ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - # 25

[Hatfield]

In trying to narrow down what is most likely what happened here is JMO on it.

JMO
Going to rule out a real honest accident with no culpability at all. Because if they were not responsible for the boys death in any way and it was a real accident then the boy would be there when they called 911.

So throwing that one out altogether.

For the other theory about giving the boy away. That one did have some possibles like mentioned already. Lack of emotion and other things.
But I think I am going to throw that one away because of 2 main reasons.
1-Someone else would have to be willing to commit illegal adoption and go along with this plan. I don't think anyone would be willing to do it.
2-If someone really wanted the boy then they could have pursued a legal adoption instead of this huge public ruse.

So I am going to throw that one out for now too and put it second after the last theory.

The last theory which seems most plausible is some sort of manslaughter or worst case murder where one of them had a hand in the boy ending up dead. It may not have been intentional but somehow they feel they would get arrested for his death if anyone knew the real story of what happened so they had to hide the boy.

It just seems most plausible based on what we know. I think the give boy away theory is what we hope happened because it is the only one where the boy would still be alive. We can keep that in our list because that truly would be the best outcome. IMO it has to be 2nd on the list though.

 

[sonjay]

You make really good points. I agree in that, if it were an accident, whatever caused it must have been legally and morally worse than lying about it for eight months. Must have been pretty bad. Accident can mean different things. I guess the big distinction I make in my mind is between accident and premeditated murder. Did they plan the trip to disappear him? I dunno but I hope not. Any forms of an accident seems slightly less sinister.

There's a big gap between what I referred to above as a "true accident" and premeditated murder. If little DeOrr misbehaved and the parents got angry and started hitting him, and their anger got out of control and they kept hitting him until he died..... that's probably not premeditated murder, IMO. If they got angry and hit him once and he fell and hit his head and died, that's not premeditated murder, IMO. But in those scenarios, his death would have resulted from deliberate acts by the parents — as opposed to a true accident -- say, he really was left with GGP, and as a move-er and a go-er, he got out of GGP's sight, fell in the water and drowned.

If an adult got angry at another adult and started hitting him, and kept hitting him until he died.... that person would almost certainly be charged with some type of manslaughter. If an adult got angry at another adult and hit him, and the other person fell and hit his head and died, that person would likely be charged with some lesser manslaughter charge, but still some sort of manslaughter. It doesn't matter that the person didn't intend for the other person to die. It's still an illegal act that resulted in the death of another. The law wouldn't consider it an accident, and I don't think it should be considered an accident if parents do it to their child either.

I agree that something like that would be less sinister than actual premeditated murder — the notion that they planned the trip with the intent of killing little DeOrr and disappearing his body on the mountain. That would be more sinister, IMO, and the law recognizes that kind of act as more sinister.

I still don't buy that it could possibly be a true accident. I also have trouble with premeditated murder. I lean toward the parents doing something on purpose that resulted in little DeOrr's death but possibly without the intention of killing him. Some form of manslaughter, IOW. Then they compounded it with their lies and cover-up. MOO and all that. I think some people might consider that to be "accidental," but I do not.

 

[mommylicious]

I don't think there's a single person posting or reading here who would NOT do something if they thought they saw "Deorr". I don't think he was abducted, I don't think he was adopted out, and I believe he is dead, but if I thought I SAW him anywhere, I'd take a photo, phone the cops, grab a license plate number, etc., etc. I haven't moved on because of my belief that he's dead. . . none of us have.

Sorry, I should have been a little more clear. I know people haven't moved on (we're all still here, 25 threads later). It was just how flippant mom was in talking about her belief that people have just accepted it and moved on. If my child were truly missing and I believed they'd been abducted I'd be angry and frustrated that people had taken the word of LE (or whomever) that my child was dead. I'd be pleading with them to keep looking. She didn't really seem to care that, in her mind, people didn't seem to care. I hope that makes more sense.

 

[sonjay]

In trying to narrow down what is most likely what happened here is JMO on it.

JMO
Going to rule out a real honest accident with no culpability at all. Because if they were not responsible for the boys death in any way and it was a real accident then the boy would be there when they called 911.

So throwing that one out altogether.

For the other theory about giving the boy away. That one did have some possibles like mentioned already. Lack of emotion and other things.
But I think I am going to throw that one away because of 2 main reasons.
1-Someone else would have to be willing to commit illegal adoption and go along with this plan. I don't think anyone would be willing to do it.
2-If someone really wanted the boy then they could have pursued a legal adoption instead of this huge public ruse.

So I am going to throw that one out for now too and put it second after the last theory.

The last theory which seems most plausible is some sort of manslaughter or worst case murder where one of them had a hand in the boy ending up dead. It may not have been intentional but somehow they feel they would get arrested for his death if anyone knew the real story of what happened so they had to hide the boy.

It just seems most plausible based on what we know. I think the give boy away theory is what we hope happened because it is the only one where the boy would still be alive. We can keep that in our list because that truly would be the best outcome. IMO it has to be 2nd on the list though.

I agree 100% with this analysis.

 

[Kairi'sMom]

http://m.localnews8.com/news/exclusive-deorr-kunzsparents-extended-interview-with-chelsea-brentzel/38478346

6:32 VDK: (Shaking head no) "I don't know what happened to my son other than I left him with a trusted and respected adult (takes a quick breath sits up straighter for a moment then slumps down) we come back and he's gone a short time later- and he's gone. (looks into space ahead of him, shakes head no slightly ) I-I have-The last time I heard my son's voice and seen him...that's where I'm at and [garbled words " I said"? "I'm set"? "I stay"?] in my mind. And that-my memory's gettin' pretty faded, I'd like some new ones with my son. And I'm gonna keep hoping -and going on that I'm goin' to get my new memories and keep my memories goin' with him. Cuz I want (shakes head yes)...I have so many things in my life I want to do with my son-teach him, to show him (as he's shakes his head no) and I'm not giving up on that that I'm gonna be able to do that. (Lots of micro-expressions here. Then he gulps a moment later)

Interesting words he's chosen and interesting story he's told. In his chain of events he implicates something occurred with the "trusted and respected adult" while they were gone, when they came back Deorr was "gone a short time later". Then, "He's gone."

I'd love to see the FBI's behavioral and statement analysis on this part.

 

[MBK]

Sorry, I should have been a little more clear. I know people haven't moved on (we're all still here, 25 threads later). It was just how flippant mom was in talking about her belief that people have just accepted it and moved on. If my child were truly missing and I believed they'd been abducted I'd be angry and frustrated that people had taken the word of LE (or whomever) that my child was dead. I'd be pleading with them to keep looking. She didn't really seem to care that, in her mind, people didn't seem to care. I hope that makes more sense.

Maybe I wasn't clear! I knew what you were saying. I thought it was very flippant of her, too, to just act as if "the public" had written Deorr off, when really, SHE has.

 

[Hatfield]

She acted like someone who was jokingly calling herself a helicopter mom or something. There was a casualness that is completely at odds with having a missing child. I hope she wasn't expecting a lighthearted giggle from the audience, "Oh, you silly grieving mom!"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JMO
I think I must have missed a recent interview and need to go back and find the link and view that.

It seems very obvious to me that they have researched other missing child cases and that really bothers me. So many times during this case I have felt that they have done a lot of research into other missing cases.

Some of that is maybe natural if it happens to you but what bothers me is it seems they are grasping at other cases to use parts of it to fit into their own. I just get a sense they lack the real emotion and so they search other cases to try to find out what is the proper way to act or things to say.

Its just really bizarre to me. They should be having true sad feelings on their own and should not need other examples to show them.
There seems to be a lack of empathy and that is scary to me.

 

[GennaB]

That made me sad, too, Midge. I kind of couldn't believe that the example she used to explain DeOrr's personality started with her being depressed and irritated in the kitchen and him coming in saying "mama" and trying to cheer her up. I didn't like the picture that painted at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think it's a negative thing that her son cheered her up when she was depressed. I have severe depression, especially in the winter and my 4 year old has cheered me up when I'm having a bad day. He'll come in and jump on me and say "hey mama! Turn that frown upside down!" And I laugh every time and we tickle and giggle and I feel better and pull myself together. All mothers have moments of feeling irritated or depressed, so its not fair to hold those basic human emotions against a person. Painting a picture of an angry home life based on thay statement is just us speculating. She may have simply been trying to describe what a loving boy he was, how empathetic, even at a young age and honestly, since she is distressed (even for selfish reasons) she may miss those moments of having someone loving her unconditionally. On national TV, she had to say *something* nice about her son and his attention to her is probably what she misses the most. Selfish, cold people still want to feel love and I'm certain that baby Deorr worshipped her, as babies do to thier mothers. She sure hasn't been feeling the love lately!

 

[Rayemonde]

I don't claim to have a clue what happened, but I tend to guess accidental death. I can't wrap my head around a pre-planned abduction scenario for a few reasons. But for anyone who can, if JM or they both gave DeOrr away and he's out there, what do you make of the parents pushing that he was abducted and that people should be looking for him. You'd think they would worry that someone looking might see him and the gig would be up! They are the only ones who haven't ruled out abduction. You'd think instead they would be saying he must have wandered and succumbed to the elements so that people wouldn't be on alert to look for him. .

If they wanted to make money out of DeOrr's disappearance, it makes sense to push the abduction angle. We need money to search for him! Some pedophile could have him! But I don't think they planned the disappearance to make money (like Karen Matthews did), because if that had been the plan they would have been all over the media pleading for help finding him. Instead, they avoided the media. Sure they were happy to accept donations, but keeping a low profile was more important to them than making as much money as possible, imo.

Karen Matthews gave her daughter to a relative, and then reported her missing and was all over the media pleading for the return of her daughter. She wanted people to look for her, but she didn't have to worry about them actually finding the girl because the relative was keeping her drugged and restrained in an attic The plan was to wait for a large reward to be offered, and then the relative would pretend to find the girl, claim the reward and split it with the mother.

 

[Hatfield]

If they wanted to make money out of DeOrr's disappearance, it makes sense to push the abduction angle. We need money to search for him! Some pedophile could have him! But I don't think they planned the disappearance to make money (like Karen Matthews did), because if that had been the plan they would have been all over the media pleading for help finding him. Instead, they avoided the media. Sure they were happy to accept donations, but keeping a low profile was more important to them than making as much money as possible, imo.

Karen Matthews gave her daughter to a relative, and then reported her missing and was all over the media pleading for the return of her daughter. She wanted people to look for her, but she didn't have to worry about them actually finding the girl because the relative was keeping her drugged and restrained in an attic The plan was to wait for a large reward to be offered, and then the relative would pretend to find the girl, claim the reward and split it with the mother.

Wow. Thanks for the example of someone willing to hold a child for another person to split some money. I should have known it could happen. In that case it took 2 like minded sinister people for sure.

I guess Baloon Boy was kind of an example too for fame or money.

I found another case where someone was hiding a boy but this one was more of a custody issue I think.

http://www.aol.com/article/2014/11/...d-alive-hidden-behind-wall-near-atl/21000578/

 

[Rayemonde]

There's a big gap between what I referred to above as a "true accident" and premeditated murder. If little DeOrr misbehaved and the parents got angry and started hitting him, and their anger got out of control and they kept hitting him until he died..... that's probably not premeditated murder, IMO. If they got angry and hit him once and he fell and hit his head and died, that's not premeditated murder, IMO. But in those scenarios, his death would have resulted from deliberate acts by the parents — as opposed to a true accident -- say, he really was left with GGP, and as a move-er and a go-er, he got out of GGP's sight, fell in the water and drowned.

If an adult got angry at another adult and started hitting him, and kept hitting him until he died.... that person would almost certainly be charged with some type of manslaughter. If an adult got angry at another adult and hit him, and the other person fell and hit his head and died, that person would likely be charged with some lesser manslaughter charge, but still some sort of manslaughter. It doesn't matter that the person didn't intend for the other person to die. It's still an illegal act that resulted in the death of another. The law wouldn't consider it an accident, and I don't think it should be considered an accident if parents do it to their child either.

I agree that something like that would be less sinister than actual premeditated murder — the notion that they planned the trip with the intent of killing little DeOrr and disappearing his body on the mountain. That would be more sinister, IMO, and the law recognizes that kind of act as more sinister.

I still don't buy that it could possibly be a true accident. I also have trouble with premeditated murder. I lean toward the parents doing something on purpose that resulted in little DeOrr's death but possibly without the intention of killing him. Some form of manslaughter, IOW. Then they compounded it with their lies and cover-up. MOO and all that. I think some people might consider that to be "accidental," but I do not.

In similar cases where children are accidentally killed by a beating that goes too far, the parents.are usually charged with 2nd degree murder. Or in states that have Felony Murder charges, they are charged with felony murder. Sometimes the parents are convicted of 1st degree murder though, because if you really lose your temper and for a moment you intentionally beat your child so hard you know it could kill them, them immediately regret it, it can still be classed as premeditated. Premeditation can take place in moment.

 

[sonjay]

In similar cases where children are accidentally killed by a beating that goes too far, the parents.are usually charged with 2nd degree murder. Or in states that have Felony Murder charges, they are charged with felony murder. Sometimes the parents are convicted of 1st degree murder though, because if you really lose your temper and for a moment you intentionally beat your child so hard you know it could kill them, them immediately regret it, it can still be classed as premeditated. Premeditation can take place in moment.

Yeah, that's why I said it would probably not be premeditated murder if that's what happened. It would depend on the circumstances of the case, what could be proved in court, how good the respective attorneys are, and what the jury concludes from the evidence. So yes, it could be premeditated murder if it was a punishment/discipline/beating that got out of control.

In practical terms, while something like that is unbelievably bad to normal parents who don't beat their children, it doesn't carry quite as much horror as the thought of parents cold-bloodedly planning ahead of time to kill their little boy and disappear his body on a camping trip.

 

[Hippie Heart]

BBM. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not sure exactly what anyone on this thread means by "accidental." As I see it, there are at least two profoundly different types of "accidental death" possible:

1. An honest-to-god accident. Maybe accompanied by neglect, maybe not. The little boy fell into the water and drowned. Was run over by the truck in the dark. Wandered up behind someone swinging an axe and got clocked. Absolutely nothing intentional was done to the child.

2. "Discipline" or "punishment" that went too far and "accidentally" resulted in his death. He had a potty-training accident and what started out as a spanking ended in his death. He was misbehaving and was put in the truck for punishment, then died from hyperthermia. Yeah, it was an accident in that they didn't intend to kill him, but they did deliberately engage in conduct that resulted in his death.

If it was accident type #1, there's no reason that I can see for them to engage in this massive cover-up and web of lies. They should have been heartbroken and they should have called 911 the instant it happened. What loving parent doesn't call 911 the instant a serious accident happens to their child?

If it was accident type #2, I wouldn't even call that an accident. Legally, it would probably be some form of manslaughter, IMO. Voluntary or involuntary, I dunno. I could see parents lying and covering up if it was this kind of accident.

Myself, I completely reject the possibility of it being a true accident. I do consider it possible that it was a result of "punishment taken too far."

I tend to agree. IMO, there are 2 things that could have taken place. I don't think (or can't fathom) that these 2 fairly simple country-ish people would be part of a pedophile ring or would have premeditated his murder, especially given the apparently loving, extended family they both have. It seems both sides of grandparents were in his life and attached to him, imo, although I guess I could be wrong. I say this because of Deorr Kunz Sr. (Vernal's father) describing his close relationship with baby Deorr, and TBC's genuine looking grief.

So, I think there was an accidental (as in being run over, being shot, drowning from lack of being watched, etc.) death due to neglect or irresponsibility and these 2 are SO concerned with what others would think that they thought it better to cover it up than face the music about their lack of parenting/supervision skills. I say this because of the emphasis they have put on SM rumors, threats, etc. rather than expressing more grief, working to get their son's name out there, etc.

It seems completely ridiculous, however they seem young to me and her lack of parental involvement with her other 2 kids is off to me. I am a mother of 2 girls and I CANNOT IMAGINE leaving my 2 children with their father and having no custody. CANNOT IMAGINE IN MY WILDEST DREAMS. And I am not a perfect mother, but I love my kids WITH EVERY BONE IN MY BODY. JM does not strike me as that way, at all. She is cold, period. I did see tears in her eyes at one point, however the bending over pressing a tissue to her eyes with no visible tears coming out was not believable to me, at all. I realize everyone reacts differently to things, and I myself can cry easily and would be HYSTERICAL in her shoes, but it still seems off.

OK, sorry to go off on a tangent.

#2 Something was done to him that was so heinous that it HAD to be covered up. Was he actually seen at the campground on Friday by IR? Or was he just seen at some point on the trip? Could something have happened at the Silver Dollar and that's why that stop wasn't released until recently? Although if the timeline starts at 8 am, I guess that would eliminate the stop at the SD being a part of this. So back to #2. What could have been done to him? I'm not sure, but I only see these 2 scenarios as a possibility. In any event, they are suspects and I believe they are covering something up. LE has stated over and over and Klein as well, that there is zero evidence that points to an abduction and that these 2 know what happened and where he is.

So, were they so self centered that they callously threw their dead son away to avoid judgement for their lack of parenting skills/neglect/supervision, or did they cover up something incredibly heinous? Remember, child abusers and molesters don't fare too well in prison. Even criminals have a "code of ethics". I think the amount of concern for themselves throughout this whole ordeal has overshadowed their concern for their son.

All of this is JMO.

 

[ReadySet]

Rayemonde, your photos also remind me of this couple that lied and covered-up the death of the mom's son, Robert Manwill, in Boise in 2009. They reported him missing and there were massive searches for days. The couple helped with the searches, wore "Find Robert" t-shirts, and stood up at the press conferences crying about the missing child. Their charade lasted less than two weeks, however, because his body was found floating in a canal (with rocks in his pockets). His death was the result of the boyfriend's "punishments" and the mom kept quiet. Very sad case. :-(

source: http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/special-reports/article40697877.html

I've thought of Robert Manwill's case many times also.
Yes, hundreds-thousands? of people searched in Boise for Robert. The "parents" stood by and let it happen, all the time knowing Robert was dead. As I recall, they didn't ever speak in any of the pressers. A relative spoke for them. The relative maintained their innocence until the facts were overwhelming.
At the time of this case, I had not started following missing person's cases, and at first I believed these parents that they didn't know where he was. This was the beginning of my sad understanding that some parents fail their children in horrible ways.
This is also the case that helped me understand how witness accounts can be faulty. There were several people of all ages who insisted they had seen little Robert after he went missing. All their accounts were eventually discounted, when it was proven that Robert was dead at the time of their sightings.

 

[Hippie Heart]

Another thing re: JM's behavior.

As for her hair/makeup/piercing in the interview. I'm not as concerned by this because I believe Vernal's sister (twin?) Tanisha is a hair dresser. I can see her saying "let me at least do your hair, make you feel better".

What I do find strange and callous is that on the 6 month anniversary of her son being "missing", she did not post anything on FB, IIRC. Tanisha posted, publicly, a very long emotional post about her nephew. JM did comment something to the effect that she "always had a way with words". I think that is so bizarre. How do you not mention the anniversary of your missing son, if for no other reason than to remind people he is still "missing"? She's keenly aware than people follow them on SM. How can you forward posts about appetizers and cooking tips and cute outfits and not mention your son? :thinking::gaah:*If I am mentioning anything off limits, please let me know and I will delete.*

I wonder if she thought that by starting over with a new man, and being a little older when having Deorr Jr., that things would be easier or she would be happier. And then discovered that bam, guess what, I wasn't cut out for this motherhood thing after all. Again, I don't necessarily see her as a premeditating murderer, but never has she struck me as particularly emotional about her son and we already know she doesn't have custody of the other 2. To me all of this points to neglect being a very real possibility.

Also I didn't think her denial of murdering or disappearing her son to CB in the latest interview was convincing at all. I was very uncomfortable watching it because she just looked and sounded guilty. I'm not so sure about him. At one point he said "not to my knowledge" which was interesting given his earlier comment of "at least to me" in the same interview.

JMO, as always.

 

[ConcernedCitizenID]

Another thing re: JM's behavior.

As for her hair/makeup/piercing in the interview. I'm not as concerned by this because I believe Vernal's sister (twin?) Tanisha is a hair dresser. I can see her saying "let me at least do your hair, make you feel better".

What I do find strange and callous is that on the 6 month anniversary of her son being "missing", she did not post anything on FB, IIRC. Tanisha posted, publicly, a very long emotional post about her nephew. JM did comment something to the effect that she "always had a way with words". I think that is so bizarre. How do you not mention the anniversary of your missing son, if for no other reason than to remind people he is still "missing"? She's keenly aware than people follow them on SM. How can you forward posts about appetizers and cooking tips and cute outfits and not mention your son? :thinking::gaah:*If I am mentioning anything off limits, please let me know and I will delete.*

I wonder if she thought that by starting over with a new man, and being a little older when having Deorr Jr., that things would be easier or she would be happier. And then discovered that bam, guess what, I wasn't cut out for this motherhood thing after all. Again, I don't necessarily see her as a premeditating murderer, but never has she struck me as particularly emotional about her son and we already know she doesn't have custody of the other 2. To me all of this points to neglect being a very real possibility.

Also I didn't think her denial of murdering or disappearing her son to CB in the latest interview was convincing at all. I was very uncomfortable watching it because she just looked and sounded guilty. I'm not so sure about him. At one point he said "not to my knowledge" which was interesting given his earlier comment of "at least to me" in the same interview.

JMO, as always.

I think we have to be careful when saying JM or VDK didn't post anything on FB. How do we really know? I say this for two reasons: 1) perhaps they DID post something about Little DeOrr on a special anniversary but maybe their FB settings were restricted only to friends being able to view; and 2) if one of us WebSleuths DOES happen to be friends with JM or VDK on Facebook and their FB privacy settings are that only friends can see their posts, then we can't discuss what they say here on this forum per the TOS (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?291123-Social-Media-Facebook-Twitter-etc 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!).

On the other hand, VDK's twin sister, Tanisha, has been very vocal, I agree.

 

[giagreen]

Another thing re: JM's behavior.

As for her hair/makeup/piercing in the interview. I'm not as concerned by this because I believe Vernal's sister (twin?) Tanisha is a hair dresser. I can see her saying "let me at least do your hair, make you feel better".

What I do find strange and callous is that on the 6 month anniversary of her son being "missing", she did not post anything on FB, IIRC. Tanisha posted, publicly, a very long emotional post about her nephew. JM did comment something to the effect that she "always had a way with words". I think that is so bizarre. How do you not mention the anniversary of your missing son, if for no other reason than to remind people he is still "missing"? She's keenly aware than people follow them on SM. How can you forward posts about appetizers and cooking tips and cute outfits and not mention your son? :thinking::gaah:*If I am mentioning anything off limits, please let me know and I will delete.*

I wonder if she thought that by starting over with a new man, and being a little older when having Deorr Jr., that things would be easier or she would be happier. And then discovered that bam, guess what, I wasn't cut out for this motherhood thing after all. Again, I don't necessarily see her as a premeditating murderer, but never has she struck me as particularly emotional about her son and we already know she doesn't have custody of the other 2. To me all of this points to neglect being a very real possibility.

Also I didn't think her denial of murdering or disappearing her son to CB in the latest interview was convincing at all. I was very uncomfortable watching it because she just looked and sounded guilty. I'm not so sure about him. At one point he said "not to my knowledge" which was interesting given his earlier comment of "at least to me" in the same interview.

JMO, as always.

A lot of times on fb post don't actually show up.
I know that with mine all my game apps, food recipes, and some pictures will show up and people I am not friends with can see that....yet an actual post or status update will not show up for people who are not my friends. It all depends. She could of changed her privacy settings after realizing there is whole group dedicated to taking screen shots and picking it apart.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[Hippie Heart]

I think we have to be careful when saying JM or VDK didn't post anything on FB. How do we really know? I say this for two reasons: 1) perhaps they DID post something about Little DeOrr on a special anniversary but maybe their FB settings were restricted only to friends being able to view; and 2) if one of us WebSleuths DOES happen to be friends with JM or VDK on Facebook and their FB privacy settings are that only friends can see their posts, then we can't discuss what they say here on this forum per the TOS (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?291123-Social-Media-Facebook-Twitter-etc 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!).

On the other hand, VDK's twin sister, Tanisha, has been very vocal, I agree.

I am not friends with any of them on FB or any other SM. What I saw was public.

I agree they could've adjusted their settings, but why? Why post a recipe for the public but not acknowledge the anniversary? She knew people were watching her. To me, that makes more sense if you know he's dead or she/they had something to do with his disappearance.

MOO.

 

[iluvmua]

These 2 are a piece of work. jmo

 

[Hippie Heart]

A lot of times on fb post don't actually show up.
I know that with mine all my game apps, food recipes, and some pictures will show up and people I am not friends with can see that....yet an actual post or status update will not show up for people who are not my friends. It all depends. She could of changed her privacy settings after realizing there is whole group dedicated to taking screen shots and picking it apart.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

Hmm. I hear you but I saw info regarding searches, forwards about shaken baby syndrome, outfits, recipes, on and on. Hard to believe you would limit views on podts about your son, especially if you are really trying to be perceived as innocent. IMO there were no emotional posts because she isn't emotional about it. She already knows what happened. Allllll MOO.

ETA: I saw all of those public posts right before she deleted her acct. I'm pretty certain she was already aware of all the groups dedicated to screen shots, etc.