ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #4

[katydid23]

I don't understand why they would tell him four minutes when they told everyone else (911, media, LE) times that were longer. It seems like such an odd thing. Did they say 40 (closer-ish to the other times) and he misunderstood, or did he maybe do his own calculations?

Because four minutes. No way imo.

I read the PEOPLE article and here is how I interpreted it. I believe they were saying that the parents left on a walk, DeOrr was with GPP [ friend was never mentioned]----Parents were gone for several minutes, then GPP looked away , for about 4 minutes, and then parents came back and said 'Where's DeOrr?'

That is how I understood what the article tried to say. But it conflicts with the idea that GGP thought the boy was with the parents, imo, because he admits that he WAS watching him until he looked away, then boy vanished.

 

[Elainera]

I read the PEOPLE article and here is how I interpreted it. I believe they were saying that the parents left on a walk, DeOrr was with GPP [ friend was never mentioned]----Parents were gone for several minutes, then GPP looked away , for about 4 minutes, and then parents came back and said 'Where's DeOrr?'

That is how I understood what the article tried to say. But it conflicts with the idea that GGP thought the boy was with the parents, imo, because he admits that he WAS watching him until he looked away, then boy vanished.

bbm

I don't think there is a conflict, I think when he realized the boy is not with him anymore, then he thought he must have run to his parents.

 

[bluesneakers]

I read the PEOPLE article and here is how I interpreted it. I believe they were saying that the parents left on a walk, DeOrr was with GPP [ friend was never mentioned]----Parents were gone for several minutes, then GPP looked away , for about 4 minutes, and then parents came back and said 'Where's DeOrr?'

That is how I understood what the article tried to say. But it conflicts with the idea that GGP thought the boy was with the parents, imo, because he admits that he WAS watching him until he looked away, then boy vanished.

That was exactly what I got too, but I want to know how he got the time. I just don't get where four minutes would come from. I'm leaning to they told him 40 and then either he or People got it wrong.

 

[katydid23]

bbm

I don't think there is a conflict, I think when he realized the boy is not with him anymore, then he thought he must have run to his parents.

AAGGHHHH....that just bothers me so much. How is a 2 yr old BABY supposed to find his parents in the woods when they had already been gone for 5 or 10 minutes.....GRRRRR....why didnt he go looking for him immediately, or call out for HELP? So aggravating...

 

[bluesneakers]

bbm

I don't think there is a conflict, I think when he realized the boy is not with him anymore, then he thought he must have run to his parents.

I think it's a conflict especially since he wasn't even there. Is he maybe just guessing?

 

[wondering25]

This has been over thought, imo. There were no bald eagles carrying off babies, attacking mountain lions, or big foot. The simple answer is usually the right one. The dogs have not picked up a scent that leads away from the campground and only went back to the reservoir and camp area. He either drowned or was abducted by humans thus far unnamed or unknown. JMO.

 

[wondering25]

I read the PEOPLE article and here is how I interpreted it. I believe they were saying that the parents left on a walk, DeOrr was with GPP [ friend was never mentioned]----Parents were gone for several minutes, then GPP looked away , for about 4 minutes, and then parents came back and said 'Where's DeOrr?'

That is how I understood what the article tried to say. But it conflicts with the idea that GGP thought the boy was with the parents, imo, because he admits that he WAS watching him until he looked away, then boy vanished.

If grandpa has a mental( cognitive) or health issue as has been reported, he is not a reliable historian.

 

[pappa rob]

Yes. There would be a trace especially as you said, "bit and carried". There would be blood and DeOrr's scent at the point of capture. DeOrr's scent would have been sloughing off in the form of skin cells in a struggle with the lion and someone would have most likely heard the baby screaming. I don't see it is possible a lion could attack him and take him off without a single piece of evidence left behind.

Sorry there would no zero sound, the same for blood. Most adults would maybe have enough time to inhale before it's to late. Large cats don't rip into a victim they crush the neck. A child would be taken pretty much unaware. The evidence may be there but it's hard to spot camo even if it's a large piece. You don't even want me to get started about the dog discussion....

 

[white rabbit]

I'm sure this was posted on page 1 but I hadn't seen it...

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/family-friend-at-campsite-deorr-kunz-just-disappeared/

“So he was just with you and the grandfather when he wandered away?” reporter Nate Eaton asked Reinwand on his front porch.

“Uh-huh,” Reinwand responded. “As far as I know he disappeared.”

Watch the rest of the conversation with Reinwand in the video player above."

 

[pappa rob]

I believe there was an expert here who recently posted and he mentioned how rare is to find these animals. I am not convinced. I do not rule it out because I do not think we could rule out anything at this point but again, with ALL the equipment, HUNDREDS of searchers and dogs and nothing? No, doesn't sound feasible to me but of course, who knows!

It's pretty rare to find or see a mountain lion, that doesn't indicate that they aren't there. You'll not see them, but they'll see you.

 

[Elainera]

AAGGHHHH....that just bothers me so much. How is a 2 yr old BABY supposed to find his parents in the woods when they had already been gone for 5 or 10 minutes.....GRRRRR....why didnt he go looking for him immediately, or call out for HELP? So aggravating...

Maybe he did. We don't know that he didn't.

 

[Elainera]

I think it's a conflict especially since he wasn't even there. Is he maybe just guessing?

Who was not there? Sorry, I'm confused.

 

[pappa rob]

No clocks? Each parent had a cell phone and I'm sure there's a clock in the truck so they would be just as aware of the time as if they were in town. We just finished camping for eight days and were always aware of the approximate time. They knew they got back to the campsite at about 1:00 so determining it was 2:00 when they explored would not be difficult, imo

Lets say one of your children goes missing, how often will you pull out your phone or even glance at the watch on your wrist? You'll go into panic mode time's altered.

 

[katydid23]

Maybe he did. We don't know that he didn't.

I don't think he did. He said he thought the boy went to his parents. He was 'shocked' when they came looking for him at the camp. So he did not go looking, AFAIK.

 

[Mette]

bbm - small correction - I believe it was said he had been unaccounted for for about 4 minutes when the parents arrived back at the campsite. Then they started searching, and after a while (20 minutes?) called 911.

Minimising/maximising is a standard reaction to social and criminal stress.

The "4 minutes" was a quote from a grandmother, one never on the scene.

The one hour of searching before the 911 call was a recorded claim by the mother.

 

[ClaireNC]

I don't understand what is meant by "4 minutes where no one had eyes on him". Does that mean ggp saw Deorr and then was looking elsewhere/rested his eyes for 4 minutes and Deorr was gone when he looked back where the baby had been? I'm not trying to be dense - it seems like there would be no way to know how long no one had eyes on him, as no one has seen him in over 2 weeks.

That was my interpretation, or something close to it.

After the four adults compared notes, they determined that a four minute window occurred when the parents were exploring, and ggf and the friend were distracted -- turned their eyes away -- and didn't see him.

I found that a little odd, myself, but I'd be willing to bet that if we read the entire statement, and not only that one line People printed out of context, it would make sense.

http://www.people.com/article/missing-boy-idaho-grandfather-speaks

I don't understand why they would tell him four minutes when they told everyone else (911, media, LE) times that were longer. It seems like such an odd thing. Did they say 40 (closer-ish to the other times) and he misunderstood, or did he maybe do his own calculations?

Because four minutes. No way imo.

I read the PEOPLE article and here is how I interpreted it. I believe they were saying that the parents left on a walk, DeOrr was with GPP [ friend was never mentioned]----Parents were gone for several minutes, then GPP looked away , for about 4 minutes, and then parents came back and said 'Where's DeOrr?'

That is how I understood what the article tried to say. But it conflicts with the idea that GGP thought the boy was with the parents, imo, because he admits that he WAS watching him until he looked away, then boy vanished.

I think it's a conflict especially since he wasn't even there. Is he maybe just guessing?

If grandpa has a mental( cognitive) or health issue as has been reported, he is not a reliable historian.

Who was not there? Sorry, I'm confused.

Sorry for all the quotes, I wanted to capture the discussion. Maybe I can clear up some of the confusion. Personally, I entirely discount the 4 minute claim as hearsay. The People article, quoted the Paternal Grandfather, also named DeOrr, and he was not at the campground. The Maternal Great Grandfather, was the one that joined them on the camping trip. He has "declining physical and mental health" so even if he said it was "just 4 minutes", I wouldn't put too much weight on it.

Here are the links for reference: http://www.people.com/article/missing-boy-idaho-grandfather-speaks and http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/sheriff-family-friend-not-a-suspect-in-deorr-kunz-case/

From People: "Mitchell's father-in-law, also named DeOrr Kunz, tells PEOPLE." So it was the paternal grandfather speaking. "The elder Kunz says the boy's parents were setting up camp and assumed Mitchell's grandfather, who was also on the trip, was watching the boy."

From East Idaho News: "The great-grandfather, who authorities have not identified, also has not been labeled as a suspect. Authorities said his declining physical and mental health ruled him out at the beginning of the case."

 

[katydid23]

I'm sure this was posted on page 1 but I hadn't seen it...

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/family-friend-at-campsite-deorr-kunz-just-disappeared/

“So he was just with you and the grandfather when he wandered away?” reporter Nate Eaton asked Reinwand on his front porch.

“Uh-huh,” Reinwand responded. “As far as I know he disappeared.”

Watch the rest of the conversation with Reinwand in the video player above."

WOWZERS....just wow...:no:



“Uh-huh,” Reinwand responded. “As far as I know he disappeared.”



PLease people, take a second to watch this video....:sigh:

 

[katydid23]

Sorry for all the quotes, I wanted to capture the discussion. Maybe I can clear up some of the confusion. Personally, I entirely discount the 4 minute claim as hearsay. The People article, quoted the Paternal Grandfather, also named DeOrr, and he was not at the campground. The Maternal Great Grandfather, was the one that joined them on the camping trip. He has "declining physical and mental health" so even if he said it was "just 4 minutes", I wouldn't put too much weight on it.

Here are the links for reference: http://www.people.com/article/missing-boy-idaho-grandfather-speaks and http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/sheriff-family-friend-not-a-suspect-in-deorr-kunz-case/

From People: "Mitchell's father-in-law, also named DeOrr Kunz, tells PEOPLE." So it was the paternal grandfather speaking. "The elder Kunz says the boy's parents were setting up camp and assumed Mitchell's grandfather, who was also on the trip, was watching the boy."

From East Idaho News: "The great-grandfather, who authorities have not identified, also has not been labeled as a suspect. Authorities said his declining physical and mental health ruled him out at the beginning of the case."

Have you watched the very recent video of the family friend?

 

[wondering25]

It's pretty rare to find or see a mountain lion, that doesn't indicate that they aren't there. You'll not see them, but they'll see you.

So, with all the drones and searchers, in addition to not finding deorr they also have not seen one mountain lion or not reported seeing one. See, IMO it works both ways.. one has to be spotted in order to know one was living in the area.. so i am totally discounting this mountain lion neck snapping bloodless attack until someone shows me there is one spotted on a drone or by a human in that area.. jmo

 

[jmcgladr]

WOWZERS....just wow...:no:



“Uh-huh,” Reinwand responded. “As far as I know he disappeared.”



PLease people, take a second to watch this video....:sigh:

I agree, it's very strange. An odd way of responding to this question when he acknowledges he was right there. If he was right there, there should be no "as far as I know" because he WOULD presumably know. This family friend does not seem "all there" himself, IMO. And this answer seems contrived/prepared.