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

[kammiemc]

"those who seek to find him, and are seeking justice for him".

Can that not be done without defiling and hurting the parents during the seeking?How does LE solve the cases they DO solve? Do they sit around a table discussing every possible scenario under the sun, no matter how bazaar? Or do they follow the evidence? Maybe THAT'S why these outrageous theories come to be . . . . because there's just no evidence to follow. IMO

What is preposterous theory to one is not a preposterous theory to another. Frankly, some of the most bizarre theories had nothing to do with the parents at all.

Certainly, parents harming their children or covering up for negligence is something that happens all the time. It is not even slightly bizarre.

For me, it's not that complicated. The parents are lying. They always have been lying. They are covering up for what happened. They do not want their son to be found. They have never wanted him to be found.

Like Klein said, bringing charges is complicated. He said it's not a question as to IF the parents will be charged, but WHAT those charges will be.

You can keep saying that LE/FBI/Klein have nothing, but we just don't have a clue what they have. Like so many other cases, they might have a ton of info that points to the parents without a doubt. But they're not in a hurry. They want to have enough to press for the most charges possible.

Some people were harsh on Bowerman for not being candid with the public about where his investigation was going. It's ironic that when he IS forthcoming that the parents are the suspects, now he's "defiling" them because random public citizens think he really knows nothing.

We don't know what evidence they have, that is being processed or that will be found.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pepelepolecat]

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.

I admit that some things struck me as strange from the start, but thanking people upfront didn't at all. I believe I related many threads ago how I will thank my kids *while they are doing something I asked them to do because it motivates them -- and I just feel it's more polite. I would probably have been on TV thanking all the searchers and rescue workers for giving up so much of their daily lives to help me even had they not as yet been successful. *shrug* Maybe that's the exception rather than the rule, but being married to someone who had a pretty thankless first responder job for a while, I have seen firsthand how much sacrifice goes into it. Those people deserve our thanks nmw. imo/ime.

 

[ILOKAL]

If they were less than truthful in their answer to that specific control question (for example) that would cause their answers to the relavent questions to perhaps be misinterpreted, IMO.

 

[pepelepolecat]

If this lady is telling the truth and it wasn't someone trying to mix up the investigation then there is no way I'd want my name out there either for the creep guy to find out. Nope....no way.



Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

I think she was probably telling the truth and probably trying to be helpful. I think most people want to be helpful. And I'd not want my name out there either, tbh.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

If they were less than truthful in their answer to that specific control question (for example) that would cause their answers to the relavent questions to perhaps be misinterpreted, IMO.

Genuine questions: Do you think it logical that 9 poly's between both parents by LE and FBI experts would all have the same error? You wouldn't think they'd spot and fix such problems before publicly making them suspects?

 

[giagreen]

Yeah, this is surprising to me because it seems like she is more known than I originally thought. News 8 definitely seemed to talk with her directly so LE could easily find out who she was.

So why was this tip thrown away then. Maybe LE checked it out with her and decided it was nothing.

I hope LE did visit with her to make sure they knew who she was and where she lived at least.

The story seemed like it could be important and the way the parents latched onto it seemed like it was maybe made up to me. Because would this not be one of the first things you would have said to LE if you knew about this jeep and some guy that was in the area.

The whole story about the jeep seemed like it was made up after the boy went missing because it did not come out till well after.

I guess we just have to hope LE checked things out all the way.

Maybe their composite sketches (if they both did one) didn't match at all?

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[Hatfield]

Back to the first interview and the Dad thanking the searchers. I really didn't have a problem with that at first until the interview went on and on and very little real information came out about what really happened.

I was all ears trying to understand and I never did really get any good information as to what really happened. There was so much side information like thanking the searchers over and over and other side distractions that I began to think it was done to delay the questions.

He did finally come around to describing the 911 call and all but I felt there was very little real substance as far as what happened. I am sure it is not easy being interviewed by a news place but the whole interview really bothered me because I was trying so hard to understand what happened and I came away with very little that helped me understand.

 

[desert-blue]

If they were less than truthful in their answer to that specific control question (for example) that would cause their answers to the relavent questions to perhaps be misinterpreted, IMO.

I'm wagering that the professionally trained FBI polygraph specialists know what they are doing and how to interpret the results.

 

[persimmon]

Yeah, this is surprising to me because it seems like she is more known than I originally thought. News 8 definitely seemed to talk with her directly so LE could easily find out who she was.

So why was this tip thrown away then. Maybe LE checked it out with her and decided it was nothing.

I hope LE did visit with her to make sure they knew who she was and where she lived at least.

The story seemed like it could be important and the way the parents latched onto it seemed like it was maybe made up to me. Because would this not be one of the first things you would have said to LE if you knew about this jeep and some guy that was in the area.

The whole story about the jeep seemed like it was made up after the boy went missing because it did not come out till well after.

I guess we just have to hope LE checked things out all the way.

It seems like another example of deception. Honestly, it could be one of the examples SB cites when he says their story consistently changes. Anybody in their right mind would report such an incident if their child did in fact go missing.

 

[kammiemc]

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.

For me, it wasn't any one of those things alone, but everything put together, along with a gut feeling that they were not genuinely panicked about their son's welfare. They seemed to be faking it. IMO. But I realized that was totally my own impression, based on my own experiences. I was ready to have my suspicions quashed.

I guess now that the parents are suspects and LE says that the parents have indeed changed their stories constantly and haven't been truthful about their knowledge of what happened to their son and where he is, it makes me think that my first impression, that they weren't being truthful, is probably in line with reality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ILOKAL]

Genuine questions: Do you think it logical that 9 poly's between both parents by LE and FBI experts would all have the same error? You wouldn't think they'd spot and fix such problems before publicly making them suspects?

How would the examiner know? If the parents are adamant about their answer to the control question then nothing will change on subsequent tests if the same control question is asked. That's the way I understand it anyway. They sometimes use a control question as a relevant question, but I would expect the same answer, IMO. That "might" be what Bowerman is referring to when he says they are less than truthful in not telling him what they know. jmo

ETA: I'm not sure I know what you mean they would spot and fix those problems? They can't FORCE an answer to their liking. They can't change the physiological responses. They can't change the results. Perhaps the reason all tests came back inconclusive is because they answered the control and relevant questions the same every time. jmoo

 

[persimmon]

Back to the first interview and the Dad thanking the searchers. I really didn't have a problem with that at first until the interview went on and on and very little real information came out about what really happened.

I was all ears trying to understand and I never did really get any good information as to what really happened. There was so much side information like thanking the searchers over and over and other side distractions that I began to think it was done to delay the questions.

He did finally come around to describing the 911 call and all but I felt there was very little real substance as far as what happened. I am sure it is not easy being interviewed by a news place but the whole interview really bothered me because I was trying so hard to understand what happened and I came away with very little that helped me understand.

I agree completely. He sais so much but so little. Part of that I blame on NE who should have directed the interview much better but when given the stage to make a genuine plea, we learn very little about DeOrr and his "disappearance" and when NE tried to reign in VDK and get he and JM to address facts such as rumors they might want to address, again they thought of themselves and largely misinterpreted (i believe) the use of the term "rumors" and addressed VDKs work situation which was innane and failed to say anything about possible pois or sightings or provide anything substantial for the public to get a clear image of what transpired. This is what you get when someone is busy lying and convincing and jusifying actions instead of simply telling the truth.

Sorry...this is one run on sentence! I have a difficult time posting from my phone. I hope this makes some sense because the grammar and structure is pretty sad.

 

[kammiemc]

Yeah, this is surprising to me because it seems like she is more known than I originally thought. News 8 definitely seemed to talk with her directly so LE could easily find out who she was.

So why was this tip thrown away then. Maybe LE checked it out with her and decided it was nothing.

I hope LE did visit with her to make sure they knew who she was and where she lived at least.

The story seemed like it could be important and the way the parents latched onto it seemed like it was maybe made up to me. Because would this not be one of the first things you would have said to LE if you knew about this jeep and some guy that was in the area.

The whole story about the jeep seemed like it was made up after the boy went missing because it did not come out till well after.

I guess we just have to hope LE checked things out all the way.

Perhaps it wasn't thrown away. They probably checked it out and realized it had nothing to do with the case in Leadore, IMO.

It was AFTER this woman's report that Vilt claimed (in his interview) that he called DK and asked (I guess for the first time?) if he had noticed any cars in the parking lot at the Stage Stop, and Vilt claimed DK described the Rube using the exact same language as the woman in Swan Valley. I think it's more possible that Vilt wanted so badly to create a lead he made up that DK said that or he suggested it to him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ILOKAL]

I'm wagering that the professionally trained FBI polygraph specialists know what they are doing and how to interpret the results.

And the result was inconclusive, aka "no opinion" on all nine tests. Must be a reason! imoo

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

How would the examiner know? If the parents are adamant about their answer to the control question then nothing will change on subsequent tests if the same control question is asked. That's the way I understand it anyway. They sometimes use a control question as a relevant question, but I would expect the same answer, IMO. That "might" be what Bowerman is referring to when he says they are less than truthful in not telling him what they know. jmo

I'll be honest I don't know much about poly's and control questions (polygraphs aren't used in the UK) but what I picture from your words is the examiner(s) doing 9 tests and scratching their chin(s) looking puzzled. I really can't imagine this is how it went down and even if it did it wouldn't result in LE making them suspects and for the extremely conservative (IMO) SB to effectively call them liars.

 

[desert-blue]

And the result was inconclusive, aka "no opinion" on all nine tests. Must be a reason! imoo

Except that they consistently failed on the questions about what happened to DeOrr.


"Bowerman says portions of polygraph tests administered to Kunz and Mitchell have come back “less than truthful” – including questions about knowing what happened to DeOrr, why the child disappeared and where the toddler is located."

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/01/lemhi-sheriff-deorrs-parents-have-been-less-than-truthful-are-suspects-in-childs-disappearance/

 

[ILOKAL]

Can you provide statements that support your assertion?

My assertion that there must be a reason why all nine tests were inconclusive? Because there is a plus and minus system given to the graph based upon the examinees physiological reactions to the questions. There is a range for NDI (no deception indicated) and a range for DI (deception indicated). There is a range between the two. If the result falls in that range the test is determined to be inconclusive which is also known as "no opinion".

 

[desert-blue]

Back to the first interview and the Dad thanking the searchers. I really didn't have a problem with that at first until the interview went on and on and very little real information came out about what really happened.

I was all ears trying to understand and I never did really get any good information as to what really happened. There was so much side information like thanking the searchers over and over and other side distractions that I began to think it was done to delay the questions.

He did finally come around to describing the 911 call and all but I felt there was very little real substance as far as what happened. I am sure it is not easy being interviewed by a news place but the whole interview really bothered me because I was trying so hard to understand what happened and I came away with very little that helped me understand.

I agree - the interview was odd. The parents basically omitted everything that occurred prior to the 911 calls in their first interview, instead choosing to ramble about the searches and rumors and abduction. The time before the 911 calls is coincidentally the exact same time period as Klein's "window." The parents don't want anyone to know happened during that window - they didn't share anything then and they're not saying now. When pressed for details, they were forced to tell a tale (myth). It's not surprising that they can't keep their stories straight.

 

[persimmon]

OT of DeOrr but in regard to polygraph exams and the law, they have validity and can and are being used in various ways as an accurate measure of a criminals honesty. The following link provides such an example:http://converus.com/sex-offenders-california-take-lie-detector-tests/
To summarize, sex offenders in California who are currently on parole are subjected to routine poly exams that focus on questions that would help determine the likelihood of a repeat offense. Therefore, they are not some backward speech pseudo science nonsense that has no bearing on reality.

SB strikes me as honest and he tried to give the parents the benefit of the doubt. Look at the number of times they took and shoqed deception on these exams. Moreover, he stated repeatedly that there was other behavioral analysis intepreted by FBI agents skilled in that field. The results for the poly are held up against other infornation in arriving at a final analysis. They lied.

 

[persimmon]

My assertion that there must be a reason why all nine tests were inconclusive? Because there is a plus and minus system given to the graph based upon the examines physiological reactions to the questions. There is a range for NDI (no deception indicated) and a range for DI (deception indicated). There is a range between the two. If the result falls in that range the test is determined to be inconclusive which is also known as "no opinion".

No, your assertion that the interpretation of the exams administered to VDK and JM resulted in the FBI or LE reading them as "no opinion." I do not recall SB stating that the results were "no opinion."