ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #9

[Onebest]

Haven't posted since thread 4 or so; I tried to keep posting the 1st you tube video Nate did where he shows where they walked. My biggest question since day 1 is what is the track record of the SAR dogs? I feel they messed up with tracking him.

The first two dogs deployed were not SAR K9's. Sheriff stated in unedited interview posted yesterday that the first two dogs were his own tracking K9 and one from Salmon ID, both Law Enforcement K9's. I think we can have faith in him that those were top quality resources doing as good a job as could be asked for.

[video=youtube;FV-h82eVQ1M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV-h82eVQ1M[/video]

 

[Inthedetails]

I agree. When it was placed in the hands of FBI, that is one of the reasons I really suspected abduction. If they thought he just got lost, I don't think they would be involved. It seems like they suspect abduction or a crime of some sort. The sheriff insists abduction is at the bottom of the list, yet he called it a crime scene in the interview yesterday. I would surely like his opinion of what happened to little DeOrr! He didn't just vanish or disappear! MO, he was either abducted or his little body is still in the campground area and has been missed in the searches. Early on, the sheriff didn't think he was carried away by an animal...so what does that leave?

I know the words "crime scene" are getting a lot of attention, but it could be an innocent slip from someone who works in LE. He deals with crime scenes all the time, and perhaps he said "crime scene" out of habit, not because he considers the campsite a crime scene. I'm still leaning toward tragic accident with the little boy wandering away.

I could be completely wrong, of course.

 

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

As I said earlier, IIRC, the FBI does not investigate missing persons unless there is evidence of a kidnapping (ransom note or other firm proof). When I mix that with the sheriff referring to the site as a crime scene, I believe there is proof of foul play that we are not privy to. There is something in the physical evidence that the sheriff turned over to the FBI that points toward that, IMO. Behavioral evidence is one thing and is open to strong interpretation even by experts but physical evidence is compelling. Thank you to those of you that also found the sheriff's description of the site as a crime scene to be a red flag.

 

[starfire]

Who is "they" when the sheriff says that's where they went in reference to the store. The parents? The parents and little Deorr? Or the entire crew?

Never mind...I see where Bowerman said little Deorr went.

I wonder how he knows little Deorr was at the store and if it's based solely on what the parents told him. He never says that any of them were seen by any witnesses there, or that they were all captured on surveillance cams, and indicates the receipt as why he believes they were there.

“I don’t believe they have surveillance, but we have, uh…a receipt that we documented that they purchased certain items. They were on the receipt. The time was stamped on the receipt, and so, we believe, ya’ know, that’s where they went.” -- Sheriff Bowerman

I wish LE would clear up the time the parents were at the store and if any witnesses remember seeing them there -- all 3 of them, especially little Deorr -- because that is a major piece of the puzzle. A witness seeing Deorr at the store would be the last time anyone saw him before he went missing (aside from the people he went camping with) so that info is vital to the case.

 

[Cardinal47]

Personally, I think there is something off with the grandfather's comments that little DeOrr can't walk on level ground without falling. I just get an impression that DeOrr sr's father is the type of person that exaggerates when he speaks, like an old time story-teller. There are just some people that generally do that when they speak.

In the long interview, dad said "he's a goer and a mover but he does not go away from his parents" and "He's pretty small for his age but he moves pretty good, and that was our concern." I don't think little DeOrr had that much trouble getting around. He is 2 1/2, not a toddler just learning to walk. IMO

Darn I went through several pages but I can't find it now. Somebody quoted somebody....saying the road up to the reservoir is steep and a toddler in oversize cowboy boots could not make it up there.

Wish I could find it...sorry.

Since you did say you think the video might be of the reservoir I am going to post it again. What a beautiful place.

[video=youtube;mEk7Fe-GzDo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEk7Fe-GzDo[/video]

 

[dek]

Thank You, OneBest. Good information.

What do you think it means that the dogs kept returning to the campsite? Does it mean anything?[/QUOTE

Sounds like dog gave a negative at reservoir, end of trail, no find. Dog circled back to start to see if he could pick up any other direction of travel. Doesn't sound to me like there was one to be found. Sheriff does not say his dog followed scent down to the creek or over the embankment. He specifically says they went from the campground UP to reservoir. It would be interesting to see that on the map.

I didn't read anything about any cadaver dogs reacting like this any where during the investigation.

"Unlike search and rescue dogs, which are typically trained to bark and claw where they sense someone in need, cadaver dogs are usually trained to sit quietly or lie down when they detect human remains."

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-cadaver-dog.htm

 

[Hatfield]

The first two dogs deployed were not SAR K9's. Sheriff stated in unedited interview posted yesterday that the first two dogs were his own tracking K9 and one from Salmon ID, both Law Enforcement K9's. I think we can have faith in him that those were top quality resources doing as good a job as could be asked for.

[video=youtube;FV-h82eVQ1M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV-h82eVQ1M[/video]

That was another huge bias thing for me when I heard the Sheriff used his own dogs at first.
Just another bad sign for me that critical time was lost right at the beginning.

His dogs maybe the best trained dogs ever OR maybe not. Maybe he had bias in wanting the dogs to be the hero.

It was good that other dogs were brought in and that is a good sign. So in the long run I think they had good dogs eventually show up. Its just at first I think some critical time was lost.

Which brings up something I just cant shake about this case. (modsnip)

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I have a question: I’ve seen posts asking why there isn’t more media coverage. Yet I also constantly hear from following cases: It’s up to the parents to generate media coverage. So in this case, we have parents who refuse to talk to the media, but apparently, this case should be all over the news? Why is this case exempt from the rule?

 

[neesaki]

.

As I said earlier , it is doubtful DeOrr headed in the direction of his parents , otherwise they would have encountered him on their way back to the campsite

Most likely DeOrr headed in the opposite direction because he saw Issac go that way earlier (without Issac realizing it , or knowing it)

Green X marks the campsite
Red dot parents
Lavender dot approximately Issac
Orange dot steep creek bank

Most likely the child stepped over the edge of the steep bank and tumbled into the creek , just a bounce or two and he is in the water , no scent trail for dogs to follow

Look at the creek , many deep spots , water runs over large rocks , around large rocks , and under large rocks. The body is likely caught deep under one of those rocks , held there by the undercurrent , invisible to searchers , not traceable by dogs

It even looks like the water stream percolates underground in one place and rejoins again on the left side at 1:57 in the video

Plenty of places to trap a small body that is 1/10 the the size of some rocks
And the water current running under the rock will hold it there for a long time.

http://www.ktvb.com/story/news/loca...andfather-believes-boy-was-abducted/30321903/


.
View attachment 80253 View attachment 80252 View attachment 80251

Thanks so much for the pics Arnie I have to say I hadn't realized before how hazardous that creek is. I can imagine a small toddler like little Deorr being swept away for some distance before something happening as you described. Or, leaving him the victim of a predator such as a Mountain Lion or wolf. JMO

 

[starfire]

I have a question: I’ve seen posts asking why there isn’t more media coverage. Yet I also constantly hear from following cases: It’s up to the parents to generate media coverage. So in this case, we have parents who refuse to talk to the media, but apparently, this case should be all over the news? Why is this case exempt from the rule?

At some point, somewhere, I read that several national news outlets reached out to the parents but they declined to be interviewed. Has anyone else read that? It may not be true.

 

[Hatfield]

At some point, somewhere I read that several national news outlets reached out to the parents but they declined to be interviewed. Has anyone else read that? It may not be true.

I heard it somewhere too. Could not tell you where I saw it but it has been talked about here that they stopped talking with media.

Some of it is easy to understand because Media and SM can be brutal. But if they want more people to be on the lookout for the boy then unfortunately you have to take the good with the bad.

 

[Onebest]

I didn't read anything about any cadaver dogs reacting like this any where during the investigation.

"Unlike search and rescue dogs, which are typically trained to bark and claw where they sense someone in need, cadaver dogs are usually trained to sit quietly or lie down when they detect human remains."

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-cadaver-dog.htm

In the previously posted Sheriff's Report to the Commissioners
http://lemhiweb.com/content/search-recap
and the Sheriff's unedited interview from yesterday

It wasn't the cadaver dogs that kept returning to camp, it was the trailing dogs that were initially utilized by the sheriff who stated they left the campground and went up to reservoir and then kept returned to campground.

We have not read anything else in print that I am aware of about the other live find dogs that were deployed and what their behavior was.

The only thing I remember we have read about the cadaver dogs is that they hit (indicated) on the reservoir and that is where the whole issues with cremains dumping came into play. We never read where the cadaver dogs hit on anything else besides the water. A cadaver dogs alert can be a lot of different trained responses depending on the dog/handler training ie: sit, down, recall or bark at source. JMO and to the best of my recall.

 

[wondering25]

At some point, somewhere, I read that several national news outlets reached out to the parents but they declined to be interviewed. Has anyone else read that? It may not be true.

During the NG episode it said that they had reached out to the parents but they had not responded by airtime. It was a printed thing on the utube part.. i dont know how else to describe it.

 

[haven71]

In the Sheriff's description of the three people at the campground: IR was truthful and the parents were good.

Which definition is the strongest to you - truthful or good?

I would have to say truthful. Maybe he stated that IR was being very truthful because HIS story matched what the other 3 said about him when being questioned separately. Like GGP and parents each vouched for his whereabouts and activities.

Good sounds like a general statement about the Mom and Dad. Maybe he didn't say truthful because he feels or knows the parents are withholding information as per the other POI's separate accounts, but have been cooperative otherwise.

 

[Cardinal47]

I have a question: I’ve seen posts asking why there isn’t more media coverage. Yet I also constantly hear from following cases: It’s up to the parents to generate media coverage. So in this case, we have parents who refuse to talk to the media, but apparently, this case should be all over the news? Why is this case exempt from the rule?

MOO is that when parents appear in front of a camera numerous times and the story is featured on Nancy Grace it generates interest. GMA and Today usually invite persons of interest to their shows. NG does follow up.

With that said if the main people don't want the publicity and don't appear in front of a camera then it remains local and on WS and FB pages.

Some people are ready and willing to make appearances. Others not so much. Some people are naturally shy.

Recently I was putting together an album from the Summer and noticed not one picture of my dear DIL. She avoids the camera and she is uncomfortable being in pictures. She would never do well in front of a microphone.

So perhaps DeOrr's parents have said it all and just don't want to do that.

Which leads me to thinking they all might know something about abduction either by a stranger or somebody known to the family.

I would think if there was the possibility he was abducted they would have missing posters everywhere. Friends usually organize to start that kind of campaign.

Maybe no organizers in this camp or perhaps they do have an idea who has DeOrr and they are treading lightly.

I find myself changing my mind all the time about what could have happened to DeOrr.

MOO

 

[ClaireNC]

At some point, somewhere, I read that several national news outlets reached out to the parents but they declined to be interviewed. Has anyone else read that? It may not be true.

Yes, Starfire, I posted that before. It is considered rumor because it came from a journalist friend of mine who has been in contact with some of the news outlets. They were told that some of the national channels did reach out to the family in the first few weeks, but the family refused to give any interviews.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

I really think the Grandpa was just trying to emphasize that DeOrr was not physically capable of taking off walking and wandering so far he couldn't be found, rather than saying he has some type of disability or delay. Little kids trip over nothing at times, and out there he was on uneven ground with rocks, sticks, brush, etc that would have made slow going even on the steadiest of feet.

It's natural to want to believe an abduction happened over believing an accident happened, because in an abduction there's a chance the child is alive. The problem here is that this campground is simply NOT easily accessible, and anyone coming or going in a vehicle would be heard, and the likelihood of someone on foot being there, and being able to snatch little D without a sound is miniscule.

The end effect is that in this situation, the parents' belief in abduction ends up making them look suspicious because it's such an unlikely scenario. Please note this isn't me blaming them, just pointing out how their early statements have ended up making them look suspicious rather than hopeful.

 

[Onebest]

That was another huge bias thing for me when I heard the Sheriff used his own dogs at first.
Just another bad sign for me that critical time was lost right at the beginning.

His dogs maybe the best trained dogs ever OR maybe not. Maybe he had bias in wanting the dogs to be the hero.

It was good that other dogs were brought in and that is a good sign. So in the long run I think they had good dogs eventually show up. Its just at first I think some critical time was lost.

Which brings up something I just cant shake about this case. Lets assume that the rumor is true that the Sheriff had ties to the family of the missing boy.

So they decide to go camping to a spot they never went to before and the boy goes missing and BINGO the Sheriff knows them and BINGO again the Sheriff happens to have search dogs of his own.

Sure, it could be sheer coincidences. I just don't like coincidences in cases like this.

Question ie: critical time loss? Do you know if SAR K9 Resources are closer to the campsite then the SO?

 

[TheGambler]

TxJan, thank you so much for letting me know that Nate said it was a 20 min. drive to the store. I just remembered wrong which is normal.

On another note, I think the friend looked so drugged up. When the parents said they didn't know who would want to hurt them by taking Deorr (my words), I think drug dealers get revenge in just this manner when drug deals go bad. Of course, I'm dreaming up things. This is not fact but it is what I thought of.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Also - the photo being discussed showing Little D looking bow legged is from last summer, so he was probably only about 16-18 months old when it was taken.