Still Missing CA - Orson & Orrin West (3&4), California City, 21 Dec 2020

[Warwick7]

Others have said this but I'm going to reiterate it:

TW: "I realised that I'd left the gate open so I .... ran into the house and searched it!"

Makes no sense. moo

 

[rosesfromangels]

Others have said this but I'm going to reiterate it:

TW: "I realised that I'd left the gate open so I .... ran into the house and searched it!"

Makes no sense. moo

It makes sense to me. The children weren't in the yard, so he went to see if they were in the house before he extended his search beyond his property. I would do the same. This makes sense to me.

I'm really wanting to know more about this adoptive couple and their work history which affords six kids and a house. I want to know if the kids are a business, or an act of love. That's a lot of mouths to feed. I am waiting until (and if) this couple are named POI or Suspects as I know TOS doesn't permit us to sleuth them until such (and if) time. Sitting on hands no so patiently.

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[Warwick7]

I must have missed a msm someone posted. Could you repost again?

The neighbor in a recent video yesterday spoke about how the two boys were seen on neighboring camera footage going in the house but no recording of them coming out.

 

[Kiranerys]

I'm super new here! I've read through most of this thread and I don't think this has been mentioned but I noticed that TW said that they sent the two youngest ones outside to play while JW was wrapping gifts. It strikes me as odd that he identifies them as the "two youngest" as if there were other children in the house and then later says that the four other children were on "vacation" at grandma's house.

Welcome to WS. What a fantastic point!!!!

 

[MsBetsy]

I must have missed a msm someone posted. Could you repost again?

The neighbor in a recent video yesterday spoke about how the two boys were seen on neighboring camera footage going in the house but no recording of them coming out.

I've been looking for that. I think it was on AV news, a local station. I can't find the video.

 

[Edinlass]

It makes sense to me. The children weren't in the yard, so he went to see if they were in the house before he extended his search beyond his property. I would do the same. This makes sense to me.

I'm really wanting to know more about this adoptive couple and their work history which affords six kids and a house. I want to know if the kids are a business, or an act of love. That's a lot of mouths to feed. I am waiting until (and if) this couple are named POI or Suspects as I know TOS doesn't permit us to sleuth them until such (and if) time. Sitting on hands no so patiently.

Amateur opinion and speculation

This makes sense to me too. Once my 2 year old was out in the garden with me whilst I washed the car. Literally there one minute, gone the next. I initially looked on the street and then ran into the house and there he was sitting watching cartoons.

 

[Warwick7]

I've been looking for that. I think it was on AV news, a local station. I can't find the video.

Is AV an approved site here?

 

[MsBetsy]

Is AV an approved site here?

I'm not sure. I think it stands for Antelope Valley. It looks like a legitimate local news site, but I guess we should ask a mod.

The only problem is, I still can't find the interview.

 

[Jo in Calif]

Is AV an approved site here?

No.

 

[Jo in Calif]

ADMIN NOTE:

AV News Crew is NOT an approved MSM site and nobody asked us if they are approved. They are generally not an approved source.

Having said that, we can't stuff all that toothpaste back in the tube, so here is the deal:

Members may ONLY link to and discuss what the bio mom said in her interview and what the foster/adoptive parents said in their interview. Members may NOT discuss the opinions of the reporter or link to anything other than the actual interview with the case players involved. Period.

Bump

 

[Mediumtripletriple]

I'm not sure. I think it stands for Antelope Valley. It looks like a legitimate local news site, but I guess we should ask a mod.

The only problem is, I still can't find the interview.

Its on his YouTube page

 

[Warwick7]

Bump

Thanks, I thought so.

 

[Lusitana]

I think the adopted father was so understanding of the bio mom because he knows the community is not happy with him and his wife and saying any other thing would make it even worse.

 

[Knox]

I must have missed the part when he talked about the kids not touching the dirt. I'm not sure what that means.

Another thing that doesn't make sense is his throwing the wood over the fence while the kids were playing. Wouldn't he be afraid to hit them with a log, especially since they were so rambunctious? And if he was looking where he was throwing, wouldn't he have noticed whether the kids were there or not?

I also thought his response to the biological mom blaming them on the kid's disappearance was odd. He didn't deny it, but said he understood and would feel the same way. Then he said "That's exactly the point." I'm not sure which part he was referring to as being "the point."

It's at .50 in the video linked below- "Do not let them go on the dirt in the backyard keep them close".

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=390820925484800

 

[Knox]

I seriously doubt there was anything resembling a log on that neighbouring property. More like twigs, if even that. There is no need to throw twigs over the fence, you can easily carry them with you and it is more practical to have them in a bunch.

In some of the news video's of the back yard, you can see a small pile of what appears to be longish tree branches. Very twig like in diameter, not like a log at all.

 

[PommyMommy]

conflicting report:
On December 29, authorities executed a second search warrant of the home. Local reporters saw police carrying out several large bags.
Police chief says foul play likely involved after two missing boys disappear from backyard at same time

eta:
Search party scheduled for Saturday Jan 2, 21:
https://twitter.com/bayanwang

Well, that it explains it, thanks. Maybe I'm being thickheaded but I don't understand why a second warrant would have been necessary. Re-listening to the Chief's update (which was before they went back into the home, of course), I don't get that sense at all. The initial warrant was easily obtained - the kids were missing. The second search wasn't for something else as far as we know - it was for the house and they had that warrant already. MOO

KGET - TV 17 Bakersfield
7:15 Reporter: Do you think you're going to go back in the house at any point? You have that search warrant still, right? Chief: It's absolutely possible, yes.

9:54 Reporter: Could you explain how police were able to get a warrant inside the house and [retain?] custody over the rest of the four kids even two of them are biological? Chief: Oh, that's, uh, the fact that the kids are missing, that's the easy part, um you know, obtaining the warrant was easy, like we do every warrant search. Reporter: You're allowed., enough evidence is that the kids were missing and you're allowed [crosstalk]... Chief: That is correct. Correct.

@leighEg, can you clear this up for us? It is stated in your 12/30 article, "On December 29, authorities executed a second search warrant of the home." Did LE obtain a second warrant or was this simply a second search under the initial warrant? Inquiring minds want to know. TIA

Police chief says foul play likely involved after two missing boys disappear from backyard at same time – Crime Online

 

[AgeofAquaruis]

It's at .50 in the video linked below- "Do not let them go on the dirt in the backyard keep them close".

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=390820925484800

Who's going through it? One would think the biggest concern would be what Orrin,and Orson are going through. They must be so scared, cold, hungry, missing their siblings,crying etc. MOO

 

[Warwick7]

Why not go out the front door and take a left and pick up wood scraps? It is far closer than going clear to the back end of that property, open that huge gate and retrieve wood pieces....

 

[Knox]

Well, that it explains it, thanks. Maybe I'm being thickheaded but I don't understand why a second warrant would have been necessary. Re-listening to the Chief's update (which was before they went back into the home, of course), I don't get that sense at all. The initial warrant was easily obtained - the kids were missing. The second search wasn't for something else as far as we know - it was for the house and they had that warrant already. MOO

KGET - TV 17 Bakersfield
7:15 Reporter: Do you think you're going to go back in the house at any point? You have that search warrant still, right? Chief: It's absolutely possible, yes.

9:54 Reporter: Could you explain how police were able to get a warrant inside the house and [retain?] custody over the rest of the four kids even two of them are biological? Chief: Oh, that's, uh, the fact that the kids are missing, that's the easy part, um you know, obtaining the warrant was easy, like we do every warrant search. Reporter: You're allowed., enough evidence is that the kids were missing and you're allowed [crosstalk]... Chief: That is correct. Correct.

@leighEg, can you clear this up for us? It is stated in your 12/30 article, "On December 29, authorities executed a second search warrant of the home." Did LE obtain a second warrant or was this simply a second search under the initial warrant? Inquiring minds want to know. TIA

Police chief says foul play likely involved after two missing boys disappear from backyard at same time – Crime Online

Maybe the first warrant was too broad to include what they went after in the house the second time? Or maybe a jurisdictional issue, in that another agency was collecting the evidence? Regardless, I'd rather see an over abundance of caution than evidence being tossed out in court because it was illegally obtained. MOO-

 

[PommyMommy]

Maybe the first warrant was too broad to include what they went after in the house the second time? Or maybe a jurisdictional issue, in that another agency was collecting the evidence? Regardless, I'd rather see an over abundance of caution than evidence being tossed out in court because it was illegally obtained. MOO-

Yes, could be, and I completely agree with your last statement. I just dislike conflicting information! MOO