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

[Rayemonde]

Oh wow... Fingers crossed Deorr will be found soon!!

Perhaps IR has told LE something, or perhaps one of the parents has. (modsnip) JMO.

 

[Rayemonde]

The boy’s aunt, Tanisha O’Neal Tompkins, says the family was in shock and declined further comment.

http://www.kpvi.com/mostpopular/sto...ior-Disappearance/Qa4HG_s9LE-f5TVUtnBHXw.cspx

 

[Onebest]

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.

I have often wondered how someone could be too sick to talk but still camping. JMO

 

[Lilibet]

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

Thanks. I thought about that and didn't elaborate earlier, but I will now. I'm not sure that the legal definition of "abduction" (illegal removal of a child from parents or guardian) necessarily has to eliminate the parents if just one of the parents is responsible for DeOrr's disappearance. Both parents have legal custody of the child, so if one interfered with that custody by removing DeOrr from the other parent, could it be considered abduction in the legal sense?

I'm not saying that I believe that's what happened. I'm still just trying to make sense of Klein's redundant phrase "forced abduction." Klein seems to have eliminated strangers (which would be forced), animals, wandering off. All that's left is that one or more of the four were involved. It could be one of the parents and still be an abduction in the legal sense of the word IMO. I certainly hope that isn't the case!
JMO

 

[ILOKAL]

Thanks. I thought about that and didn't elaborate earlier, but I will now. I'm not sure that the legal definition of "abduction" (illegal removal of a child from parents or guardian) necessarily has to eliminate the parents if just one of the parents is responsible for DeOrr's disappearance. Both parents have legal custody of the child, so if one interfered with that custody by removing DeOrr from the other parent, could it be considered abduction in the legal sense?

I'm not saying that I believe that's what happened. I'm still just trying to make sense of Klein's redundant phrase "forced abduction." Klein seems to have eliminated strangers (which would be forced), animals, wandering off. All that's left is that one or more of the four were involved. It could be one of the parents and still be an abduction in the legal sense of the word IMO. I certainly hope that isn't the case!
JMO

I don't know for sure (obviously), but when Klein refers to a "forced abduction" I think he means DeOrr went with whomever willingly rather than having been taken forcefully and might not have anything to do with "who" he went with. Hope that makes sense.

 

[ILOKAL]

I have often wondered how someone could be too sick to talk but still camping. JMO

And it could be like the little Smart sister who couldn't bring her memory forward for quite some time.

 

[krig101]

I don't know for sure (obviously), but when Klein refers to a "forced abduction" I think he means DeOrr went with whomever willingly rather than having been taken forcefully and might not have anything to do with "who" he went with. Hope that makes sense.

I'm thinking the same thing.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

[bessie]

I don't know for sure (obviously), but when Klein refers to a "forced abduction" I think he means DeOrr went with whomever willingly rather than having been taken forcefully and might not have anything to do with "who" he went with. Hope that makes sense.

That makes perfect sense. Thanks!

 

[bessie]

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.

And yet Klein says neither IR nor his attorney will speak with his agency. If true, that doesn't jive with him being the informed source.

The source could be an unrelated third party who observed something "on the mountain".

 

[Lilibet]

I don't know for sure (obviously), but when Klein refers to a "forced abduction" I think he means DeOrr went with whomever willingly rather than having been taken forcefully and might not have anything to do with "who" he went with. Hope that makes sense.

Yes, it makes sense because that's exactly my point. I think we're on the same page. I'm splitting hairs about this because "abduction" is by definition "forced." To me, adding the word "forced" would emphasize that DeOrr didn't go willingly. I'm just assuming that if he went willingly, he knew the person he went with because it appears that stranger abduction (which would be "forced") has been ruled out (at least the Rubicon and other campers). But I suppose it's possible that he went willingly with an unknown stranger.

I'm assuming that Klein is using the word "forced" for a reason, which may not be true. It may just be sloppy writing!

 

[ILOKAL]

And yet Klein says neither IR nor his attorney will speak with his agency. If true, that doesn't jive with him being the informed source.

The source could be an unrelated third party who observed something "on the mountain".

Or, it could be a third party who observed some post "behavior" of someone within the camping foursome.

I agree that it doesn't "sound" as though IR has come forward with any information.

 

[ILOKAL]

Yes, it makes sense because that's exactly my point. I think we're on the same page. I'm splitting hairs about this because "abduction" is by definition "forced." To me, adding the word "forced" would emphasize that DeOrr didn't go willingly. I'm just assuming that if he went willingly, he knew the person he went with because it appears that stranger abduction (which would be "forced") has been ruled out (at least the Rubicon and other campers). But I suppose it's possible that he went willingly with an unknown stranger.

I'm assuming that Klein is using the word "forced" for a reason, which may not be true. It may just be sloppy writing!

I don't think abduction by definition is necessarily forced. Many children have been "abducted" by a parent without having any idea they HAVE been abducted. IMO

ETA: I want to make it clear that I don't believe either parent "abducted" DeOrr and harmed him in any way whatsoever!

 

[MBK]

The 3rd of three numbered points in the media release is:

"The team has NOT ruled out this case as a death - either accidental or with intent. "

This seems key. In order for there to be a death, there certainly does not have to be an abduction.

 

[ILOKAL]

The 3rd of three numbered points in the media release is:

"The team has NOT ruled out this case as a death - either accidental or with intent. "

This seems key. In order for there to be a death, there certainly does not have to be an abduction.

But not a "forced abduction", which is MY point.

 

[Lilibet]

I don't think abduction by definition is necessarily forced. Many children have been "abducted" by a parent without having any idea they HAVE been abducted. IMO

ETA: I want to make it clear that I don't believe either parent "abducted" DeOrr and harmed him in any way whatsoever!

I agree. If you read my original post trying to make sense of Klein's use of the phrase "forced abduction" I posted a link to the dictionary definition of abduction. The main meaning involves "force." The exception to that is the legal use of the term abduction when it applies to illegally removing a child from its parents or legal guardians. As I said, that would not necessarily be forced. These two definitions are why I was trying to figure out what Klein may have meant when he used the phrase "forced abduction."

I'm not implying that DeOrr's parents harmed him. I'm just trying to make sense of what seemed to me to be either a deliberately or ignorantly redundant phrase used by Klein. But this discussion is getting way more complicated than I ever intended! JMO

Link to my original post:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...round-10-July-2015-15&p=12295288#post12295288

 

[desert-blue]

I feel that abduction of any sort has been ruled out. MOO.

 

[ILOKAL]

I agree. If you read my original post trying to make sense of Klein's use of the phrase "forced abduction" I posted a link to the dictionary definition of abduction. The main meaning involves "force." The exception to that is the legal use of the term abduction when it applies to ilegally removing a child from its parents or legal guardians. As I said, that would not necessarily be forced. These two definitions are why I was trying to figure out what Klein may have meant when he used the phrase "forced abduction."

I'm not implying that DeOrr's parents harmed him. I'm just trying to make sense of what seemed to me to be either a deliberately or ignorantly redundant phrase used by Klein. But this discussion is getting way more complicated than I ever intended! JMO

Link to my original post:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...round-10-July-2015-15&p=12295288#post12295288

I agree . IMO, Klein used the term deliberately to send a message . . . .

 

[Trident]

I feel that abduction of any sort has been ruled out. MOO.

I believe it IS possible, but I'm not sure of the whys or wherefores. It is much easier to believe in the cougar.

 

[Purplepixii]

And yet Klein says neither IR nor his attorney will speak with his agency. If true, that doesn't jive with him being the informed source.

The source could be an unrelated third party who observed something "on the mountain".

It's not an "unrelated third party" though (see number 1/ below). Whilst looking for the quote about who the informed source is I pulled out a lot of info, partly to help me get my thoughts in order and partly for those who don't access FB. I believe the following is allowed as KIC is a legitimate FB site akin to a legitimate LE page which is allowed. Hopefully this helps someone else too.


From the Q&A session held by Klein Investigations & Consulting on FB on 11/01/16:

1/ Re the witness that came forward over the weekend of 09/10th January 2016: "A person with direct knowledge. Not heresay." (my note: this means it is one of the four persons present as, legally, anything else would be considered hearsay).

2/ The information received from the witness neither affirms nor changes the direction KIC were going with the investigation. The information was gathered by a witness that was scared to come forward because of all of the publicity on the case.

3/ In response to being asked how KIC / LE know DeOrr Jr was at the campsite "There is a reason why LE and our team is not giving the public any evidence at this time"

4/ The scent dog was thrown off by the spreading of cremains (which have nothing to do with this case)

5/ Q - Was there ever video that places Deorr in that truck on that day riding to the campground? A - We will not comment on video that was found. (my note: so there IS video as this is usual "speak" when wishing to neither confirm nor deny).

6/ If the campsite had been secured from the start KIC think that it could have helped with finding DeOrr Jr

7/ The parents were away from the campsite for a total of 17 minutes (during which time DeOrr allegedly disappeared)

8/ Scent dogs did not detect DeOrr Jr's scent at the campsite (my note: kids don't shed as many skin cells as adults & are kept "too clean" these days anyway)

9/ When asked if KIC believed that DeOrr Jr was at the campsite (the word campsite is specifically used), the response was that KIC believe he was "on the mountain"

10/ The previous criminal history re drugs is not pertinent to this case

11/ Cell pings pertinent to this case have been obtained


From the statement issued by Klein Investigations & Consulting 15/01/16:

1) The team has ruled out any attack by a wild animal - beyond a reasonable doubt. There is no evidence to support this theory whatsoever.
(my note: It wasn't an animal)

2) The team has ruled out a forced abduction of DeOrr Kunz, Jr. - beyond a reasonable doubt. There is no evidence to support this theory whatsoever.
(my note: The opposite of forced is voluntary. Thus it could be a willing abduction (ie someone DeOrr Jr or his family knew and something that was arranged))

a. Investigators have determined beyond a reasonable doubt, there is no evidence to support the sighting of a black Rubicon Jeep.
(my note: It wasn't a stranger in a black Jeep - there was NO black Jeep)

b. Investigators have determined beyond a reasonable doubt, there was no secondary party in the immediate proximity of the Timber Creek campground that has not been vetted and cleared that could have participated in a forced abduction.
(my note: It wasn't a stranger at or near the TC campground)

3) The team has NOT ruled out this case as a death - either accidental or with intent.
DeOrr could be alive
DeOrr could be dead


Other pertinent FB postings by KIC:

16/01/16 @ 01:35 - KIC advise that there has been a request to delay publishing statement for 12-24hrs

16/01/16 @ 13:51 - KIC publish the statement

16/01/16 @ 15:40 - KIC state "this case is very very fluid at this time, and investigators have been working 24 hours a day over the past three days regarding “information” that has been provided to them."




In addition to the above are some of my thoughts

An arranged "abduction" could be involved (if not abduction in the way we understand the word then an arrangement to have DeOrr Jr removed by persons known to the perpetrator)

It's not impossible that DeOrr Jr was never at the campsite - "on the mountain" and "at the campsite" are very different expressions

Who has the power to request / demand that the statement publication is delayed? LE? FBI? And why? I'd love to know if it was edited at the request of whoever before being published.

As of 11th January 2016 IR hadn't spoken to Klein Investigations. Between 11/01 - 15/01 it's not impossible contact was made, especially if there was a hint of a report being released.

We've still not heard publicly from GGPa - I wonder if he might be the witness that has finally come forward?

 

[ILOKAL]

I believe it IS possible, but I'm not sure of the whys or wherefores. It is much easier to believe in the cougar.

I agree, except if DeOrr was "abducted" (not forced but went willingly) by one of the foursome.