ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #5

[MyBelle]

Good thoughts. I hope my post was not against the rues, by the way. My understanding is that we can't quote or discuss it as fact. Others have posted the link to the page and another rumor mentioned.

Unfortunately, rumors in these cases all seem to eventually pan out with nuggets of truth.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I understand they are public (the post I was responding to was about how to locate/obtain them), but I don't know if we would be allowed to discuss them here (other than to say they exist). If you can find them maybe PM a mod before discussing the details, unless you know it's okay because they're public record.

I'm sure we're all curious what's in them but we don't want to kill this thread.

If there are search warrants, they are a matter of public record but they may be sealed. Evidently other posters claim the parents themselves have said their property has been searched but we've seen no search warrants. LE is playing this close to the vest.

JMO

 

[bluesneakers]

If there are search warrants, they are a matter of public record but they may be sealed. Evidently other posters claim the parents themselves have said their property has been searched but we've seen no search warrants. LE is playing this close to the vest.

JMO

This is basically what I just said... I have my doubts we can discuss them even if someone manages to locate them, at least as long as the parents aren't suspects. And they aren't suspects - they are POI.

JMO!

 

[Elainera]

If they are parents of a missing kid? I would think LE would be negligent not to fully search and investigate them. How else can they be ruled out?

But shouldn't the investigation and search happen before they are called 'good' and 'solid'?

As it is, it looks like the sheriff's department was in fact 'negligent', as you put it, and did not fully investigate the parents to rule them out, but rather, well, simply ruled them out anyway. The investigation seems to be happening now only that the FBI is involved.

 

[gitana1]

I think LE would still obtain a search warrant as a matter of practice and so it can not be raised later if there is a trial. And I do believe there will be a trial in this case.

JMO

There has to be probable cause for there to be a search warrant: "A search conducted pursuant to a valid consent is constitutionally permissible. One of the specifically established exceptions to the requirements of both a warrant and probable cause is a search that is conducted pursuant to consent. In situations where the police lack probable cause to arrest or search, a search authorized by a valid consent may be the only means of obtaining important and reliable evidence." (Schneckloth v. Bustamonte)

http://m.policemag.com/article/2438/consent-searches

 

[gitana1]

But shouldn't the investigation and search happen before they are called 'good' and 'solid'?

As it is, it looks like the sheriff's department was in fact 'negligent', as you put it, and did not fully investigate the parents to rule them out, but rather, well, simply ruled them out anyway. The investigation seems to be happening now only that the FBI is involved.

It is a process of elimination. If a child goes missing from a house, the search is centered there and then starts expanding out from there. Same thing if a kid goes missing from a campsite.

In any event, how do you know when the searches were conducted?

 

[MyBelle]

There has to be probable cause for there to be a search warrant: "A search conducted pursuant to a valid consent is constitutionally permissible. One of the specifically established exceptions to the requirements of both a warrant and probable cause is a search that is conducted pursuant to consent. In situations where the police lack probable cause to arrest or search, a search authorized by a valid consent may be the only means of obtaining important and reliable evidence." (Schneckloth v. Bustamonte)

http://m.policemag.com/article/2438/consent-searches

Are you saying there was no probable cause for a search warrant? I do believe either the parents or their relatives are saying there was a search. If so, probable cause should not have been an issue for a warrant nor I believe there will be a problem with the search.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

There has to be probable cause for there to be a search warrant: "A search conducted pursuant to a valid consent is constitutionally permissible. One of the specifically established exceptions to the requirements of both a warrant and probable cause is a search that is conducted pursuant to consent. In situations where the police lack probable cause to arrest or search, a search authorized by a valid consent may be the only means of obtaining important and reliable evidence." (Schneckloth v. Bustamonte)

http://m.policemag.com/article/2438/consent-searches

Parents last seeing their child isn't probable cause for a search warrant? Seriously?

 

[starfire]

If there are search warrants, they are a matter of public record but they may be sealed. Evidently other posters claim the parents themselves have said their property has been searched but we've seen no search warrants. LE is playing this close to the vest.

JMO

This article mentions the searches:
http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/parents-of-deorr-kunz-we-pray-our-lil-man-will-be-found/
DeOrr’s parents confirm they have been in contact with the FBI and, according to Kunz, investigators have searched their house and vehicles.

So maybe it was the FBI that encouraged/told local LE to search?

 

[MyBelle]

This article mentions the searches:
http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/parents-of-deorr-kunz-we-pray-our-lil-man-will-be-found/
DeOrr’s parents confirm they have been in contact with the FBI and, according to Kunz, investigators have searched their house and vehicles.

So maybe it was the FBI that encouraged/told local LE to search?

Yeah, it mentions searches but does not mention search warrants. The FBI may very well be obtaining search warrants. This crime happened on federal land.

JMO

 

[bluesneakers]

This article mentions the searches:
http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/parents-of-deorr-kunz-we-pray-our-lil-man-will-be-found/
DeOrr’s parents confirm they have been in contact with the FBI and, according to Kunz, investigators have searched their house and vehicles.

So maybe it was the FBI that encouraged/told local LE to search?

I think they volunteered to let LE search their home and car. These are parents who want their child back and even though people have listed the many mistakes they made wrt SM, I don't think they would interfere with LE or insist on them having a search warrant. Parents desperate to get their child back are not going to stand in the way of the people who most want to help them.

JMO.

 

[persimmon]

Parents last seeing their child isn't probable cause for a search warrant? Seriously?

I don't believe so.

 

[Elainera]

This article mentions the searches:
http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/parents-of-deorr-kunz-we-pray-our-lil-man-will-be-found/
DeOrr’s parents confirm they have been in contact with the FBI and, according to Kunz, investigators have searched their house and vehicles.

So maybe it was the FBI that encouraged/told local LE to search?

That is how it would seem to me.

 

[gitana1]

And since we already talked about it not being standard procedure to search their homes in a missing child case that happened out in the wilderness - what do you all think now knowing it has been searched?



Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

That they're doing their jobs. Thoroughly.

 

[gitana1]

Why do they call him 'lil man' ? Does this go in line with his father repeatedly saying he was three years old, while he's only 2 1/2 ? I mean, he's practically still a baby in my view. Can someone shed some light on if this is some sort of regional thing ? I'm really not trying to nitpick or be overly accusing of anything, but something about this just bothers me. TIA

Seriously? Gosh these poor people. They lost their child.

 

[MyBelle]

There has to be probable cause for there to be a search warrant: "A search conducted pursuant to a valid consent is constitutionally permissible. One of the specifically established exceptions to the requirements of both a warrant and probable cause is a search that is conducted pursuant to consent. In situations where the police lack probable cause to arrest or search, a search authorized by a valid consent may be the only means of obtaining important and reliable evidence." (Schneckloth v. Bustamonte)

http://m.policemag.com/article/2438/consent-searches

You actually think there is no probable cause for a search warrant? Seriously? The parents are cooperating and a search authorized by consent is just that. I'm baffled what you are trying to prove.

 

[MyBelle]

There has to be probable cause for there to be a search warrant: "A search conducted pursuant to a valid consent is constitutionally permissible. One of the specifically established exceptions to the requirements of both a warrant and probable cause is a search that is conducted pursuant to consent. In situations where the police lack probable cause to arrest or search, a search authorized by a valid consent may be the only means of obtaining important and reliable evidence." (Schneckloth v. Bustamonte)

http://m.policemag.com/article/2438/consent-searches

If there is no probable cause for a search warrant, please cite it. Thanks.

 

[jmcgladr]

It seems that there could be a very real possibility they arrived Thurs night around 9:30pm. What are thoughts on this?

It's possible, but I read in the people.com article that the parents were "setting up camp" when DeOrr Jr. disappeared. What about that? I would think camp would have been set up long before Friday afternoon if they arrived Thursday night! Here's the quote: "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. The grandfather assumed the boy's parents were watching him, says Kunz. "

I'll note that this account contradicts the parents' account of exploring as well, though, so it's unclear which version is accurate!

http://www.people.com/people/mobile/article/0,,20938555,00.html

 

[gitana1]

Here is the link that states Sheriff finally ASKED the FBI for help...they did not come in on their own.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0Q52OP20150731?irpc=932



Gitana...I hope you're not attributing this direct quote to me....I never stated that and to imply or assume anyone has is RUDE also...we are at a stalemate with differing opinions and that is how it will remain.

What direct quote?

 

[gitana1]

You actually think there is no probable cause for a search warrant? Seriously? The parents are cooperating and a search authorized by consent is just that. I'm baffled what you are trying to prove.

I'm sorry but I have no idea what you're saying.

If there is no probable cause for a search warrant, please cite it. Thanks.

You can't prove a negative. But I think it's simple- if there is probable cause for a search warrant there will be a warrant. If there's no search warrant then there's likely no probable cause for one.