ID - DeOrr Kunz, Jr., 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #30

[ReadySet]

OT:
This has nothing to do with little Deorr's case.
Don't know where to put it so I'll post it here.

I thought that this never happens (finding remains of victim but not telling public) but I guess there is an exception to everything.
I am not familiar with this case but saw this today. There is no thread for her on WS.

Remains of missing woman found Feb. 2016, just announced now to public.
It's understandable because they couldn't find the POI and they wanted to talk to him before they announced to public. So even if it took say, 6 mos. to identify remains, that's still over a year that they knew she had been found. She is still listed missing in NamUs. I wonder if family was informed? I just find this very interesting.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2017/dec/07/remains-of-woman-missing-since-2004-found-near-coe/

Remains found in a wooded area near Coeur d’Alene have been identified as 34-year-old Christine Lott, a Priest River woman who had been missing since 2004.
According to the Kootenai County Sheriff’s Office, Lott’s remains were located along a Forest Service road in February 2016. The discovery of her remains was kept confidential, the Sheriff’s Office said, until her husband could be interviewed by detectives.
The death of Lott, mother of three, is being investigated as a homicide.

ETA: To those who insist Deorr will never be found. It happens. 12 years for Christine but she was found.

 

[Trident]

As much as I would like justice for little DeOrr, I would hate to think our justice system would degrade to the point where we MUST charge someone with something just because WE/PTB "think" they are guilty.

 

[ReadySet]

As much as I would like justice for little DeOrr, I would hate to think our justice system would degrade to the point where we MUST charge someone with something just because WE/PTB "think" they are guilty.

OP didn't say or imply they should be charged because public thinks they're guilty. They have been named suspects and that is based on evidence, even if we don't know what it is.

 

[Trident]

OP didn't say or imply they should be charged because public thinks they're guilty. They have been named suspects and that is based on evidence, even if we don't know what it is.

What evidence?

 

[ReadySet]

Read again what I wrote: ...even if we don't know what it is.

What evidence?

 

[Trident]

Read again what I wrote: ...even if we don't know what it is.

I did read what you wrote. Surely, if they have named the parents POI(s), they gave a reason? I've followed this case since the beginning although I did quit posting around the "cat" phase also. Even though I kinda think the cat is still a possibility.

Of course, we don't know everything they/LE do and I hope they have more information that we do, but at this point I'm not seeing it. The most excitement in this case came from the PI (I think he was a PI and he quit a few months ago, but I forgot his name). What I'm saying is, children go missing frequently. Many missing children are never found. Should each and every person who has a child wander off be charged with something? I hope not. Sometimes parents get all mixed up with their words, should every upset parent go to jail because they misspoke or could not remember EXACTLY what happened in their stress and excitement of losing their child? I hope not or we all might end up there at one time or another. Should everyone always be held accountable every time something happens to a child? I hope not, accidents do happen. I don't want LE or anyone else feeling obliged to charge someone with something because something (who knows what) happened to a child. I want guilty people charged, not trumped up charges so someone can be found guilty of "something. Anything."

:cow:

 

[ReadySet]

I did read what you wrote. Surely, if they have named the parents POI(s), they gave a reason? I've followed this case since the beginning although I did quit posting around the "cat" phase also. Even though I kinda think the cat is still a possibility.

Of course, we don't know everything they/LE do and I hope they have more information that we do, but at this point I'm not seeing it. The most excitement in this case came from the PI (I think he was a PI and he quit a few months ago, but I forgot his name). What I'm saying is, children go missing frequently. Many missing children are never found. Should each and every person who has a child wander off be charged with something? I hope not. Sometimes parents get all mixed up with their words, should every upset parent go to jail because they misspoke or could remember EXACTLY what happened in their stress and excitement of losing their child? I hope not or we all might end up there at one time or another. Should everyone always be held accountable every time something happens to a child? I hope not, accidents do happen. I don't want LE or anyone else feeling obliged to charge someone with something because something (who knows what) happened to a child. I want guilty people charged, not trumped up charges so someone can be found guilty of "something. Anything."

:cow:

Recommend you go to the first page of the thread where you will find 7 pages of articles etc. This will answer many of your questions.
I don't know if you were being facetious about the "cat", but if you weren't, I find that line of reasoning disrespectful to little Deorr. And also the "accident happens" argument. He deserves thoughtful and fact based theories.
And this is why I only have 400+ post in over two years. I don't mind having a conversation when posts are thoughtful, logical, and informed; but I know when I'm being baited.

 

[Trident]

Recommend you go to the first page of the thread where you will find 7 pages of articles etc. This will answer many of your questions.
I don't know if you were being facetious about the "cat", but if you weren't, I find that line of reasoning disrespectful to little Deorr. And also the "accident happens" argument. He deserves thoughtful and fact based theories.
And this is why I only have 400+ post in over two years. I don't mind having a conversation when posts are thoughtful, logical, and informed; but I know when I'm being baited.

In fact, I was answering THIS post when you jumped in:

"Alii
Registered User

If murder charges cant be brought against VDK and Jessica Mitchell, what about other charges? Child endangerment, negligence, hinder investigation, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, or something. Anything."

I suggest we agree to end our chat since obviously we are not on the same page.

 

[ReadySet]

In the interest of trying to improve what I call my "posting stamina," I will answer.
I referred to the OP as is WS custom.
You replied to my post with reply to quote.
You did not reply to the OP post with reply to quote.

I stand by my commitment to accuracy, facts, and truth for little Deorr.

In fact, I was answering THIS post when you jumped in:

"Alii
Registered User

If murder charges cant be brought against VDK and Jessica Mitchell, what about other charges? Child endangerment, negligence, hinder investigation, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, or something. Anything."

I suggest we agree to end our chat since obviously we are not on the same page.

 

[Alii]

As much as I would like justice for little DeOrr, I would hate to think our justice system would degrade to the point where we MUST charge someone with something just because WE/PTB "think" they are guilty.

VDK and Jessica Mitchell lied to LE. There is no doubt. That, in itself, should be a chargeable offense. They were responsible for the health and safety of baby DeOrr. They failed in their duty of care. They should be charged with something. If Trina or another family member had filed a civil suit for wrongful death, IMO, it would have had every chance of success. I repeat, VDKS and JM failed in their duty of care of baby DeOrr. He is missing, believed dead. They are responsible. They should be charged accordingly, with anything and everything, for which LE has evidence.

 

[LietKynes]

What stood out to me and still does (and no, I am not a trained private investigator ) , were details that Little DeOrr's parents could NOT remember ; and the parts of their story that changed, or "new" details that emerged.
Over and over.

YES, if either of my children went missing, I'd be upset. I might need to be sedated at times. I would never stop looking for them,or trying to find answers, ever. Until the day I died.
But my memory would be crystal clear as to how that day unfolded.

If you can stand it... think about a terrible event in your life, and you can probably recall other insignificant things that are also etched in your mind.

Strange how good times can happen and we don't recall what was said or interactions between others ---- however, let something horrific (like losing your toddler) happen. And that day/moment stands out in your mind as if it happened yesterday.

That's how I see it , and why I'm suspicious of VDK and Jessica.
:moo:

 

[watcher9]

Discovery ID has the DeOrr Kunz mystery on now.

 

[always reading]

Discovery ID has the DeOrr Kunz mystery on now.

I watched it again and still don't know what to think.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[TTF14]

What stood out to me and still does (and no, I am not a trained private investigator ) , were details that Little DeOrr's parents could NOT remember ; and the parts of their story that changed, or "new" details that emerged.
Over and over.

YES, if either of my children went missing, I'd be upset. I might need to be sedated at times. I would never stop looking for them,or trying to find answers, ever. Until the day I died.
But my memory would be crystal clear as to how that day unfolded.

If you can stand it... think about a terrible event in your life, and you can probably recall other insignificant things that are also etched in your mind.

Strange how good times can happen and we don't recall what was said or interactions between others ---- however, let something horrific (like losing your toddler) happen. And that day/moment stands out in your mind as if it happened yesterday.

That's how I see it , and why I'm suspicious of VDK and Jessica.
:moo:

I agree with you, except if you were chemically impaired (i.e. by alcohol or drugs). I have no clue if that was the case in this instance, but just speaking from person experience with a traumatic situation, and wishing I remembered more. (Alcohol, not drugs).

 

[Jo in Calif]

VDK and Jessica Mitchell lied to LE. There is no doubt. That, in itself, should be a chargeable offense. They were responsible for the health and safety of baby DeOrr. They failed in their duty of care. They should be charged with something. If Trina or another family member had filed a civil suit for wrongful death, IMO, it would have had every chance of success. I repeat, VDKS and JM failed in their duty of care of baby DeOrr. He is missing, believed dead. They are responsible. They should be charged accordingly, with anything and everything, for which LE has evidence.

If they were charged and convicted with everything they have evidence for, at this time and served time for those offenses and years later evidence was found that they were in fact responsible for murder guess what, they could not be charged for it. That would be double jeopardy.

 

[jessie]

If they were charged and convicted with everything they have evidence for, at this time and served time for those offenses and years later evidence was found that they were in fact responsible for murder guess what, they could not be charged for it. That would be double jeopardy.

We no longer have double jeopardy in the UK.
If "New and Compelling Evidence" comes to light a person can be retried for the same crime.
IMO double jeopardy is such a restriction on charging and trial it should be abolished.

 

[Trident]

We no longer have double jeopardy in the UK.
If "New and Compelling Evidence" comes to light a person can be retried for the same crime.
IMO double jeopardy is such a restriction on charging and trial it should be abolished.

Yeah! Try 'em over and over and over again until you get the verdict you want.

 

[jessie]

Yeah! Try 'em over and over and over again until you get the verdict you want.

No, I think you may possibly be misunderstanding the principal of double jeopardy. It is not that the same charges are submitted but that "new and compelling evidence" is available, enough to instigate another trial.

In the US you have juries I think as we do in the UK. Therefore we trust the juries to consider the evidence presented, consider all the points and come to a conclusion of guilty or not guilty accordingly. This is the way our laws are upheld surely?

I do appreciate the legal system in our different countries varies slightly, but I doubt anyone would wish a person/s to be accused and taken to trial under a system that only "has suspicions" they are guilty of a crime. That has echoes of a 'kangaroo court', and IMO has no place in our present educated society.

 

[GeorgiaSuzy]

[/FONT]

If they were charged and convicted with everything they have evidence for, at this time and served time for those offenses and years later evidence was found that they were in fact responsible for murder guess what, they could not be charged for it. That would be double jeopardy.

No, for it to be double jeopardy they'd have to be charged with murder or manslaughter or whatever, not child neglect.

 

[Roselvr]

Discovery ID has the DeOrr Kunz mystery on now.

Is that what it's called? Nothing came up on search.