JM shows to be not longer "married" on her FB but now will spent her life trying to bring little Deorr home ....
BBM
To me, the changing stories alone are the reason I think there is a coverup, rather than a lion carrying off DeOrr. If it was a lion, or an eagle or even a harder-to-believe human abduction, their stories would be more consistent because they would have nothing to hide.
I can think of a scenario in which all four (or five including Jessica's mom) would agree to and stick to a coverup. If GGP impatiently smacked DeOrr too hard in irritation, causing him to hit his head fatally, I think Jessica would call her mom repeatedly for help. She wouldn't want to get GGP in trouble for an accident. None of them would. He is the only one of the group that all of them would be willing to protect. After hiding DeOrr's body and agreeing on their stories, they would then call 911 and claim DeOrr had disappeared. This would protect GGP from being arrested for manslaughter. Keep in mind they would be in a state of panic and fear and grief, not thinking clearly.
Jessica's mom arrived before LE and perhaps would make sure there was no evidence. No one would have any reason to tell the truth and get an old man in trouble. The others hadn't killed DeOrr, couldn't be charged with anything serious and would all be willing to protect GGP at all costs. But they would not be able to keep the details straight and polygraphs would be inconsistent.
Even though everyone is suspicious about the story and the public is against them, all they would have to do is stonewall and neither LE nor the PIs could prove anything. They would keep the secret for GGP. Perhaps when he dies it would be revealed, or not. I don't think any of them would have thought this through carefully or expected a little boy's disappearance in Idaho to blow up this big.
Just a theory FWIW. I'm sure there's some fact I've forgotten that blows holes in this scenario, but it's the only one that explains everyone's behavior to me.,,at this point.
JMO, MOO, etc.
I hear you. The changing stories are troubling but could be the result of many things. Trauma does things to memory. I would think losing your kid in the forest would be the most traumatic experience and added to that being questioned, vilified and suspected.
But in my experience guys like the GGP's friend, who has done time before, they aren't going to cover for anyone except maybe their own kids. I think he would've sang like a canary at the first sign of pressure. He has a few convictions, right? So not a bright guy. Easy to break. Wouldn't want to take the fall for that family and i guarantee LE threatened him during questioning that he would.
No. For me the coverup theory never made sense and my gut observing the parents is they're grieving and not guilty of more than not watching him close
enough.
This is one one of the few times I haven't sided quickly with LE. Typically I cigur they are only motivated to solve a case and have good reasons for labeling someone a suspect.
Just my opinion.... and I hope that one day DeOrr will be found and that every single person that contributed to his disappearance and cover-up will be held responsible.
I'm with you and have been for months, I think it could well be a cover up / protection of Grandpa except I think he might have reversed into DeOrr while drunk. I also think Jess was in control of What Happened Next and she persuaded Vernal to dispose of the body, this way he became complicit too. However, I do think maybe this all happened either on Thursday night while drunk or Friday morning while Isaac was sleeping it off, and while he has at least an inkling of what happened he didn't directly see anything. He too is protecting his mate Grandpa.
I tell you now, if I thought my child had wandered off or been taken by an animal I would've been up there every spare minute of my life, and I know I'd have dozens of people helping me search - friends, family, local SAR, total strangers. An animal doesn't know it has to cover up its kill, a human does. There would be bones, there would be wellies, there would be something.
If I thought my child had been abducted I'd want full national press coverage, a hefty reward, social media campaign, TV interviews, photos on milk cartons, the works.
Neither of those things happened. And that, your honour, is why I think this couple is guilty. Of exactly what, and to what extent, I'm not quite sure..... but somethin' ain't right
BBM-- the one common thing I keep reading is Grandpa "drunk" or had been drinking, but in the video posted earlier of IR questioning, he states that whiskey was purchased and taken to campsite by Grandpa, then states that Grandpa had a few, oh, but wait, he doesn't drink anymore. Hinky meter went off on that statement.
BBM-- the one common thing I keep reading is Grandpa "drunk" or had been drinking, but in the video posted earlier of IR questioning, he states that whiskey was purchased and taken to campsite by Grandpa, then states that Grandpa had a few, oh, but wait, he doesn't drink anymore. Hinky meter went off on that statement.
It makes sense when GGP said: Little Deorr was staying with me I heard. Very drunken people would have to hear from others what they have done the hours before when they had their usually (?) blackout.
I don't understand at all why GGP seems worth to be protected by (at least) 3/4 adults to the price of being suspected of murder themselves. IF indeed he the GGP is protected.
Good point. The "I heard" is a big red flag. Also why would parents leave their child with an elderly man on oxygen who was also drinking whiskey? Or maybe they were all drinking whiskey, and doing who knows what else on top of it. I don't think I can hold any one person accountable for what happened, Because I believe it was at least three out of four. But ultimately, the parents are the ones responsible for their child. JMOIt makes sense when GGP said: Little Deorr was staying with me I heard. Very drunken people would have to hear from others what they have done the hours before when they had their usually (?) blackout.I don't understand at all why GGP seems worth to be protected by (at least) 3/4 adults to the price of being suspected of murder themselves. IF indeed he the GGP is protected.
I see the I heard remark as Grandpa covering but softening his lie. I think he is referencing that he heard little Deorr was left with him because they stormed up a lie to blame his disappearance on grandpa, his memory, and his health but grandpa didn't really watch Deorr. So he heard or aka was asked to lie and say he was watching him.Good point. The "I heard" is a big red flag. Also why would parents leave their child with an elderly man on oxygen who was also drinking whiskey? Or maybe they were all drinking whiskey, and doing who knows what else on top of it. I don't think I can hold any one person accountable for what happened, Because I believe it was at least three out of four. But ultimately, the parents are the ones responsible for their child. JMO
I see the I heard remark as Grandpa covering but softening his lie. I think he is referencing that he heard little Deorr was left with him because they stormed up a lie to blame his disappearance on grandpa, his memory, and his health but grandpa didn't really watch Deorr. So he heard or aka was asked to lie and say he was watching him.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
I'm guessing he may be scared or they threatened him not to tell.Exactly - I totally agree. What makes no sense to me is why is he continuing to cover for them? Why doesn't he just tell LE or Klein that it's all a sham? Why won't he tell them what he knows? If Bob and Isaac would both confirm to LE that DeOrr wasn't there (or that they didn't see him), wouldn't that be enough to charge the parents with something? Or at least call in a grand jury? Ugh. This case is so frustrating. :-(
Exactly - I totally agree. What makes no sense to me is why is he continuing to cover for them? Why doesn't he just tell LE or Klein that it's all a sham? Why won't he tell them what he knows? If Bob and Isaac would both confirm to LE that DeOrr wasn't there (or that they didn't see him), wouldn't that be enough to charge the parents with something? Or at least call in a grand jury? Ugh. This case is so frustrating. :-(
In order for them to say "hey, actually, we didn't see baby Deorr at all during the trip" they would have to explain why they were prepared to make up a story which included a child who was never there. It is one thing to cover up something which has been witnessed but quite another to incriminate yourself in a situation about which you have absolutely no knowledge.