ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #21

[pepelepolecat]

Has any of this actually helped? How much has sm actually helped? From what the PI and SB has said all sm has done was make things harder. I'm not sure if I'd consider that helping as much as I'd consider it a problem.
It's a two way street. Not everybody lives life on sm. Not everyone is going to see flyers of him shared on fb.
But yet when they showed up to search the area after LE let them back in the video how many people where there? Next to none compared to how many have an opinion.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

Again -- what do you think the public needs to do? The public has ALSO raised funds to get billboards. Have those helped? The public has raised funds to hire a PI. Has that helped? In what way do you believe that WE, the public, can help beyond what we have already done? Give me something concrete. I'm sure many would be happy to participate.

It's not the public's fault DeOrr isn't being found.

 

[giagreen]

I feel like the case of Noah Chamberlain is/was somewhat similiar to Deorr's case in that in both cases, two little boys disappeared while outside when the adult who was supervising them (who was not the mom or dad) wasn't paying attention. Both cases had that "Is he lost or did something malicious happen?" element to it. I also think both boys were from pretty similiar socioeconomic backgrounds. Yet Noah's case got a lot more media coverage than Deorr's case. Why? It couldn't be the parents because Noah's parents didn't do any media appearances. I think it was because LE was very proactive with the media---they did plenty of press conferences. In a case where a child goes missing under those circumstances, I think you have a very small window to have the spotlight. People are following the case because they desperately want the child to be found---after a week or two, it becomes more and more likely (especially since LE is not saying the child was abducted) that the child is dead. I think that is true for most cases----they get 95% of their media coverage in the first couple of weeks/month. I think the people involved in the Kunz case from the parents to LE didn't take advantage of the small window they had to get maximum media coverage. It's really unfortunate but it doesn't even seem like the Boise media has much interest in this case.

Awww Noah Chamberlain [emoji29]
I agree for the most part. But I also feel what the media did pick up on was confusing and had a lot incorrect info.
I didn't follow along much with Noah's case as it just makes me sad. DeOrr was enough and now I'm just waiting for some type of resolution then I don't think I will ever follow a missing child's case again.



Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[Hatfield]

One thing I struggle with on this case is why did the parents seem to want to think someone abducted their child?

If they really had no idea where he went then wouldn't an animal like a cougar or bear could have taken him so I struggle with why they kept thinking someone took him.
There was no more evidence of that happening than if an animal could have grabbed him.

So why did they think abductor?

 

[pepelepolecat]

I don't think the problem is that anyone is trying to be mean as much as uneducated assumptions are being stated as fact.
I agree drugs make sense. So does them getting drunk and some thing happening. But we don't know that for sure. The PI has said it's not an issue.
I mean in her interview all she did was move her tongue around her teeth. That doesn't equal meth mouth. Or that she killed her child and hide his body.


Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

I must have missed the meth mouth accusations. And no, she doesn't look like she does meth. But drugs and alcohol are things that people would logically reach towards because it helps make sense of things that are otherwise senseless. That said, I think there'd be evidence of large volumes of alcohol being consumed or drug paraphernalia at the campsite, which would have led to a conclusion long before now, imo. Since there doesn't seem to've been such evidence, it's probably safe to say they weren't directly involved in his disappearance and presumed (by KI) death.

 

[giagreen]

Again -- what do you think the public needs to do? The public has ALSO raised funds to get billboards. Have those helped? The public has raised funds to hire a PI. Has that helped? In what way do you believe that WE, the public, can help beyond what we have already done? Give me something concrete. I'm sure many would be happy to participate.

It's not the public's fault DeOrr isn't being found.

Your getting a bit worked up over a comment I made in reference to flyers. Because yes I read over and over and over people on sm criticizing the parents saying they didn't put up flyers and that they knows this because they are somewhat local. At that point they could of printed of flyers and hung them up also. The parents can't be everywhere all at once. And where we're those same locals when they were out there searching? Possibly to busy on sm watching their interviews speculating that JM had meth mouth.

And without the benifit that the public so kindly donated money to was not held by the family then where would such great people have donated there money to? Like I said it's a two way street.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[MBK]

I think more importantly is how where they in the store. Even if they hurt DeOrr seems JM would still be crying. Where they happy? Look like they had been crying or have dirt Mudd on them?
We will never know as long as the clerk doesn't fully remember them to the point she had to see and meet them again to remember them.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

Wait, why would "they" be crying? And if either of the parents had hurt Deorr, that wouldn't necessarily make JM cry. If she HAD been crying (and there is no reason to think she was crying at all) . . . I would THINK that the little incident would be more memorable to ANYONE there. If I had a lady crying and a guy going on and on and on and on about how they were getting fries for his kid, and I was a store clerk, I'd sure as heck think something was wrong. I mean, at the very least, I'd think that he was trying to distract me into giving the wrong change. Or trying to distract me from seeing that the lady was crying. And then if you throw a crying kid (filthy or not) into the mix, heck, I don't think I'd forget that little incident rather quickly! ( I mean, it was several years ago, but there were 2 kids "lost" in Macy's that were found by a store clerk in the dressing room . . I couldn't help but watch and witness the whole incident, and I'll NEVER forget it!!!)

 

[persimmon]

One thing I struggle with on this case is why did the parents seem to want to think someone abducted their child?

If they really had no idea where he went then wouldn't an animal like a cougar or bear could have taken him so I struggle with why they kept thinking someone took him.
There was no more evidence of that happening than if an animal could have grabbed him.

So why did they think abductor?

To point the investigation away from the wilderness where they disposed of his body? That is my first thought. Claiming abduction clears all of them and muddles the facts enough to confuse everyone. Also, it works to create doubt and it makes them even more of the victims they consistently portray themselves to be.

 

[MBK]

One thing I struggle with on this case is why did the parents seem to want to think someone abducted their child?

If they really had no idea where he went then wouldn't an animal like a cougar or bear could have taken him so I struggle with why they kept thinking someone took him.
There was no more evidence of that happening than if an animal could have grabbed him.

So why did they think abductor?

Key question! Ya know, the only thing I can think is . . on Thursday night (it took us a WHILE to learn that they arrived on Thursday night, as we recall) . . . let's say while they were tossing back a few at the old bar and grill . . . Deorr was left to sleep in the car. At that time . . . he was abducted by someone with more or less nefarious purposes. Mom and Dad didn't realize this until the next morning, when they woke up and realized that . . gee. . .. little Deorr was on this trip, wasn't he? (Speculative scenario, and I'm not quite sure that even I believe it)

 

[Paulas88]

One thing I struggle with on this case is why did the parents seem to want to think someone abducted their child?

If they really had no idea where he went then wouldn't an animal like a cougar or bear could have taken him so I struggle with why they kept thinking someone took him.
There was no more evidence of that happening than if an animal could have grabbed him.

So why did they think abductor?

Yes. This was my biggest struggle with the case. I could go along with the possibility that the searchers missed DeOrr, but the abduction and the creep in a jeep really sealed my suspicions about the parents story, just ridiculous. (IMO)

 

[Beezneez]

There was also physical evidence in the death of Azaria Chamberlain but 32 years later we all know now that the evidence was bunk. 32 years it took to fully clear two wrongfully accused parents in the death and disappearance of their child.
The similarity in these two cases are somewhat scary. The camping trip, lynch mob mentality, people who were camping with them didn't beleive they hurt there child. The tunnel vision. Speculation, rummors, crazy wild theories, and the parents where said to be untruthful. And people couldn't wrap their minds around that a wild animal took the child and made jokes about it.

The saddest part is to this day "a dingo ate my baby" is still a laughing joke.
Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/u...an-scorned-by-australias-news-media.html?_r=0

The above link is a pretty good summary of the Dingo case. What strikes me as a pretty big difference here is the stance that SB has taken. He has not egged on rumors. He is very careful about LE influence on public speculation. Additionally I think evaluation of forensic physical evidence has advanced so incredibly far. Not to say that is it infallible or that human error is not possible, but there were some real blunders in that case. Also, we don't know what IR and GGP think. They might think it's possible something happened with the parents. They might think aliens came out of the lake & launched Deorr to the moon. They might, as IR said, only be aware that the kid seemed to disappear. And finally, the investigators in this case have stated clearly that there is no evidence whatsoever to support the idea of wild animal involvement. Azarias stained jumper was found within days of the disappearance. There is nothing, no trace, to indicate that little boy was removed from that campsite by an animal.
The speculation on JM and her personality does strike me as similar. I was really put off by watching Lindy Chamberlin describe how dingos peel their victims like an orange while simultaneously talking about how her infant child died. That is disturbing. Maybe she is a weirdo. Maybe she and JM and anyone who isn't always publicly totally enraptured by the glory of their own offspring 24/7 is a weirdo. Of course, you can't take it too far the other way either or you are definitely too obsessed with the kids & also a weirdo.
The point is that those are all little pieces to the puzzle that create the whole picture. This is just the way the human mind puts information together to create and idea. If there is more than one unexpected bit of info they get put together in a category. Missing kid+ chilling/weird statement/behavior from parent+ improbable explanation about what happened to the kid= a second look. Local investigators, County investigators, State level investigators and National level investigators are all highly trained, experienced and have concluded after several reviews that there is a criminal portion to this missing child case and the parents are the criminals.

 

[giagreen]

One thing I struggle with on this case is why did the parents seem to want to think someone abducted their child?

If they really had no idea where he went then wouldn't an animal like a cougar or bear could have taken him so I struggle with why they kept thinking someone took him.
There was no more evidence of that happening than if an animal could have grabbed him.

So why did they think abductor?

Well IF they didn't have anything to do with it then it seems like the PI and LE both said there was no evidence of a wild animal attack so they'd probably think the same. If they searched for 20 min then they probably realized there was no trace of an animal taking him.
And hope. Hope that's he's still alive and they'd get him back.

And just from personal experience I know that it's a question LE asks if a child is missing. For me it was over and over "can you think of anyone who'd take him" to the point I felt that the cops believed someone did and I was throwing everyone under the bus right down to the guy who walks past my house everyday who wears a red jacket.
Not saying that's why they went in that direction but I could see why they possibly would.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[pepelepolecat]

One thing I struggle with on this case is why did the parents seem to want to think someone abducted their child?

If they really had no idea where he went then wouldn't an animal like a cougar or bear could have taken him so I struggle with why they kept thinking someone took him.
There was no more evidence of that happening than if an animal could have grabbed him.

So why did they think abductor?

This actually made sense to me -- initially. I think were I in that position, I'd far rather think of abduction, which offers the possibility of getting my child back alive, than animal attack, which leaves little or no hope of survival.

In light of the recent changes in the direction of the case, I have no clue.

 

[MBK]

To point the investigation away from the wilderness where they disposed of his body? That is my first thought. Claiming abduction clears all of them and muddles the facts enough to confuse everyone. Also, it works to create doubt and it makes them even more of the victims they consistently portray themselves to be.

Yes, it gets well-meaning people (and some not so well-meaning) looking for him all over the country (if not the WORLD) and calling in tips. Puts a huge strain on the police force, using up resources that could be used locally . . . where the focus probably should be . . .

 

[pepelepolecat]

Your getting a bit worked up over a comment I made in reference to flyers. Because yes I read over and over and over people on sm criticizing the parents saying they didn't put up flyers and that they knows this because they are somewhat local. At that point they could of printed of flyers and hung them up also. The parents can't be everywhere all at once. And where we're those same locals when they were out there searching? Possibly to busy on sm watching their interviews speculating that JM had meth mouth.

And without the benifit that the public so kindly donated money to was not held by the family then where would such great people have donated there money to? Like I said it's a two way street.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

I'm not getting worked up at all. I understand that tone doesn't often convey in the written word, but I respectfully submit that you might have read more into my comment than was written.

The bottom line -- the public has helped. Their help, sadly, has come to naught. But they HAVE helped. It's not the general public's fault that some locals and people on SM have taken trolling to a new level. But that does bring something else to mind: Why would the locals not be standing behind this family? I know my neighbors would be doing everything they could to help out, and the community would more than likely be going the extra mile. I've seen them rally behind others in similar dire situations. So why is their community so reticent? Is it a cultural thing? (I'm genuinely asking. I have exactly one friend in Idaho, and she's military, so she's not even a native Idahoan.)

 

[bessie]

I feel like the case of Noah Chamberlain is/was somewhat similiar to Deorr's case in that in both cases, two little boys disappeared while outside when the adult who was supervising them (who was not the mom or dad) wasn't paying attention. Both cases had that "Is he lost or did something malicious happen?" element to it. I also think both boys were from pretty similiar socioeconomic backgrounds. Yet Noah's case got a lot more media coverage than Deorr's case. Why? It couldn't be the parents because Noah's parents didn't do any media appearances. I think it was because LE was very proactive with the media---they did plenty of press conferences. In a case where a child goes missing under those circumstances, I think you have a very small window to have the spotlight. People are following the case because they desperately want the child to be found---after a week or two, it becomes more and more likely (especially since LE is not saying the child was abducted) that the child is dead. I think that is true for most cases----they get 95% of their media coverage in the first couple of weeks/month. I think the people involved in the Kunz case from the parents to LE didn't take advantage of the small window they had to get maximum media coverage. It's really unfortunate but it doesn't even seem like the Boise media has much interest in this case.

Keep in mind that DeOrr disappeared in a very remote campground, atop a mountain in the middle of nowhere. IMO that makes a difference in terms of media coverage and public response. Based solely on my observation of missing children cases over the years, it appears that the closer to home, the stronger the reaction of the community. Which in turn drives media interest. JMO

 

[giagreen]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/u...an-scorned-by-australias-news-media.html?_r=0

The above link is a pretty good summary of the Dingo case. What strikes me as a pretty big difference here is the stance that SB has taken. He has not egged on rumors. He is very careful about LE influence on public speculation. Additionally I think evaluation of forensic physical evidence has advanced so incredibly far in the past 32 years. Not to say that is it infallible or that human error is not possible, but there were some real blunders in that case. Also, we don't know what IR and GGP think. They might think it's possible something happened with the parents. They might think aliens came out of the lake & launched Deorr to the moon. They might, as IR said, only be aware that the kid seemed to disappear. And finally, the investigators in this case have stated clearly that there is no evidence whatsoever to support the idea of wild animal involvement. Azarias stained jumper was found within days of the disappearance. There is nothing, no trace, to indicate that little boy was removed from that campsite by an animal.
The speculation on JM and her personality does strike me as similar. I was really put off by watching Lindy Chamberlin describe how dingos peel their victims like an orange while simultaneously talking about how her infant child died. That is disturbing. Maybe she is a weirdo. Maybe she and JM and anyone who isn't always publicly totally enraptured by the glory of their own offspring 24/7 is a weirdo. Of course, you can't take it too far the other way either or you are definitely too obsessed with the kids & also a weirdo.
The point is that those are all little pieces to the puzzle that create the whole picture. This is just the way the human mind puts information together to create and idea. If there is more than one unexpected bit of info they get put together in a category. Missing kid+ chilling/weird statement/behavior from parent+ improbable explanation about what happened to the kid= a second look. Local investigators, County investigators, State level investigators and National level investigators are all highly trained, experienced and have concluded after several reviews that there is a criminal portion to this missing child case and the parents are the criminals.

I agree that the big difference is the way SB has approached this situation.
And I have faith in SB. I've always liked him. But it doesn't seem like he has a lot to go off of other then inconsistencies. And I'm just very uncomfortable declaring guilt based on that alone as anyone should be imo

Nothing is full proof. And I think it was just last year a man who spent 30 years in prison who was wrongfully accused was released and exonerated from FBI testimony that put him away. So it's hard to say how far we have come in 30 years imo.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/21/fbi-jail-hair-mass-disaster-false-conviction

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[neesaki]

One thing I struggle with on this case is why did the parents seem to want to think someone abducted their child?

If they really had no idea where he went then wouldn't an animal like a cougar or bear could have taken him so I struggle with why they kept thinking someone took him.
There was no more evidence of that happening than if an animal could have grabbed him.

So why did they think abductor?

I think it could go one of two ways: Either they just wanted to believe he was still alive somewhere, Or they wanted the attention focused away from the campground and away from the four who were there.

 

[giagreen]

I'm not getting worked up at all. I understand that tone doesn't often convey in the written word, but I respectfully submit that you might have read more into my comment than was written.

The bottom line -- the public has helped. Their help, sadly, has come to naught. But they HAVE helped. It's not the general public's fault that some locals and people on SM have taken trolling to a new level. But that does bring something else to mind: Why would the locals not be standing behind this family? I know my neighbors would be doing everything they could to help out, and the community would more than likely be going the extra mile. I've seen them rally behind others in similar dire situations. So why is their community so reticent? Is it a cultural thing? (I'm genuinely asking. I have exactly one friend in Idaho, and she's military, so she's not even a native Idahoan.)

Sorry to be clear it was locals from timber creek area. So I'm not sure how well they actually new the parents.


Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[persimmon]

It's insane to keep arguing about the parents' complicity in this case. There's an anecdote somebody can provide to challenge any experts on any theory but that doesn't alter facts. This SM argument is not helpful and I think most of us have largely ignored anything some bitter locals have put out there. It would have done much for the parents to have ignored it as well instead of wrestling with pigs. The public has been generous to JM and VDK. They have opened their wallets, donated their time and resources to search, and opened their hearts to support efforts to bring DeOrr home. This case is not about VDK and JM its about DeOrr. Those people who will go back and search after the thaw are not going to do that because they seek to clear the good names of VDK and JM but because they want a child to have the dignity of being found and given a peaceful resting place. They want those who loves DeOrr to have some closure. Facts are facts and the facts we currently have indicate VDK and JM know where DeOrr is and are therefore playing a huge game at the expense of their son's right to be brought home and buried. There is no mob mentality at work here...there are who see the big picture and understand that their help is needed because the parents have not and will not step up and speak for the son. This is because they are angry that life is catching up with them and their story didnt convince everyone of what victims they are.

 

[Hatfield]

Well IF they didn't have anything to do with it then it seems like the PI and LE both said there was no evidence of a wild animal attack so they'd probably think the same. If they searched for 20 min then they probably realized there was no trace of an animal taking him.
And hope. Hope that's he's still alive and they'd get him back.

And just from personal experience I know that it's a question LE asks if a child is missing. For me it was over and over "can you think of anyone who'd take him" to the point I felt that the cops believed someone did and I was throwing everyone under the bus right down to the guy who walks past my house everyday who wears a red jacket.
Not saying that's why they went in that direction but I could see why they possibly would.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

Yeah I suppose trying to stay hopeful and wishing for a best outcome alone could lead the parents to want to think an abductor took him because then he at least could still be alive and recoverable.

And you are probably right about LE asking them if they knew anyone who could have taken him. That sure would put thoughts in their mind and could have influenced it.

I guess for me I was initially thinking animal over an abduction which is why it struck out to me as unusual because I surely thought if anything happened to him there at the campground then it would have likely been an animal versus some stranger abduction.

There is one thing we have brought up before and I sure hope LE has pursued it. It involved the alleged Rubicon Jeep sighting which some of us think is a false story called in by someone. The way I remember it is that alleged sighting was called into the first PI from someone. So LE could trace that phone call and maybe find out who made that call. If it is proven to be a faked story and depending on who made that call it could break this case wide open. LE could at least get some concrete evidence of someone trying to derail the investigation and I think charges could even be filed for false reporting or something.

It may be just enough to break open this case. I hope LE has thought to trace that call. I do wonder if they would be able to get a judge to get a search warrant for the PI's phone calls though because a judge may not be willing to allow a search warrant for his phone records.