrival......

And it seems that from GGP's statement....I turned my head and he was gone ...as if he WAS once there..

Sure is confusing!

By the way....where did you read "mixup"?



Here is just 1 possible way that everything we have learned could still be right and yet the boy was never there.

Assuming 2 vehicles were taken and assuming it was common for the boy to go with grandpa sometimes...

We have been told there was a "mixup".

So what if the "mixup" happened at the store or even before they left their houses. Both vehicles would have thought the other vehicle had the boy.

Then lets say parents get there last and as soon as they get there they are anxious to quickly explore the area. Everything looks fine to them as they take a quick look around and they are still assuming the other 2 people had the boy so they take a 10 minute look around and come back and all heck breaks loose when they realize he is not there.

Im not sure how likely this scenerio is but just providing an example of how the mixup could have happened before they even left for the campground.
 

This is my last post:


In one of the articles (can't remember which now)... it said that the SAR dogs circled the camp and kept returning back to the camp instead of venturing out into the wilderness. I find this interesting because the latest article the Idaho Fish and Game Investigator Tony Latham made the remark, "Latham said some theories investigators may be considering include 1.) Deorr walking away on his own, 2.) the possibility of him being abducted, 3.) the idea that he was never at the campsite in the first place or 4.) that a wild animal was involved in his disappearance." In my opinion: 1.) If he walked away the dogs would have caught the trail. 2.) If he were abducted there would not be a trail. 3.) If he were never there to begin with the dogs would return to the camp due to the belongings and scent from the parents car. 4.) If there was a wild animal attack there would be some blood or something and the dogs would have caught the trail. What is your opinion?

This article talks of the possibility of him never being there.

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07...-a-resolution/

I agree with all but #2 not because I think he was abducted but because I think there would still be a trail if here were abducted...

the one thing that I don't know is: what are dogs trained to do if they dont get a scent? are they just supposed to go back to the start or what? Is it thought that the dogs got a scent at the camp or they didn't get a scent and were taken back to the camp by the handlers?

Untill we know more about the entire situation I just can't get off the fence on this one. From following previous cases here I have learned from the SAR members that scent trails can be left even if the victim was driven away in a car and still find a victim that is underwater so if these dogs are not finding anything alive or deceased really has me stumped.
 
so if these dogs are not finding anything alive or deceased really has me stumped.

Hence the theory/question if Deorr was ever at the campsite.

I don't know how many times I asked this question (sorry) but again, who places Deorr at the campsite (besides family) the day of his disappearance?
 
Does "abducted" include "murdered near the campsite by person or persons unknown"?
 
From a legal standpoint and perhaps one of the lawyers here can answer: Can LE take the cadaver dogs and let them check the black truck? Or they need a special permission?
 
I agree with all but #2 not because I think he was abducted but because I think there would still be a trail if here were abducted...

the one thing that I don't know is: what are dogs trained to do if they dont get a scent? are they just supposed to go back to the start or what? Is it thought that the dogs got a scent at the camp or they didn't get a scent and were taken back to the camp by the handlers?

Untill we know more about the entire situation I just can't get off the fence on this one. From following previous cases here I have learned from the SAR members that scent trails can be left even if the victim was driven away in a car and still find a victim that is underwater so if these dogs are not finding anything alive or deceased really has me stumped.


But search dogs are not fail proof. They often don't find a trail even if it later turned out the person was there, walked there, died in the vicinity, etc. Case in point, Leanne Bearden. The dogs lost her scent a couple of streets from her house. She was found about a mile from her house a month later (suicide). She walked there.

I wouldn't read too much into the dogs not finding anything. It depends on many factors, weather, temperature, other people walking around before the dogs came, the handler ... Yes they can do awesome things, but not always. Maybe the cowboy boots Deorr was wearing hindered or masked his scent.
 
And it seems that from GGP's statement....I turned my head and he was gone ...as if he WAS once there..

*snipped by me*
GGP, as far as I have read, has never made any public statement at all. GGP's daughter (who would be little Deorr's maternal grandma) made that statement and she was not at the campsite when Deorr went missing. She didn't even say "he said he turned his head..." Here is what she said, "“My dad was standing their watching him and he turned his head and then (Deorr) was gone,” Clegg said. “It appears like he just vanished.”
Again, the grandma who made this statement was not at the campsite when little Deorr went missing. She did not go on the camping trip. I would actually love to hear a direct quote from GGP.

http://pix11.com/2015/07/13/grandmother-of-missing-2-year-old-he-just-vanished/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
224
Guests online
2,077
Total visitors
2,301

Forum statistics

Threads
599,811
Messages
18,099,831
Members
230,931
Latest member
Barefoot!
Back
Top