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

[iluvmua]

I wonder why the other 2 911 calls were never released

 

[desert-blue]

I forgot to add it to my reply that JM's time was listed wrong as someone else said the same thing there, I believe that whoever was posting had the times wrong.

I thought Klein clarified the times to be 14:22, 14:26 and 14:28. There was some confusion at first, but then it was clarified. However, even if the times are incorrect (maybe the clarified times are still not right, who knows), I'm still wondering about the third 911 call. Also, JM is adamant that she called at 2:36 - that's an 8 minute difference that I've never understood either. Could be a difference in the clock on her phone versus the 911 clock but in this day and age with automatic time settings, I'd think they wouldn't be that far off. MOO.

 

[desert-blue]

I wonder why the other 2 911 calls were never released

I wonder too. Even if the third call was a dropped call, they still have not released DK's call.

 

[Sillybilly]

Bringing visitors' comments over from Facebook and discussing them is a violation of TOS.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?65798-Etiquette-amp-Information

SOCIAL MEDIA LINKS, e.g., FACEBOOK and TWITTER

Approved Pages/Profiles

Individuals
Victim (missing or murdered person)
Suspect (as indicated by LE)

•Links may be used to direct members to posts made by a victim or a suspect.
•Copying and pasting, or taking screen caps, directly from these pages is not allowed.
•Paraphrasing is okay.
•Posts by friends and visitors are off limits.
•Do not link to an individual’s (victim or suspect) social media page if you are not 100% certain it belongs to the correct individual.
•If a social media page is set to private and you get in the back way, you may not post what you find. Private means private!

 

[Aunt_Tulip]

I was only going by what the deputy said and the Klein statement. I haven't seen the Q&A. They seemed to have cleared everyone else. To me, that indicates none of them had information because they were not involved in any way...including being a witness, imo. Someone among the four could have been afraid to speak up, however.

I still say "previously withheld" means they had talked to the person before and the information wasn't given at that time, but I could be wrong. They would say someone came forward instead if it was a person not known to them, imo.

Yep, its really hard to tell with the information they put out. Here is the quote from Klein's Q&A on their FB page.

"It is information gathered by a witness that was scared to come forward because of all of the publicity on the case. We are vetting the information and it will take us a few days to do it - then compare it to what we have."

 

[CoverMeCagney]

I remember when this first happened, my suspicious mind made me query dad's trip in the truck to get better phone coverage. How long was he gone, where did he go, has that been reported?

 

[Sillybilly]

Just a matter of opinion, but I haven't known of a missing child's case where a reward was discouraged by LE.

I don't have time to look for more, but a quick google search brought this one up:

from:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...f-c39efea5f95e.html+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

"I want my little boy to come home."

She said there has been talk of offering a reward for some time, but police discouraged it at first.

"We offered to do it earlier, but the police asked us to hold off until they ran out of leads," she said.

Although the above case was in the UK, I doubt LE decision-making is all that different when it comes to considerations regarding offering rewards. JMO

ETA: OOPS .. above case was in Greenwich, NY ... not the UK.

 

[Deleted member 718]

On the EIN Facebook page, NE responds to viewer comments about NG- He says that he misspoke about the parents going up to the resivor so I'm glad that is cleared up so this case will not get anymore confusing than it already is.

Did anyone watch the Nancy Grace Christmas eve special Bring them home for Christmas? We have the short teaser video from East Idaho News with Nate, but I missed the full broadcast from NG and have been unable to find a transcript.

"Grace interviewed EastIdahoNews.com reporter Nate Eaton, Lemhi County Sheriff Chief Deputy Steve Penner, private investigator Philip R. Klein and others during the DeOrr Kunz segment."

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/1...be-featured-on-nancy-grace-christmas-special/

 

[CoverMeCagney]

I don't have time to look for more, but a quick google search brought this one up:

from:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...f-c39efea5f95e.html+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca



Although the above case was in the UK, I doubt LE decision-making is all that different when it comes to considerations regarding offering rewards. JMO

ETA: OOPS .. above case was in Greenwich, NY ... not the UK.

It's a brilliant idea - they set the reward at £25,000 to be reduced at the end of each month.

 

[iluvmua]

I guess the timeline is going to be crucial in finding out what happened to Deorr.

jmo

 

[travelbug]

I thought Klein clarified the times to be 14:22, 14:26 and 14:28. There was some confusion at first, but then it was clarified. However, even if the times are incorrect (maybe the clarified times are still not right, who knows), I'm still wondering about the third 911 call. Also, JM is adamant that she called at 2:36 - that's an 8 minute difference that I've never understood either. Could be a difference in the clock on her phone versus the 911 clock but in this day and age with automatic time settings, I'd think they wouldn't be that far off. MOO.

BBM Perhaps she read the time when she finished speaking with the 911 operator and not when she placed the call. moo

 

[ILOKAL]

I guess the timeline is going to be crucial in finding out what happened to Deorr.

jmo

Didn't the Klein spokesperson say they had 90% of the timeline complete?

 

[LietKynes]

Just marking my spot... my .02 is that there isn't that much more progress in this case than there was a week or so after little DeOrr went missing.
Can't think why that is ; but my hunch is that he fell into a hole or slipped and went into some water -- and they just haven't found him yet.
IMO.
Apologies for the gloomy outlook.
I haven't forgotten about this little cutie.

 

[TeaTime]

Hmmm. "Information 'gathered' by a witness" and "a witness with direct knowledge, not hearsay" and "previously withheld information" are all very interesting but confusing. How many witnesses does this suggest?

There is Witness A who gathered information. If the information was gathered from an eye witness, for example, (Witness B), then it is not hearsay, but rather direct knowledge of what Witness B said and which Witness B withheld from LE. This suggests 2 witnesses but Witness A has come forward. Witness B is still reluctant?

Witness A could be anyone from a family member, pastor or PI. Witness B could be anyone who either witnessed what happened to DeOrr (present at the scene) or witnessed some post incident behavior that was suspect.

The Witness withholding the information is said to be fearful of coming forward because of the publicity of the case? This doesn't sound right. Why would publicity create fear of reporting what was/was not seen?

Why would the family not want to post a $10K reward? Could it be because Witness B would be more likely to come forward and tell things that the family does not want revealed?

Not an abduction by human or animal. He didn't wander off. He was on the mountain and there is a witness who knows more than he/she has told.

The truth will out. If Witness B was questioned by LE previously and lied, he/she is facing obstruction of justice charges. Hopefully this threat is enough for this person to come forward and reveal what he/she knows.

 

[Elle*Bee]

http://www.postregister.com/article...vestigator-believes-deorr-kunz-jr-dead#sidr-1

"Klein said he called and told DeOrr’s family members about his theories over the weekend and said it was a “very emotional” phone call. Klein said even his team of investigators became caught up with emotion while discussing the case in what Klein calls his “war room.”"

 

[iluvmua]

Just marking my spot... my .02 is that there isn't that much more progress in this case than there was a week or so after little DeOrr went missing.
Can't think why that is ; but my hunch is that he fell into a hole or slipped and went into some water -- and they just haven't found him yet.
IMO.
Apologies for the gloomy outlook.
I haven't forgotten about this little cutie.

I wish you were right, but KI said that he was either killed via accident or intentionally.

 

[desert-blue]

http://www.postregister.com/articles/featured-news-daily-email/2016/01/18/investigator-believes-deorr-kunz-jr-dead#sidr-1

"A Texas private investigator does not believe a Jeep Rubicon is connected with the disappearance of DeOrr Kunz Jr. Nor does he believe the boy is being held by a family member, or anyone else.

He believes DeOrr is dead."

 

[iluvmua]

http://www.postregister.com/article...vestigator-believes-deorr-kunz-jr-dead#sidr-1

Klein said the suspicious black Jeep previously reported by people in Leadore and DeOrr’s mother, Jessica Mitchell, was unfounded.

“That was a farce, we know that for a fact,” Klein said.

 

[renarde]

http://www.postregister.com/article...vestigator-believes-deorr-kunz-jr-dead#sidr-1

Klein said the suspicious black Jeep previously reported by people in Leadore and DeOrr’s mother, Jessica Mitchell, was unfounded.

“That was a farce, we know that for a fact,” Klein said.

Those are some strong words.

It's going to be interesting to see if Klein continues to get paid after that. I wonder how the raffle / benefit went.

 

[Hoosier952]

http://www.postregister.com/article...vestigator-believes-deorr-kunz-jr-dead#sidr-1

Klein said the suspicious black Jeep previously reported by people in Leadore and DeOrr’s mother, Jessica Mitchell, was unfounded.

“That was a farce, we know that for a fact,” Klein said.

It almost makes it sound like he is stating JM lied with the intention of misleading the investigation. Am I reading that correctly?