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

[Arnie M]

Where are you seeing that the search lasted a full three weeks? From everything I have read, it seems like the bulk of the search happened the first 10 or 11 days from July 10 to July 21. ""We've literally torn that country apart and found absolutely not one clue." - Lemhi County Sheriff Lynn Bowerman, Lemhi County sheriff's officials said via their Facebook page, "After 10 days of searching, diving, and scouring the hillsides, the Sheriff's Office has decided to redirect the investigation." https://www.facebook.com/LemhiCountySheriffsOffice?fref=nf At that time the sheriff was quoted in the media as saying they would have somebody up there checking on the area occasionally, but they were not searching full time.

On July 22 Twin Falls sent 4 officers, two drones, a Razor, and two 4-wheelers to use in the search. They searched and documented the area for two days. It is all in the post on their FB page, you have to read the comments to see that they only searched two days. https://www.facebook.com/twinfallssheriff

The heat-seeking aircraft were only used the first one or two days.

Please explain where you are getting your information from...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/31/us-usa-idaho-toddler-idUSKCN0Q52OP20150731

 

[Arnie M]

I guess I'm just finding the need to go back and review things. The Lemhi County Sheriff stated the drones were not being used to search, but the Twin Falls Sheriff's office that did the drone search stated on FB that they did search with apparently one drone, as in singular. I don't know why they would bother to bring it up there if they weren't going to search. But then I'm not sure I know what to think anymore. I'm just going to :banghead:
http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/07/lemhi-sheriff-on-deorr-kunz-we-do-not-suspect-foul-play/


http://www.ktvb.com/story/news/loca...earch-hits-two-weeks-still-no-trace/30624055/

Drones mentioned here http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/31/us-usa-idaho-toddler-idUSKCN0Q52OP20150731

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/31/us-usa-idaho-toddler-idUSKCN0Q52OP20150731

Couple of points on that article. It is from 21 days in (31st July) hence three weeks and also has no quote marks so I take it was the reporters words not the Sheriff's.

The only quoted words from anyone were:

"There is no evidence suggesting DeOrr was abducted," the sheriff said.

But that is just my opinion.

Back to waiting for the FBI report.:fence:

 

[kammiemc]

Couple of points on that article. It is from 21 days in (31st July) hence three weeks and also has no quote marks so I take it was the reporters words not the Sheriff's.

The only quoted words from anyone were:



But that is just my opinion.

Back to waiting for the FBI report.:fence:

I was just rereading that article since it was posted again and caught this paragraph:

The child's parents, DeOrr Kunz Sr. and Jessica Mitchell, told authorities they left their home in Idaho Falls on July 10 for a weekend camping trip that included their son, as well as the mother's grandfather and his friend.

While I assumed the parents were the ones who told LE they arrived Fri, there has been a lot of speculation that that wasn't the case (e.g., LE just assumed they arrived on Fri, and that when Nate said they arrived on Fri, he actually meant they arrived back from the store, whereas he really knew they arrived Thurs, etc.) I started doubting my own common sense, but it sounds like the parents did specifically tell LE that they left IF on Fri. I wonder why they gave incorrect information about when they left for the camping trip.

 

[Mickshawn]

My gut is speaking to me so loudly....It's saying that somebody (human(s)) "Disappeared" this kid.....possibly to "Harm" the parents that they were somehow connected to in some way.....

I SO hope he is alive.

 

[Mickshawn]

I was just rereading that article since it was posted again and caught this paragraph:

The child's parents, DeOrr Kunz Sr. and Jessica Mitchell, told authorities they left their home in Idaho Falls on July 10 for a weekend camping trip that included their son, as well as the mother's grandfather and his friend.

While I assumed the parents told LE they arrived Fri, there has been a lot of speculation that that wasn't the case (e.g., LE just assumed they arrived on Fri, and that when Nate said they arrived on Fri, he actually meant they arrived back from the store, whereas he really knew they arrived Thurs, etc.) I started doubting my own common sense, but it sounds like the parents did specifically tell LE that they left IF on Fri. I wonder why they gave incorrect information about when they left for the camping trip.

If they just said the date (July 10) and not the day (Thursday or Friday), perhaps they just got the dates confused? I do that all the time....I know the day, but not always the date.

 

[kammiemc]

If they just said the date (July 10) and not the day (Thursday or Friday), perhaps they just got the dates confused? I do that all the time....I know the day, but not always the date.

I really doubt that IMO, because LE would have got the basics, like "when did you leave your house?" and "when did you arrive?" immediately (Friday), so I think they would say "yesterday" or "Thursday". I don't think they would use a calendar date to refer to the day before. It seems, for whatever reason, they wanted LE to believe that they left their home on Friday. I just am not sure why. Maybe it's an innocent reason. I dunno.

ETA: Also, thinking about it more, if the parents did use a calendar date in that context, I think LE would have said, "July 10th, so today, and you arrived this morning?" etc. I don't think they would keep referring to the day as strictly the calendar date. I think there would be a lot of chances in talking to both parents for clarification. Just a bit of a mystery.

 

[kammiemc]

That article is not by Sheriff Bowermann.

Yes, I know that. I was not responding to the language being used in the article. I was responding to (agreeing with) the original poster's idea that LE knows a lot more than we do. The main person we have heard speak about what is known by LE is the sheriff, and my point was that, to me, it seems like he knows more than he is saying. IMO.

 

[audsmommy]

I really hope the FBI has some new information. We are just rehashing the same details over and over. I still believe in my gut that little Deorr wandered away and is somewhere up there. I was reading on another website stories from a SAR officer and some of the stories about where they end up finding lost children ..... crazy and truly unbelievable.

This past weekend I was at a public event and there was an older man (I would say mid to late 70's) and he was carrying his oxygen tank with him. He was pretty active and agile and was having zero problems getting around. At one point he said he was going to go have a CIGARETTE and left. His son just shook his head. Anyway .... the tank was small and portable and it made me think of the GGP.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

I was just rereading that article since it was posted again and caught this paragraph:

The child's parents, DeOrr Kunz Sr. and Jessica Mitchell, told authorities they left their home in Idaho Falls on July 10 for a weekend camping trip that included their son, as well as the mother's grandfather and his friend.

While I assumed the parents were the ones who told LE they arrived Fri, there has been a lot of speculation that that wasn't the case (e.g., LE just assumed they arrived on Fri, and that when Nate said they arrived on Fri, he actually meant they arrived back from the store, whereas he really knew they arrived Thurs, etc.) I started doubting my own common sense, but it sounds like the parents did specifically tell LE that they left IF on Fri. I wonder why they gave incorrect information about when they left for the camping trip.

It would be very telling if true but like the rest of the article, besides the quote in my previous post, it means little.

We need LE to state on video or be quoted in MSM that they told them they left IF on Fri 10th.

Sheriff Bowerman did say on video that during the investigation they learned they arrived on the Thursday, which does imply they originally stated/allowed to be assumed they arrived another day.

 

[kammiemc]

It would be very telling if true but like the rest of the article, besides the quote in my previous post, it means little.

We need LE to state on video or be quoted in MSM that they told them they left IF on Fri 10th.

Sheriff Bowerman did say on video that during the investigation they learned they arrived on the Thursday, which does imply they originally stated/allowed to be assumed they arrived another day.

It is possible that this article is wrong and the parents did not tell authorities they left Idaho Falls on July 10th. But since we were left to believe for a long time that they arrived on July 10th and LE at first also believed it or they would not have had to find out during their investigation, I can't just automatically assume that whoever wrote this article was just guessing about this information, and guessing wrong at that. Could be! But I am not ready to put money on it being wrong.

ETA: This article was prior to the public finding out about the correct timeline, so the reporter was not implying anything. The reporter was just writing what he/she was told, likely by LE. (Not sure where else a reporter would get info about LE's interviews.)

 

[ClaireNC]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/31/us-usa-idaho-toddler-idUSKCN0Q52OP20150731

Another example of don't believe everything you read. That article has so many mistruths in it that the author should not be allowed to call herself a journalist. She takes way too much creative license in a story that is supposed to be reporting the news.

 

[ClaireNC]

I was just rereading that article since it was posted again and caught this paragraph:

The child's parents, DeOrr Kunz Sr. and Jessica Mitchell, told authorities they left their home in Idaho Falls on July 10 for a weekend camping trip that included their son, as well as the mother's grandfather and his friend.

While I assumed the parents were the ones who told LE they arrived Fri, there has been a lot of speculation that that wasn't the case (e.g., LE just assumed they arrived on Fri, and that when Nate said they arrived on Fri, he actually meant they arrived back from the store, whereas he really knew they arrived Thurs, etc.) I started doubting my own common sense, but it sounds like the parents did specifically tell LE that they left IF on Fri. I wonder why they gave incorrect information about when they left for the camping trip.

I really wish that people would stop posting links to that really poorly written article. Pretty much everything that LZ has written as "fact" is an over exaggeration because she is trying to be creative and put her own spin on the story. Sensationalism at its finest journalism at its worse.

 

[ClaireNC]

It is possible that this article is wrong and the parents did not tell authorities they left Idaho Falls on July 10th. But since we were left to believe for a long time that they arrived on July 10th and LE at first also believed it or they would not have had to find out during their investigation, I can't just automatically assume that whoever wrote this article was just guessing about this information, and guessing wrong at that. Could be! But I am not ready to put money on it being wrong.

ETA: This article was prior to the public finding out about the correct timeline, so the reporter was not implying anything. The reporter was just writing what was he/she was told, likely by LE. (Not sure where else a reporter would get info about LE's interviews.)

She just took the information from the East Idaho News, like all the other media stations and apparently East Idaho News had made an assumption and it was wrong.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

It is possible that this article is wrong and the parents did not tell authorities they left Idaho Falls on July 10th. But since we were left to believe for a long time that they arrived on July 10th and LE at first also believed it or they would not have had to find out during their investigation, I can't just automatically assume that whoever wrote this article was just guessing about this information, and guessing wrong at that. Could be! But I am not ready to put money on it being wrong.

ETA: This article was prior to the public finding out about the correct timeline, so the reporter was not implying anything. The reporter was just writing what was he/she was told, likely by LE. (Not sure where else a reporter would get info about LE's interviews.)

The issue isn't whether the information is right or wrong kammiemc. That particular article just comes across to me as a copy/paste synopsis of the case up to that point. It even has two editors!

It has only a single sentence attributable quote.

And can I just agree with others that I think LE know a lot more than they are saying.

 

[kammiemc]

I really wish that people would stop posting links to that really poorly written article. Pretty much everything that LZ has written as "fact" is an over exaggeration because she is trying to be creative and put her own spin on the story. Sensationalism at its finest journalism at its worse.

Oh, I didn't even know who the author was or that she has that reputation. But, in all fairness, I don't think her reporting what the parents told LE was their departure date was sensationalized. I think it is likely the info that she got from LE and believed to be true. (That apparently everyone got from LE.) Everyone believed it to be true at that point. I'm not defending her. She could be incorrect, but I don't think she had reason to intentionally spin that particular point.

 

[ILOKAL]

I was just rereading that article since it was posted again and caught this paragraph:

The child's parents, DeOrr Kunz Sr. and Jessica Mitchell, told authorities they left their home in Idaho Falls on July 10 for a weekend camping trip that included their son, as well as the mother's grandfather and his friend.

While I assumed the parents were the ones who told LE they arrived Fri, there has been a lot of speculation that that wasn't the case (e.g., LE just assumed they arrived on Fri, and that when Nate said they arrived on Fri, he actually meant they arrived back from the store, whereas he really knew they arrived Thurs, etc.) I started doubting my own common sense, but it sounds like the parents did specifically tell LE that they left IF on Fri. I wonder why they gave incorrect information about when they left for the camping trip.

I noticed that too, but then I also noticed the article says the parents said they went "hiking" and we've never read that before, have we. It doesn't seem as though the information for the article came directly from the parents.

 

[kammiemc]

She just took the information from the East Idaho News, like all the other media stations and apparently East Idaho News had made an assumption and it was wrong.

I've seen that a lot, so the same facts get re-reported or even slightly changed by one reporter's assumption of what the first reporter meant, correct or not.
Although, it's not so certain to me that timeline discrepancy was based on the reporter's wrong assumption. That is certainly one possibility. But for the sheriff to clarify the arrival date and say he found it out during the investigation (a very basic fact he should have found out immediately) makes it seem that another possibility is that he shared what he was originally told with the press. Just my take and could be wrong. And I have no idea what it means.

 

[ILOKAL]

It is possible that this article is wrong and the parents did not tell authorities they left Idaho Falls on July 10th. But since we were left to believe for a long time that they arrived on July 10th and LE at first also believed it or they would not have had to find out during their investigation, I can't just automatically assume that whoever wrote this article was just guessing about this information, and guessing wrong at that. Could be! But I am not ready to put money on it being wrong.

ETA: This article was prior to the public finding out about the correct timeline, so the reporter was not implying anything. The reporter was just writing what he/she was told, likely by LE. (Not sure where else a reporter would get info about LE's interviews.)

Maybe she got her information from another "reporter"?

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

I have a question.

Given that, as I understand the current situation, that only parents/family/friends have been searching the area the last days/weeks with little or no LE presence.

Is it plausible that LE/FBI would allow them to find Deorr if there was the slightest chance he was out there?