ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #20

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheTruthWillOut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
2,390
Reaction score
2,394
Sorry bessie, I should have posted the quote. Weird that I can remember what is said but rarely the article it is from!

Thanks Aunt_Tulip for digging out the quote. :)
 

ILOKAL

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
2,711
Reaction score
5
Interesting! I, for one, assumed that they would be searching from when they realized he was missing. But you're thinking maybe the came back from the creek, asked GGP how long DeOrr had been gone, then searched for twenty minutes and added the times up? But would that mean they were gone forty minutes then and not just ten or fifteen? Trying to make sure I'm following your train of thought.

If they left the campsite at 1:30 to go to the creek and returned at about 1:45 or so, talked to GGPA, and then began searching for about 20 minutes (keep in mind the times ALL would have been approximations as far as I'm concerned), their search would have ended "about" 2:10. Now, I might be wrong, but I doubt, given the circumstances, that anyone would quibble about ten minutes, one way or the other.

The thing is, there doesn't really appear to be a discrepancy in the time at all from when they returned from the store, to when they were at the creek and back, to how long they searched, to when they called 911. So many commented about waiting an hour before calling 911, whereas it certainly seems that they actually called after searching for 20 minutes.

I wonder if these are some of the "discrepancies" others refer to, when they aren't discrepancies at all.
 

Hoosier952

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
1,098
Reaction score
2,922
Since they were searching, it's likely they were in a different location and GGPA made the call independently, IMO.

I don't think anyone would argue that it's a possibility, but I find it strange that Deorr's been missing an hour and we get 3 phone calls from 3 separate parties in 8 minutes. And one of those hauled away from camp to make a call. I think it's far more likely that they all decided to call at once, maybe out of fear of the call not going through.

I'm still having a problem with the statement of GGP calling first. Why would the dispatcher in the background say "Vernal?" if GGP was calling. GGPs name sounds nothing like Vernal. I still think GGP called first, JM second, and VK third. I keep bringing this up because that statement from Klein doesn't make sense in my mind. I think it's likely GGP called first, the call was dropped due to crap reception, so JM called as soon as GGP realized he wasn't getting through and DK hauled off wherever to try as well. It just seems incredibly silly for 3 adults who could be looking for a child to be wandering around looking for reception to make a 911 call.
 

ILOKAL

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
2,711
Reaction score
5
BBM

In the interview with Nate, which I just went through again, VDK says they went to the creek about 2:00 and that the time from when he "seen him until the time I figured out he was gone" was about 10 minutes. This is at about 9:10 in the video. Jessica says she called at 2:36 and that is when she said DK had been missing for an hour. It may have seemed like an hour that he was missing to JM, but he had not been missing an hour unless she is telling the truth/accurate and VDK is lying/mistaken.

I think it's clear why there is such confusion when the parents aren't even on the same page about the times. I'm not implying anything nefarious, but we aren't the ones who have this incorrect when their two stories don't come close. JMO

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mwM1oG3z358

We now know the first emergency call to 911 was placed at 2:22, nearly 15 minutes sooner than what Jessica thought. That's a chunk of time right there. I thought Vernal referred to the time as close to 2:00 or almost 2:00 as being close to DeOrr's nap time. Was it 1:45? Was he approximating? It's reasonable to think all times are approximates with the exception of the 911 calls. Personally, the timeline there seems to be about as close as it can possibly be. IMO
 

Yvettea

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
17,849
Reaction score
5,829
If they left the campsite at 1:30 to go to the creek and returned at about 1:45 or so, talked to GGPA, and then began searching for about 20 minutes (keep in mind the times ALL would have been approximations as far as I'm concerned), their search would have ended "about" 2:10. Now, I might be wrong, but I doubt, given the circumstances, that anyone would quibble about ten minutes, one way or the other.

The thing is, there really doesn't really appear to be a discrepancy in the time at all from when they returned from the store, to when they were at the creek and back, to how long they searched, to when they called 911. So many commented about waiting an hour before calling 911, whereas it certainly seems that they actually called after searching for 20 minutes.

I wonder if these are some of the "discrepancies" others refer to, when they aren't discrepancies at all.

Even as you have calculated this there is a 20 minute discrepancy not 10 minutes. And the mother would have considered the child missing for the period of time she's known him to be missing not including the time he was with GGP. IMHO
 

minnermomma

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2015
Messages
101
Reaction score
0
I question this also, why should these things change ? Idk, all I can say is that I've tried for the longest to give them the benefit of the doubt. At this point all I can say is I don't know for sure, 100%. No one does. I just have a bad feeling. On the other hand, just imagine that he did just wander off and hasn't been found. Of course that doesn't explain the untruths and inconsistencies does it?

BBM I agree, neesaki that I have also wanted to believe in the parents and that he tragically wandered away and is just not found yet.

Seems that all the WSer's that I have followed along with on these poor missing baby cases are dedicated parents and/or grandparents. None of us really want to picture any scenario that something awful happened to him with premeditated purpose.

After visiting today with a nephew and him telling me about his rowdy weekend, the thought entered my head. What if ....there was mass alcohol involved Thursday into Friday, leading to loss of memory about what actually happened and the Oh S#%t moment of where the heck is the baby?!?

Far, far reach I know but remembering back to frat party days ..anything's possible.

Guess my mind is still wanting to give the parents the benefit of the doubt cause it really don't want to go where this new stuff coming out is trying to point to. MOO
 

ILOKAL

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
2,711
Reaction score
5
At this point in time though, their story was that they were only 50 yards away and gone for 10 minutes. So gone 10 minutes plus 20 minutes of searching is half an hour, not an hour.

It could be quite a bit closer to an hour, since we know the first 911 call was at 2:22 not at 2:36 which is what Jessica said in the interview. That's 14 minutes (1/4 hour) taken off the timeline, plus taking into account approximations, and her missing for an hour statement, and searching for 20 minutes, and being gone for ten minutes comes pretty darn close. IMO
 

ILOKAL

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
2,711
Reaction score
5
Even as you have calculated this there is a 20 minute discrepancy not 10 minutes. And the mother would have considered the child missing for the period of time she's known him to be missing not including the time he was with GGP. IMHO

Please see my post #107.
 

Rayemonde

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
7,551
Reaction score
438
I can understand that being a possibility. Remember the interview when she was wedged between Deorr Sr and her mom on the couch? She looked like she was breaking down then. Possibly just overmedicated perhaps?

JMO but I personally am convinced that was an act for the cameras. I think she's enjoying her life as normal.

I have a hunch that if everything eventually comes out in a trial, we'll hear from witnesses that she never showed much grief or remorse and behaved in inappropriate ways for a mother with a missing child. JMO.

To me it speaks volumes that the worst thing about DeOrr's disappearance for Jessica has been the social media comments. I don't think she's particularly upset that he's gone.
 

Rayemonde

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
7,551
Reaction score
438
Code:

You see, there's a problem. Thanks to Jamaica for posting the audio and transcript of the call. The dispatcher ACTUALLY asked Jessica how long DeOrr HAD BEEN MISSING! She didn't ask how long Jessica had been searching. Jessica answered (that DeOrr had been MISSING) for about an hour.

So when the parents said in their interview they had searched for about 20 minutes, added to the time they had gone to and from the creek, that would BE about an hour that DeOrr had been missing.

It seems as though everyone (or at least most everyone) has had that incorrect from the very beginning all the way through and including today!

IMO

Would it? Did they say they were at the creek for 40 minutes before deciding DeOrr would like to see the minnows, then?
 

OakingtonAve

Former Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
JMO but I personally am convinced that was an act for the cameras. I think she's enjoying her life as normal.

I have a hunch that if everything eventually comes out in a trial, we'll hear from witnesses that she never showed much grief or remorse and behaved in inappropriate ways for a mother with a missing child. JMO.

To me it speaks volumes that the worst thing about DeOrr's disappearance for Jessica has been the social media comments. I don't think she's particularly upset that he's gone.


I agree - I've said this before - but I do so hope he knew love and happiness tho - I really do. Unlike baby Chance who never did. Absolutely heartbreaking. I take my hat off to all LE officials who have to deal with crimes committed against children. I'm not sure I could do it....
 

Paulas88

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Messages
2,834
Reaction score
565
I can understand that being a possibility. Remember the interview when she was wedged between Deorr Sr and her mom on the couch? She looked like she was breaking down then. Possibly just overmedicated perhaps?

I thought she looked like a fifteen year old teenager, and mommy and daddy were protecting her, not a twenty five year old adult mother of three, whose Baby was missing. She couldn't look
up (IMO) because she was afraid of what we'd see. Her hair is perfectly coiffed, yet she can't tell the world anything about DeOrr. Where's the Mama Bear we all would turn into if our child was missing.

The above sounds pretty gruff and mean spirited, but that interview really bothered me. :(
 

Dee10

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
4,520
Reaction score
736
Would it? Did they say they were at the creek for 40 minutes before deciding DeOrr would like to see the minnows, then?

Exactly. I've given up wasting my time on this part of the timeline, given problems with multiple statements and polys that aren't truthful as well as Klein saying this:

[FONT=&amp] Q: I just really want to know how long was his parents gone for when they went for a walk and also did they just wonder of without even asking grandfather to look after baby Deorr[/FONT][FONT=&amp]
31 January at 08:35

KIC: Your question is under false pretence. The senario you lay out is myth.

[/FONT]
 

Beezneez

New Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
465
Reaction score
4
I agree - I've said this before - but I do so hope he knew love and happiness tho - I really do. Unlike baby Chance who never did. Absolutely heartbreaking. I take my hat off to all LE officials who have to deal with crimes committed against children. I'm not sure I could do it....
OT- but who is Chance? Thanks!
 

jnblsm

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2014
Messages
1,476
Reaction score
1,325
OT- but who is Chance? Thanks!
The sweetest little baby boy who had parents from Hell.
Chance Walsh. We have a thread here, and it's completely heartbreaking.

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using Tapatalk
 

lifeisahighway

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2015
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I can understand that being a possibility. Remember the interview when she was wedged between Deorr Sr and her mom on the couch? She looked like she was breaking down then. Possibly just overmedicated perhaps?


I don't think she looked like she was breaking down at all. To me, she looked like she just didn't want to look up at the cameras or make eye contact with the interviewer. She also seemed to be breathing hard like she was annoyed/angry/just wanted the interview over. I know that I personally cannot lie. I'm not good at it. I would avoid eye contact at all costs. And VDK just reminds me so much of a guy I used to date. He would talk talk talk when he was lying and just praise other people to make it sound like he was such a good guy since he was giving others praise. When really he was just lying and trying to take the attention off of that.
 

Lilibet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
17,397
Reaction score
64,062
Exactly. I've given up wasting my time on this part of the timeline, given problems with multiple statements and polys that aren't truthful as well as Klein saying this:

[FONT=&amp] Q: I just really want to know how long was his parents gone for when they went for a walk and also did they just wonder of without even asking grandfather to look after baby Deorr[/FONT][FONT=&amp]
31 January at 08:35

KIC: Your question is under false pretence. The senario you lay out is myth.
[/FONT]
BBM first line.

Yes, trying to figure out this timeline of "the walk to the creek" and the search is an exercise in futility, even leaving Klein's "myth" comment out of the equation (as some will). We simply do not have enough proven information to go on, either from the parents or SB. Even leaving the polys out of it (as some will) SB has made it clear that VDK and JM have not told consistent stories. We really can't cherry pick which of their statements to believe at this point. JMO
:deadhorse:
 

giagreen

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 14, 2013
Messages
2,295
Reaction score
113
Sure. But if DeOrr was never there then what's the point of quizzing the store clerk?

How do we know DeOrr was never there? The sales clerk didn't even remember the parents till they went in and jogged her memory. I think it's safe to assume that the clerk was questioned about this and if she remembered the family by LE. This leading to DK and JM both going back into the store and confronting her. But I mean wouldn't you? If your child was missing and you had stopped at a store and the clerk was telling people or LE that it never happen.....wouldn't you stop in there and be like don't you remember me? I'm not real sure if I would consider that DK being a bully. At the point the clerk remembered the parents after saying she didn't when we all know for a fact they were there from the time stamp so that kinda threw off all credibility for the clerk imo and in fact I hear over and over again that a first hand witness can be the worst witness.
I think there is a little to much credit put into this one sales clerk. I don't know her or if she has a memory issue or drug problem. Not saying she does but we don't know. And she never even remembered the parents in the first place. For me that says enough that I can't doubt the parents that DeOrr was never there. Especially since someone said they thought they seen a child in the back seat. That's even all most more credible then the store clerk not remembering and then remembering.


"SB: Well, initially um the store salesperson didn’t remember uh the encounter. When the father uh… I call him Vernal instead of Deorr, it’s Vernal Deorr Kunz…when Vernal and his wife came back to the store several days later then the salesperson said, “Oh, yeah, I remember you!”

02:45
SB: Now I’m not sure…I don’t recall her saying specifically that she remembered the child. She remembered them talking about their child, and they bought some candy and some other items, and we have a dated and time-stamped receipt, so we know they were in the store. And someone while they were fueling up said they thought they saw a child in the back seat, but that hasn’t been ever positively stated that there was a child there, but ya’ know at this point, I’m believing the family!"

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Timelines-and-Maps-**NO-DISCUSSION-quot/page2
 

gliving

Woof
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
7,014
Reaction score
23,595
Since they were searching, it's likely they were in a different location and GGPA made the call independently, IMO.

Here's my problem. Pretty much any reason why the parents would even be searching has been ruled out. The authorities have ruled out a mountain lion, drowning in the water, wandering off, or a abduction. No trace of the child ie clothing, fibers or scent has been found at the campsite. The dogs hit on nothing.

Add in that the parents are officially named suspects in connection with the child's disappearance.

Help me figure this out. Why are the parents searching? :thinking:
 

desert-blue

Active Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
0
Code:

You see, there's a problem. Thanks to Jamaica for posting the audio and transcript of the call. The dispatcher ACTUALLY asked Jessica how long DeOrr HAD BEEN MISSING! She didn't ask how long Jessica had been searching. Jessica answered (that DeOrr had been MISSING) for about an hour.

So when the parents said in their interview they had searched for about 20 minutes, added to the time they had gone to and from the creek, that would BE about an hour that DeOrr had been missing.

It seems as though everyone (or at least most everyone) has had that incorrect from the very beginning all the way through and including today!

IMO

I agree that everything has been incorrect from the very beginning and that is because it's a myth. They weren't telling the truth, so we cannot try to make sense of their statements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top