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

[Cardinal47]

This case has gone completely cold in the strangest media black-out I have ever seen. I fear that whoever is responsible (if there is someone) has gotten completely away with it. We all know it happens....Caylee, Hailey, Korman, unfortunately the list goes on and on.

I think it goes cold because nobody is fueling the fire. Nothing new to discuss. We have pretty much reached the end.

We have commented and speculated on just about everything and still no DeOrr.

I had so hoped he would not join the ranks of Haleigh and Kyron.

Sad but true.

 

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

I think Bowerman said the FBI report would take 4-6 weeks. When would the six week mark be?

 

[Mickshawn]

I think Bowerman said the FBI report would take 4-6 weeks. When would the six week mark be?

So what happens after the FBI does its thing? Is there some public report that comes out?

 

[jashrema]

So what happens after the FBI does its thing? Is there some public report that comes out?

I think it's been about that long, hasn't it? The way everything has gone down, I wouldn't be surprised if this investigation "isn't released" to the public either. Very frustrating.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

This case has gone completely cold in the strangest media black-out I have ever seen. I fear that whoever is responsible (if there is someone) has gotten completely away with it. We all know it happens....Caylee, Hailey, Korman, unfortunately the list goes on and on.

Why/How is there a media blackout in this case, but not one for the thousands of murders and thousands of missing person case that happen each year?

 

[Arnie M]

.

It is not a "News Blackout" at all

It is simply no longer "News" .... it is now "Stale information" (in the literal sense)

There is nothing "New" to report

NEWS (definition)
--- information not previously known to someone.
--- newly received or noteworthy information, especially about recent or important events

Our problem is we are 99.9% "news junkies" and "true crime gossips" and only about 0.01% useful in finding missing people or solving crimes.

And we have become "bored" because there is nothing "new"

As far as the FBI report , I dont think we should expect much , I think the Sheriff has made a wise decision to have them look at everything as a "sober second look" and review everything. It also lets the FBI interview everybody again just to make sure all the stories are the same.

There is also the possibility the Sheriff has some hunches and prefers to have someone else (FBI) do the followup..

If it ever turned out to be a kidnapping , the Sheriff would be on the hotseat if he had not asked the FBI to look at the case. The way I understand it kidnapping is automatically an FBI matter

 

[starfire]

I think Bowerman said the FBI report would take 4-6 weeks. When would the six week mark be?

It was announced on 7/31 that the FBI was asked to assist. On 8/11 there was an update that everything had been turned over to the FBI. In the interview on 8/18 the sheriff said the FBI would have results back in 6-8 weeks. I'm not sure exactly when the 6-8 weeks started, but I am guessing it was somewhere around 8/11. That's just a guesstimate, but 6 weeks from 8/11 is 9/22; 8 weeks from 8/11 is 10/6.

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/08/lemhi-sheriff-opens-up-about-deorr-kunz-case/
http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/DeOrr-Kunz-Missing-Idaho-321484631.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/31/us-usa-idaho-toddler-idUSKCN0Q52OP20150731

 

[jmcgladr]

I think it goes cold because nobody is fueling the fire. Nothing new to discuss. We have pretty much reached the end.

We have commented and speculated on just about everything and still no DeOrr.

I had so hoped he would not join the ranks of Haleigh and Kyron.

Sad but true.

This should happen to no child (or adult) in the modern age! Frustrating that with all our technology, people can just disappear without a trace!

 

[katydid23]

According to the sheriff, GGPA told him he looked away for just a brief time and when he looked back, little Deorr was gone. I believe what's been told to US, although I'm NOT sure if it's an assumption or who even might have said it, is that at that point GGPA "assumed" little Deorr had gone over the bank to be with his parents. So it sounds like the parents and GGPA all knew little Deorr was staying behind with GGPA and that the parents thought this was fine and thought little Deorr would be good with GGPA by the campfire. When little Deorr disappeared, GGPA either SAW him go over the bank toward his parents or assumed that's where he had gone. That would explain that there WAS a clear directive which all parties understood and would also explain why GGPA didn't go after little Deorr (because he either saw him go toward his parents or assumed he had). JMO

Why would GGP think that a 2 yr old was safe going down an embankment to a running creek? Why would GGP think a toddler would be able to find his parents out in the woods? That makes no sense to me that GGP looked up, the baby was gone, and he sits back and shrugs and assumes he found his parents. It makes me angry every time I think about it.

 

[ILOKAL]

Why would GGP think that a 2 yr old was safe going down an embankment to a running creek? Why would GGP think a toddler would be able to find his parents out in the woods? That makes no sense to me that GGP looked up, the baby was gone, and he sits back and shrugs and assumes he found his parents. It makes me angry every time I think about it.

I may be wrong, but I thought the area going down to the creek, although there were some fallen trees and broken branches in some areas, was not particularly woodsy. I don't KNOW why GGPA would not have gone after little Deorr to make sure he arrived safely to his parents, but if that's what DID happen, it would probably be because at that moment, GGPA used poor judgment. I don't know how long it had been since GGPA had been back to the area, but he might not have thought where little Deorr was headed and with his parents being so close, presented a danger.

 

[Jamaica Me Crazy]

Why would GGP think that a 2 yr old was safe going down an embankment to a running creek? Why would GGP think a toddler would be able to find his parents out in the woods? That makes no sense to me that GGP looked up, the baby was gone, and he sits back and shrugs and assumes he found his parents. It makes me angry every time I think about it.

I agree. Something just isn't right. There is more to this story but unfortunately we can't view our real thoughts here.

 

[Cardinal47]

MOO is that the Sheriff will be hearing back from the FBI by the end of Sept.

There is another Go Fund Me account set up on the Internet for another search. They asked the Sheriff for permission to search and it was given for about Oct 1, after the Sheriff hears back from the FBI with their findings.

 

[TheGambler]

Let ME be the grammar police ... you can be the grammar sheriff:slap:
Plural possessive: John Does' toe tags
Singular possessive: John Doe's toe tag

But my sentence was for several John Does. So if I have 3 John Does found along side the ditch, that is the punctuation I need. John Does isn't right is it? Maybe it is. That's why I put it like Does'. Thanks!

 

[ILOKAL]

I agree. Something just isn't right. There is more to this story but unfortunately we can't view our real thoughts here.

I don't know why, and perhaps someone could explain, why there HAS to be more to this story? Children have gone missing in similar type areas, never to be found, and I don't understand why this is any different. Forty years ago Labor Day (9-1-75) Kurt Newton went missing in Maine while camping. He was four at the time. The only evidence left behind was his big wheel. Many others have been mentioned on this forum as well. So WHY does there need to be more to THIS story?

 

[ILOKAL]

But my sentence was for several John Does. So if I have 3 John Does found along side the ditch, that is the punctuation I need. John Does isn't right is it? Maybe it is. That's why I put it like Does'. Thanks!

The reason Does doesn't "look" right (and it doesn't, for sure) is because there is a word "does" in our language except it doesn't (no pun intended) take a capital first letter. So when we see "John Does" we "think" John "does". I hope that makes sense.

 

[pepelepolecat]

But my sentence was for several John Does. So if I have 3 John Does found along side the ditch, that is the punctuation I need. John Does isn't right is it? Maybe it is. That's why I put it like Does'. Thanks!

John Does is right, but you're also right that it looks funny.

Examples: "I checked the information on all the John Does and came up with no new leads."

"I am not sure about that John Doe's identity. Perhaps we need to take a closer look at the information we have."

"The John Does' records need to be returned to their respective files."

I hope that helps. "John Does" plural needs no apostrophe, "John Doe's" singular/possessive needs an apostrophe after the "e," and "John Does'" plural/possessive needs an apostrophe after the "s."

 

[alexwood]

I still think alexwood is right. If a body is found (baby, child or adult) there would be less unidentified bodies!!!! No more Jane Does' and John Does' unless of course the microchip couldn't be found. Not sure punctuation is correct on the "Doe" name. Doesn't look right.

But my sentence was for several John Does. So if I have 3 John Does found along side the ditch, that is the punctuation I need. John Does isn't right is it? Maybe it is. That's why I put it like Does'. Thanks!

So, whilst we await further developments ...

There were three "Jane Does" found alongside a ditch early this morning.
Apparently, the three Does' tags had fallen off. A fight ensued among the hunters over who shot the Does. The game warden finally settled it when he exclaimed, "Does it really matter?!!"
Moral of the story: Does' tags should not be tied to their toes.

 

[katydid23]

I may be wrong, but I thought the area going down to the creek, although there were some fallen trees and broken branches in some areas, was not particularly woodsy. I don't KNOW why GGPA would not have gone after little Deorr to make sure he arrived safely to his parents, but if that's what DID happen, it would probably be because at that moment, GGPA used poor judgment. I don't know how long it had been since GGPA had been back to the area, but he might not have thought where little Deorr was headed and with his parents being so close, presented a danger.

If all of the above was true, then they would have found each other. I do agree that GGP used very poor judgment though.
How could a fast moving creek not be considered a 'danger' to a toddler?

 

[katydid23]

I don't know why, and perhaps someone could explain, why there HAS to be more to this story? Children have gone missing in similar type areas, never to be found, and I don't understand why this is any different. Forty years ago Labor Day (9-1-75) Kurt Newton went missing in Maine while camping. He was four at the time. The only evidence left behind was his big wheel. Many others have been mentioned on this forum as well. So WHY does there need to be more to THIS story?

For me , personally, some things just don't ring true here.

 

[allmybecsloveme]

I don't know why, and perhaps someone could explain, why there HAS to be more to this story? Children have gone missing in similar type areas, never to be found, and I don't understand why this is any different. Forty years ago Labor Day (9-1-75) Kurt Newton went missing in Maine while camping. He was four at the time. The only evidence left behind was his big wheel. Many others have been mentioned on this forum as well. So WHY does there need to be more to THIS story?

You don't think that is strange? Toddlers going missing while camping? People searching for them for years and years, and nobody ever finds so much as a sock, skull, femur?

I find it odd. Of course, forests are normally huge and full of wild animals, but some of these places aren't quite as forested as others, or even very big, and still a trace is never found.

I think we can all agree that in many of these cases, they really are somewhere out there and may never be found, or will be found years from now. But in some of them, "something else" has happened.