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

[giagreen]

Someone among the four is guilty of doing, the others of protecting ? Just a thought that keeps recurring to me. And then there's GGP's "memory issues" and IR's issues (?) whatever that might mean. And GGP was oxygen dependent or he wasn't, then he was. Then there's the evidence that was taken for analysis by LE, and the mysterious "ancillary" issues with the other two POI, I mean why even bother to bring that up if it means nothing?

To me it's to convenient to just say well we didn't expect them to pass anyways. Something is very wrong with that imo. It bothers me. Probably because polygraph test are not even allowed in court for those reasons alone. And the two questions they failed seems like questions they'd know the answers if he had wondered away.

I have no idea what they asked them in the ldt but we know they asked if they new where DeOrr was and what happen to him. Wouldn't they ask if they had hurt DeOrr or if an accident happen? Yet SB makes it very clear they passed the rest of the test. Did LE not flat out ask if they hurt their child? Seems like a question they'd ask.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[giagreen]

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.

You just got me thinking now about the comment Klein made about it being a federal offence to lie to an FBI agent.
Maybe some how all that does play into this one way or another.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[persimmon]

To me it's to convenient to just say well we didn't expect them to pass anyways. Something is very wrong with that imo. It bothers me. Probably because polygraph test are not even allowed in court for those reasons alone. And the two questions they failed seems like questions they'd know the answers if he had wondered away.

I have no idea what they asked them in the ldt but we know they asked if they new where DeOrr was and what happen to him. Wouldn't they ask if they had hurt DeOrr or if an accident happen? Yet SB makes it very clear they passed the rest of the test. Did LE not flat out ask if they hurt their child? Seems like a question they'd ask.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

Asking if they hurt DeOrr might be too open ended and if they had hurt him in the past that could alter readings.

 

[Beezneez]

I don't see what that last case has to do with this, aside from establishing that over the years the use of physical evidence has been held to an increasingly accurate standard. To say that evidence realized as faulty 16 years ago, from a conviction 30 years ago should somehow cause doubt to the potential use of evidence today is inaccurate.

 

[giagreen]

Asking if they hurt DeOrr might be too open ended and if they had hurt him in the past that could alter readings.

Any question they asked could be open ended. Kind of like do you know what happen and where he is. Imo you couldn't get anymore open ended then those two questions.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[persimmon]

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.

Right. But isn't it suspicious that the couple who are claiming their son was abducted didnt remember this fact until Vilt became involved and somebody purportedly called in a tip?
If they truly believed DeOrr had been kidnapped, wouldn't they have brought the jeep story up right away? This argument I got from crazy backward speech guy. But it makes all kinds of sense.

 

[persimmon]

Also on the witness call to Vilt regarding a Jeep and man acting strangely, if you watch Vilt's interview where he discusses that, he specifically states that the witness wished to not be named. I'll have to get the exact wording but it implies the witness is not anonymous but simply doesn't want her name in the public.

 

[Hatfield]

Right. But isn't it suspicious that the couple who are claiming their son was abducted didnt remember this fact until Vilt became involved and somebody purportedly called in a tip?
If they truly believed DeOrr had been kidnapped, wouldn't they have brought the jeep story up right away? This argument I got from crazy backward speech guy. But it makes all kinds of sense.

Agree. Which is why I think it would really help this case if LE could trace that call that went into the PIs office. If LE can find out who made the phone call tip and find out if that story about the jeep and kids was false or not.

Its about the only thing I have been able to think of to at least get some solid information one way or another. The information could be used as ammunition to further this case.

 

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

February 15 update

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/02/investigation-continues-into-deorr-kunz-disappearance/


IDAHO FALLS — Officials say they are continuing to investigate the case of missing toddler DeOrr Kunz, Jr. even though there has not been any new information publicly released recently.

Lemhi County Sheriff Chief Deputy Steve Penner tells EastIdahoNews.com investigators have nothing new to say, but Penner says he will keep the public informed with significant developments.

Philip Klein, a private investigator working on the case, says his team is “putting the final touches” on their investigation, but has nothing to report right now.

<modsnip>

 

[Hatfield]

Also on the witness call to Vilt regarding a Jeep and man acting strangely, if you watch Vilt's interview where he discusses that, he specifically states that the witness wished to not be named. I'll have to get the exact wording but it implies the witness is not anonymous but simply doesn't want her name in the public.

That struck me as strange too which is why I think the tip is a purposely false lead. Because if you call in an important tip then surely you would not need to hide out who you were. Something of this importance and you want to remain anonymous just doesn't sound right to me.

I think LE would find out the person was making it up and if the person is related to any of the 4 there or know those 4 there, then this case could be solved before the day is out by confronting them with those known facts. Once they are known.

 

[persimmon]

That struck me as strange too which is why I think the tip is a purposely false lead. Because if you call in an important tip then surely you would not need to hide out who you were. Something of this importance and you want to remain anonymous just doesn't sound right to me.

I think LE would find out the person was making it up and if the person is related to any of the 4 there or know those 4 there, then this case could be solved before the day is out by confronting them with those known facts. Once they are known.

But if the tip did come in on an anonymous tipline for instance, can LE trace it? That would seem to violate the sanctity of anonymous tips. Idk the answer

 

[Hatfield]

But if the tip did come in on an anonymous tipline for instance, can LE trace it? That would seem to violate the sanctity of anonymous tips. Idk the answer

I'll have to dig up an article where I saw Vilt discussing it. I took it that he received a call directly to his office and had asked them on the phone whether they had called in the tip officially. I think he said they told them they did.

But it would mean that he got a call directly from them was how I took it, and that should be traceable if LE can get a warrant. I am not sure a judge would be willing to grant a search warrant for Vilts phone records though for something like this.

Maybe they would since it does involve a child missing. Hard to say. Let me see if I can find article that talks about the call coming into his office.

 

[ILOKAL]

Asking if they hurt DeOrr might be too open ended and if they had hurt him in the past that could alter readings.

That should have been revealed in the pre-test interview and the control questions adjusted accordingly.

 

[persimmon]

I'll have to dig up an article where I saw Vilt discussing it. I took it that he received a call directly to his office and had asked them on the phone whether they had called in the tip officially. I think he said they told them they did.

But it would mean that he got a call directly from them was how I took it, and that should be traceable if LE can get a warrant. I am not sure a judge would be willing to grant a search warrant for Vilts phone records though for something like this.

Maybe they would since it does involve a child missing. Hard to say. Let me see if I can find article that talks about the call coming into his office.

I missed that but I noticed there are several video interviews where Vilt discusses the tip. I cannot seem to find the one I recall watching.

OT but inline with discussion earlier, VDK and JM place DeOrr at the store when they allege an older man was staring at him.

 

[bessie]

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 got the impression that was based on what they picked up from LE and the search and rescue teams. Not to say anyone shared that opinion with them. But after observing all weekend, and witnessing all of that tremendous effort with no results -- possibly overhearing remarks like "no way, he's not here" -- they came away convinced that he wasn't. Someone posted about the drone yesterday, and how VK mentioned that it detected a tiny insect repellent can. That's a good example of how it was impressed upon him that if DeOrr was on that mountain, he would have been found!

I've never understood the harsh reaction to VK's reaction. It was very genuine, imo, and trust me, I'm nobody's fool. Expressing gratitude toward the people who were there to help? I've found myself doing the same in dire situations, and then later wondering why the hell I was so thankful. But I knew why. Because despite the outcome, I felt fortunate that caring individuals had put forth their best effort. That is what I sensed coming from VK. And the comment about what day is it? Yep, said that, too. So coming from a person in a very frightening, high stress situation, none of it seemed hinky to me.
Of course for now, I accept LE's findings, and will wait to see the outcome, and continue to pray that little DeOrr will be brought home very soon.

 

[bessie]

That should have been revealed in the pre-test interview and the control questions adjusted accordingly.

Link, please.

 

[MBK]

VK talked about the searchers with more animation and detail than he did about his own son. IMHO!!!!!!

 

[ILOKAL]

Link, please.

Let me go find it. It's the same one I provided to you before.

 

[neesaki]

Also on the witness call to Vilt regarding a Jeep and man acting strangely, if you watch Vilt's interview where he discusses that, he specifically states that the witness wished to not be named. I'll have to get the exact wording but it implies the witness is not anonymous but simply doesn't want her name in the public.

Right, she wasn't anonymous because Local News 8 interviewed her, she's in the video at this link. She just didn't want the public to know who she was, and I can't say I blame her.

http://www.localnews8.com/news/new-leads-in-missing-deorr-kunz-case/35276162

 

[ILOKAL]

Link, please.

Here it is. Obviously there are many. This is just one.

http://www.privatecop.com/ploygraph-lie-detector/polygraph-frequently-asked-questions.html