ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #15

[Sillybilly]

COPYRIGHT RULE

Quotes from published sources, e.g., news articles, should be limited to no more than 10% of the original material, with a source link included. Images also must be accompanied by a link to the original source.

If an article is behind a paywall (i.e., by subscription only), you may post only the link and any portion of the content shown as a free preview.

from The Rules: Etiquette & Information

:tyou:

 

[krig101]

from The Rules: Etiquette & Information

:tyou:

Sorry sillybilly
Thanks for the reminder. my post was way over 10%!

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

[Sillybilly]

Sorry sillybilly
Thanks for the reminder. my post was way over 10%!

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

No worries. I know it's really hard to do when some of the articles are so short.

 

[Dockins]

I have a question. If you read WS, yet never search fb for anything related to a case, is it normal for relatives of that case to pop up as possible 'friends' per fb? I have been getting people with names similar to this case on my ' people you may know' announcements. TIA.

 

[krig101]

http://www.kpvi.com/content/news/lo...ior-Disappearance/Qa4HG_s9LE-f5TVUtnBHXw.cspx

Is this bad reporting?

Investigators did not name potential suspects in DeOrr Kunz’s death, but asked for those with information to come forward.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

[desert-blue]

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/playlist/16611/6174477?title=kpvi

"Investigators did not name potential suspects in DeOrr Kunz's death but asked for those with information to come forward."

 

[desert-blue]

We posted the same thing at the same time....

I'm also wondering if it's just poor reporting or if it's now known that DeOrr is deceased.

 

[krig101]

We posted the same thing at the same time....

I'm also wondering if it's just poor reporting or if it's now known that DeOrr is deceased.

We sure did

I don't know either but I do think something major is about to happen.

IMO

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

[desert-blue]

We sure did

I don't know either but I do think something major is about to happen.

IMO

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Yes, things seem to be developing rather quickly. Regardless of one's feelings about Klein, it does appear that he has been a catalyst in this case. I suspect that the FBI and LE have had a pretty good idea what happened all along but felt they didn't have enough evidence. I'm glad Klein has got the ball rolling. Not sure what he did but it seems to be working (at least I hope so..).

 

[ILOKAL]

A few thoughts...keeping in mind that Mr. Klein is not an exceptionally precise writer IMO. Although his strange wording actually may be more clever than it appears to be.

His team has ruled out a "forced abduction." By definition, an abduction IS forced, so his wording seems redundant. I think he may mean that "stranger abduction" has been ruled out in this context since under this point he has specifically ruled out two sets of strangers who could have participated in a "forced abduction." DeOrr would not have gone with them willingly and would have to be "forced."

https://www.facebook.com/KleinInves...3864945696095/939454592803792/?type=3&theater

However, if DeOrr went voluntarily with someone he knew, that would not be initially "forced." But it would become an "abduction" (within the definition that an abduction is forced) when DeOrr was not returned. So it seems possible that Mr. Klein, by using the redundant word "forced," is leading our thinking toward DeOrr having gone with someone he knew, rather than strangers. This possibility would also tie in with the legal use of the word abduction... the illegal removal of a child from parents or guardians. (See link below for all definitions.)

I may be trying to make sense of what is simply sloppy writing, so I'm not at all sure this is what he meant.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/abduction

That makes sense, to me, but it also seems like it would then eliminate the parents (according to the legal definition)..

 

[giagreen]

What doesn't make sense to me is that Vilt said the family disagreed with posting a reward. Yet money was raised after and was then spent on a different PI that has seemed to of given LE a new lead.
Or maybe LE gave Klein the info?

I guess it doesn't really matter. I'm not sure how DeOrr wondering off or a ml could be ruled out based on no trace of him unless if he means that the dogs found no scent of him and I don't beleive dogs are 100% full proof. But I'd like to believe Klein knows what he's doing and there are better reasons he says that without telling the public.

There sure is a lot of hype now that the parents are totally guilty. Maybe they are. But I'm gonna hold off until we know more for that because a few things Klein says.

He said that IR refused to talk with him along with his lawyer.
And a few of my own observations as far as helping search, flyers...ect
And Klein said he ruled out "forced abduction" wth does that mean? An abduction still stands but not a forced one? Maybe I'm reading to much into it?

Who knows. I'd like to believe the parents had nothing to do with this. Because DeOrr looked like a happy and loved two year old to me anyways. But nothing shocks me anymore. Doesnt matter amyways at this point #findDeOrr

 

[Arnie M]

.

I have no problem with the parents not agreeing with Vilt to post the $10,000 reward ...... As far as the parents were concerned , their son had wandered away from the campsite , a public reward was not necessary , searchers on the ground were ..... besides , I doubt the young couple even had $10k to begin with.

I would not fault IR for getting a lawyer ..... IR was publicly attacked right from the start because he was the only one who was not family .... he appears to have a slower personality and was likely intimidated by all the reporters and publicity .

Besides , if he did something to DeOrr he did one heck of a good job of getting rid of all the evidence .... and had less than one hour to do it .... and in a manner that hundreds of searchers and 18 dogs could not find .

.

 

[Mountaingazer]

.

I have no problem with the parents not agreeing with Vilt to post the $10,000 reward ...... As far as the parents were concerned , their son had wandered away from the campsite , a public reward was not necessary , searchers on the ground were ..... besides , I doubt the young couple even had $10k to begin with.

I would not fault IR for getting a lawyer ..... IR was publicly attacked right from the start because he was the only one who was not family .... he appears to have a slower personality and was likely intimidated by all the reporters and publicity .

Besides , if he did something to DeOrr he did one heck of a good job of getting rid of all the evidence .... and had less than one hour to do it .... and in a manner that hundreds of searchers and 18 dogs could not find .

.

Vilt didn't ask them to put any money towards the reward, he put up all $10,000 out of his own pocket.

http://www.ktvb.com/story/news/local/2015/09/15/deorr-kunz-missing-lead/72298848/

Also the parents have been pushing the abduction theory, not that he just wandered off.

I agree with you about IR! I think getting a lawyer was the smartest thing he could do. There are many who are suspicious of him, but like you, I just don't believe he has the mental acuity to carry this out.

 

[JadeSLeuth]

The standout phrase for me is " previously with-held".
Who rolled?

 

[Mountaingazer]

The standout phrase for me is " previously with-held".
Who rolled?

Klein stated during his q & a that it was a witness with "direct knowledge" that had been too scared to come forward previously.

Does direct knowledge mean it would have to be one of the four who were there? Or could it be someone who was told something by someone who witnessed (or sadly, took part in) whatever happened?

If it was someone there, my guess is IR.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[JadeSLeuth]

Klein stated during his q & a that it was a witness with "direct knowledge" that had been too scared to come forward previously.

Does direct knowledge mean it would have to be one of the four who were there? Or could it be someone who was told something by someone who witnessed (or sadly, took part in) whatever happened?

If it was someone there, my guess is IR.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I think it's got to be one of the four, or possibly a close but extended family member of one of the four. I suspect we will know very soon.

 

[Purplepixii]

I wouldn't be surprised if IR knows something & is the source of the "direct knowledge". Getting a lawyer was the smartest thing for him to do - no disrespect but I don't think he's 100% "all there" so a lawyer makes sense to me. I also imagine he's easily led / easy to threaten too.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

I wouldn't be surprised if IR knows something & is the source of the "direct knowledge". Getting a lawyer was the smartest thing for him to do - no disrespect but I don't think he's 100% "all there" so a lawyer makes sense to me. I also imagine he's easily led / easy to threaten too.

Probably way off the mark but I can't help but think of the word patsy when IR is discussed.

 

[MBK]

Interesting how strongly suggest is underlined in the media release from Klein. If "other parties" have knowledge, does this "strongly suggest" imply that they could be charged with obstructing justice if they do not come forward?

 

[ILOKAL]

Klein stated during his q & a that it was a witness with "direct knowledge" that had been too scared to come forward previously.

Does direct knowledge mean it would have to be one of the four who were there? Or could it be someone who was told something by someone who witnessed (or sadly, took part in) whatever happened?

If it was someone there, my guess is IR.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

It might be the grandfather who saw something but was afraid to tell what he saw. They might want someone to come forward who can corroborate something that was told to them.