ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Does anyone know if the stream actually has minnows in it? Or was this just a ruse.
I have no idea what you are talking about minnows and a ruse, but the stream is very shallow and about 3 feet across. I suppose it is possible, but I don't know.
 
Hey

Someone else on here also read the same thing i read, that it was confirmed the sighting at store at 6 was not them... Maybe someone will read this that also read what we saw and can link it. im sorry.. but i know i read it somewhere..lol
I just don't want it to be another mistake in journalism like the one I read the other night from the Inquisitir article that stated the 3 had been ruled out (not true). I honestly don't believe they would confirm the store sighting one way or the other until this case is wrapped up. It wouldn't be a good idea for LE to do so unless they spoke to the man and saw the child to conclude it was them and not DeOrr with DK or someone else.
 
Maybe I'm confused, as it is a bit confusing, but I don't recall reading anywhere the little Deorr's great-grandfather (the one who was out camping with them) lived with little Deorr's parents?

My understanding is that the great-grandfather was the Mom's grandfather............and that the little boy, his Mom and Dad lived with the Dad's (little boy's Dad) father. Don't remember reading anythig about her grandfather living at her father inlaw's home with her/her husband and their little boy Deorr?

My understanding also is that GGF's physical and/or mental/cognitive health status was reduced enough such that LE was pretty clear fairly early on that he was definitely in no way a person of interested, due to these same factors.


It may be just my curiosity, but for some reason I don't think GGF is in as bad of shape as people would like us to think he is. He can be in his 70's, have declining health and early stages of dementia, that comes and goes. IIRC, JM stays at home with him during the day, hired by her Mom to do so, right?

Well, this could be a two-fold solution, someone is with GGF and it also gives JM an income without going out to work and paying a babysitter. If GGF health is so poor, why would JM and DK, Sr. even think about going off to explore for those 10 minutes and leaving little Deorr with GGF?

GGF has to be in better health, both mentally and physically, since the parents felt it was okay to leave toddler Deorr in his care! Hmmmmm
 
Maybe I'm confused, as it is a bit confusing, but I don't recall reading anywhere the little Deorr's great-grandfather (the one who was out camping with them) lived with little Deorr's parents?

My understanding is that the great-grandfather was the Mom's grandfather............and that the little boy, his Mom and Dad lived with the Dad's (little boy's Dad) father. Don't remember reading anything about her grandfather living at her father inlaw's home with her/her husband and their little boy Deorr?

My understanding also is that GGF's physical and/or mental/cognitive health status was reduced enough such that LE was pretty clear fairly early on that he was definitely in no way a person of interested, due to these same factors.
Correct. DKsr and JM with DeOrrjr live with DeOrr (DK's dad). DKsr and JM's dads were not at the scene, but did arrive later to help search. GGF was JM's mom's father and no one lived with him out of the 3 at the campsite.
 
Hey

Someone else on here also read the same thing i read, that it was confirmed the sighting at store at 6 was not them... Maybe someone will read this that also read what we saw and can link it. im sorry.. but i know i read it somewhere..lol

Floridian, that was me. I also posted that was what I read. And I read it recently, just don't know where? I read the transcript of the 7/13/15 interview and it's not from that. I "thought" it was an answer DK gave in response to a question. Geez, I'm SO confused!
 
I have no idea what you are talking about minnows and a ruse, but the stream is very shallow and about 3 feet across. I suppose it is possible, but I don't know.

I've never been to a creek (and we go to a LOT of them in Tennessee) that didn't have minnows. Creeks flow from larger bodies of water and the minnows flow too.
 
I've never been to a creek (and we go to a LOT of them in Tennessee) that didn't have minnows. Creeks flow from larger bodies of water and the minnows flow too.

Minnows, tadpoles, frogs, water bugs of all sorts ... I'm 99.9 percent sure that creek had minnows. :)
 
I've never been to a creek (and we go to a LOT of them in Tennessee) that didn't have minnows. Creeks flow from larger bodies of water and the minnows flow too.

A lot of creeks out west are bone dry 3/4 of the year. So no they don't all have minnows. Although if there's a dam just upstream, like here it most likely would have minnows.
 
Bowerman said everyone at the campsite — including the boy’s parents, great-grandfather and a family friend — is considered a person of interest in the case, but none of them are suspects

http://q13fox.com/2015/08/02/fbi-investigators-join-search-for-missing-idaho-2-year-old-deorr-kunz/

Semantics... Here is a quote from the blue moon murder press release last week:

[FONT=adelle-sans, sans-serif]"Initial research has led us to believe it was a ritualistic killing," Morgan said. "The method of the murder ... and[/FONT] our person of interest[FONT=adelle-sans, sans-serif] has some ties to a faith or religion that is indicative of that." (underline is mine) .

Sheriff Bowerman in the Deorr case clarified that the parents and IR were persons of interest because they were there.. it was a written statement.. I didnt hear him.. did he pause? Did he quickly clarify? Was it only written ( i cant find any audio on this statement).
[/FONT]2 different cases.. POI sure means "person under a cloud" in the blue moon case..jmo
 
A lot of creeks out west are bone dry 3/4 of the year. So no they don't all have minnows. Although if there's a dam just upstream, like here it most likely would have minnows.

We already KNOW this creek wasn't dry so it surely had minnows.
 
If Deorr Sr. said he was at the Stage shop at 1 pm and not 6pm. Let's say the clerk saw someone else that resembled the pair at 6, but when given a picture of the two Deorrs she said "Nope, it was someone else". This is totally hypothetical, but probably did happen because I'm sure Deorr Sr. knew what time he was at the store. Who was the clerk at 1PM when the two Deorrs were there? Wouldn't that clerk be able to confirm they were at the store at 1PM? If there is no clerk at 1 that can confirm them to be at the store someone is mistaken or lying. I'd like to interview whoever was working at the Stage shop at 1PM.
 
If Deorr Sr. said he was at the Stage shop at 1 pm and not 6pm. Let's say the clerk saw someone else that resembled the pair at 6, but when given a picture of the two Deorrs she said "Nope, it was someone else". This is totally hypothetical, but probably did happen because I'm sure Deorr Sr. knew what time he was at the store. Who was the clerk at 1PM when the two Deorrs were there? Wouldn't that clerk be able to confirm they were at the store at 1PM? If there is no clerk at 1 that can confirm them to be at the store someone is mistaken or lying. I'd like to interview whoever was working at the Stage shop at 1PM.

Of course that's a lot for the clerk to recall. Two people, what vehicle, what DAY, what time, etc.
 
If Deorr Sr. said he was at the Stage shop at 1 pm and not 6pm. Let's say the clerk saw someone else that resembled the pair at 6, but when given a picture of the two Deorrs she said "Nope, it was someone else". This is totally hypothetical, but probably did happen because I'm sure Deorr Sr. knew what time he was at the store. Who was the clerk at 1PM when the two Deorrs were there? Wouldn't that clerk be able to confirm they were at the store at 1PM? If there is no clerk at 1 that can confirm them to be at the store someone is mistaken or lying. I'd like to interview whoever was working at the Stage shop at 1PM.

I'm sure we'd ALL like to interview everyone present in the area, and a few peripheral players. WE might get some straight answers, not this double talk, won't talk, won't name silence.

My opinion only
 
It's a lot to recall maybe now. I know if I was working the same day a kid was missing in the area, as soon as I heard about it I would have been thinking back at who all I saw that day. I can't believe a store in that area would be that terribly busy that they wouldn't recall someone right after lunch coming in.
 
If Deorr Sr. said he was at the Stage shop at 1 pm and not 6pm. Let's say the clerk saw someone else that resembled the pair at 6, but when given a picture of the two Deorrs she said "Nope, it was someone else". This is totally hypothetical, but probably did happen because I'm sure Deorr Sr. knew what time he was at the store. Who was the clerk at 1PM when the two Deorrs were there? Wouldn't that clerk be able to confirm they were at the store at 1PM? If there is no clerk at 1 that can confirm them to be at the store someone is mistaken or lying. I'd like to interview whoever was working at the Stage shop at 1PM.
I feel like if there wasn't something relative about the sighting then they would be announcing loud and clear that it was a mixup.

There was a newspaper that said the 6pm sighting had been discounted due to video evidence, but then they removed it pretty quickly and edited it to say the walmart sighting had been discounted due to video evidence. I think that might be where some of the confusion over whether it was ruled out comes from. Stage shop in Leodore does not have cameras.
 
If Deorr Sr. said he was at the Stage shop at 1 pm and not 6pm. Let's say the clerk saw someone else that resembled the pair at 6, but when given a picture of the two Deorrs she said "Nope, it was someone else". This is totally hypothetical, but probably did happen because I'm sure Deorr Sr. knew what time he was at the store. Who was the clerk at 1PM when the two Deorrs were there? Wouldn't that clerk be able to confirm they were at the store at 1PM? If there is no clerk at 1 that can confirm them to be at the store someone is mistaken or lying. I'd like to interview whoever was working at the Stage shop at 1PM.

It would help so much to know when each of the 5 campers actually arrived. All that I have seen in MSM is "Friday" or "Friday afternoon"; unfortunately, JM/DK did not mention arrival day/time in their interview. There has been talk on SM about them having arrived on a different day but I don't think we are allowed to discuss that here? IF true, that might explain the discrepancy in the sighting. All imo.
 
Even if they arrived on Thursday and they were at the store at 6, that would explain the 6 pm sighting. But Deorr Sr. said he was at the store at 1 (Friday). I'd like to verify that info. That would at least place Deorr Jr. in the area. That would clear up people wanting to know if he was actually ever at the campground.

Edit: Well I guess if they could verify they were at the shop Thursday at 6PM that would still verify that Deorr Jr. was in the area. That would mean they went to the store twice though if Deorr Sr. said he went to the store on Friday at 1.
 
Even if they arrived on Thursday and they were at the store at 6, that would explain the 6 pm sighting. But Deorr Sr. said he was at the store at 1 (Friday). I'd like to verify that info. That would at least place Deorr Jr. in the area. That would clear up people wanting to know if he was actually ever at the campground.

Not mutually exclusive.. could have been there at 6pm on Thursday evening then again at 1pm on Friday. jmo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
3,914
Total visitors
4,068

Forum statistics

Threads
602,587
Messages
18,143,149
Members
231,446
Latest member
VAres67
Back
Top