ID - DeOrr Kunz, Jr., 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #27

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
neesaki said:
At 3:58 in that interview Sheriff B is telling Tricia what two questions they failed on all 4 the polygraphs , that the parents know where Deorr is currently, and they know what happened to him. Is that what you are pointing out? Tia

I guess they didn't ask them if Deorr went with them on the camping trip, and if he did, was he alive and well at that time.:sigh:
Click to expand...


That would've been my number 1 question even in the very beginning.
 
Round and round we go. For the fellow posters who are pushing for an arrest, please. Law enforcement doesn't bow to that kind of pressure. Once they make arrests they better have a solid case put together. If law enforcement arrests them on something lame like obstruction they can't in 6 months arrest them for murder. If this case goes stone cold you might see a token arrest and hope someone confesses, if they don't you have fired all of your bullets and will never be able to charge the same people for an additional crime later (double jeopardy).

I think we are all frustrated and want to see the hot lights shined on these cockroaches but I'd much rather let LE, Klein, etc. gather all the evidence they can so that true justice can be served. If no body is recovered the prosecution is going to need all kinds of supporting evidence to get any real charges to stick, this is a marathon not a sprint.
 
The Apparition said:
Round and round we go. For the fellow posters who are pushing for an arrest, please. Law enforcement doesn't bow to that kind of pressure. Once they make arrests they better have a solid case put together. If law enforcement arrests them on something lame like obstruction they can't in 6 months arrest them for murder. If this case goes stone cold you might see a token arrest and hope someone confesses, if they don't you have fired all of your bullets and will never be able to charge the same people for an additional crime later (double jeopardy).

I think we are all frustrated and want to see the hot lights shined on these cockroaches but I'd much rather let LE, Klein, etc. gather all the evidence they can so that true justice can be served. If no body is recovered the prosecution is going to need all kinds of supporting evidence to get any real charges to stick, this is a marathon not a sprint.
Click to expand...

Signed in just to tell you thanks Apparition. You nailed it with this post!
 
The Apparition said:
Round and round we go. For the fellow posters who are pushing for an arrest, please. Law enforcement doesn't bow to that kind of pressure. Once they make arrests they better have a solid case put together. If law enforcement arrests them on something lame like obstruction they can't in 6 months arrest them for murder. If this case goes stone cold you might see a token arrest and hope someone confesses, if they don't you have fired all of your bullets and will never be able to charge the same people for an additional crime later (double jeopardy).

I think we are all frustrated and want to see the hot lights shined on these cockroaches but I'd much rather let LE, Klein, etc. gather all the evidence they can so that true justice can be served. If no body is recovered the prosecution is going to need all kinds of supporting evidence to get any real charges to stick, this is a marathon not a sprint.
Click to expand...

It's frustrating for those not in the US who might not have the "probably cause" rules that you guys have. For example the UK can arrest on "reasonable suspicion" so in this case I've no doubt all four of them would have been arrested on suspicion of something by now, meaning full interrogations, search warrants executed and valuable/recent forensic evidence gathered. They could also be re-arrested at a later date pending further evidence.

There are many cases here on Websleuths where it would be very useful for the police to search homes/vehicles to look for the evidence they need to justify an arrest. I like that British police can do that pretty much straight away, valuable clues don't get lost with time. Kyrian Knox is a prime example here, IMO that couple who last saw him should have been forcibly questioned and had their properties searched by now. Bring his mom in too.

There are several downsides of course, for starters it means that when someone gets arrested in a UK case it doesn't always mean they've nailed their man. Or woman, obvs. Claudia Lawrence is a good example - about 10 arrests, some of those on suspicion of murder, others for obstruction etc, but several years on everyone's been cleared I think.

An interesting article about it here if anyone's interested:

....it’s a lot easier to arrest someone in the United Kingdom, but being arrested there isn’t a big deal like it is in the United States. American police need probable cause to make an arrest, but in the United Kingdom, officers can arrest on suspicion. Probable cause is defined as the belief that a crime was probably committed, and that the suspect was probably responsible. Reasonable suspicion means that a right-minded individual would have grounds to suspect that a crime had been committed and that the suspect might be responsible
Click to expand...

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._is_being_arrested_different_in_britain_.html
 
The Apparition said:
Round and round we go. For the fellow posters who are pushing for an arrest, please. Law enforcement doesn't bow to that kind of pressure. Once they make arrests they better have a solid case put together. If law enforcement arrests them on something lame like obstruction they can't in 6 months arrest them for murder. If this case goes stone cold you might see a token arrest and hope someone confesses, if they don't you have fired all of your bullets and will never be able to charge the same people for an additional crime later (double jeopardy).

I think we are all frustrated and want to see the hot lights shined on these cockroaches but I'd much rather let LE, Klein, etc. gather all the evidence they can so that true justice can be served. If no body is recovered the prosecution is going to need all kinds of supporting evidence to get any real charges to stick, this is a marathon not a sprint.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious about the statement that they couldn't arrest the six months later for murder. Why is that? It's not double jeopardy if it's two different crimes is it? Not arguing with you, just don't understand that. Thanks.
 
correct me if iam wrong but isn't loosing your child an arrestable offense I mean if you cant say what happend why he is missing isn't that not looking after your child which you could be arrested for child neglect . I would understand if they were saying he was kidnapped or he was taken by a cougar but there not even able to say that there case is i dont know what happen to my child is that not enough right there for child neglect charges ..I don't see IR and GRAMPS sitting in a cement cell for very long before they come up with the awnsers to what actually happend to the little man.....
 
Sorry folks, the new hubby is off-limits for sleuthing.

:tyou:
 
Midge Montana said:
I'm just curious about the statement that they couldn't arrest the six months later for murder. Why is that? It's not double jeopardy if it's two different crimes is it? Not arguing with you, just don't understand that. Thanks.
Click to expand...

First off thanks so much Onebest. I wanted to contribute more and star lots of posts recently but was stuck lurking on my cell phone while I was away, glad to be back and part of the discussion.

Nice article CoverMeCagney I do sometimes forget we have so many wonderful posters from around the world with different laws and rules.

MidgeMontana: My understanding of double jeopardy is once you press charges and prosecute on a particular crime you can not add charges and certainly can't have another trial later. If the parents were charged with obstruction that would be in regards to the "crime" of whatever happened to Deorr Jr. The prosecutor gets one shot per "crime" so to waste that on obstruction would be a shame. I certainly don't take your post as argumentative, I believe what I have stated is correct but certainly would be willing to stand corrected if someone with more law experience stated otherwise.
 
The Apparition said:
First off thanks so much Onebest. I wanted to contribute more and star lots of posts recently but was stuck lurking on my cell phone while I was away, glad to be back and part of the discussion.

Nice article CoverMeCagney I do sometimes forget we have so many wonderful posters from around the world with different laws and rules.

MidgeMontana: My understanding of double jeopardy is once you press charges and prosecute on a particular crime you can not add charges and certainly can't have another trial later. If the parents were charged with obstruction that would be in regards to the "crime" of whatever happened to Deorr Jr. The prosecutor gets one shot per "crime" so to waste that on obstruction would be a shame. I certainly don't take your post as argumentative, I believe what I have stated is correct but certainly would be willing to stand corrected if someone with more law experience stated otherwise.
Click to expand...
I really think you are wrong on this as long as they don't charge them with murder they most certainly could go back and charge them if they found evidence that they did in fact murder him.
The Sidney and Tammy Moore trial for the Heather Elvis case is a perfect example of this. They are being tried for the kidnapping of her and you can bet your bottom dollar if the find more evidence for murder they will be tried for that. IMOO
 
Jo in Calif said:
I really think you are wrong on this as long as they don't charge them with murder they most certainly could go back and charge them if they found evidence that they did in fact murder him.
The Sidney and Tammy Moore trial for the Heather Elvis case is a perfect example of this. They are being tried for the kidnapping of her and you can bet your bottom dollar if the find more evidence for murder they will be tried for that. IMOO
Click to expand...

The thing they need though, is a grand jury to decide if there's enough evidence, or, as I've said before, lack of evidence (that DeOrr was even at the camp), but, SB said they don't use or have access to the GJ process. Such a bummer.
 
Paulas88 said:
The thing they need though, is a grand jury to decide if there's enough evidence, or, as I've said before, lack of evidence (that DeOrr was even at the camp), but, SB said they don't use or have access to the GJ process. Such a bummer.
Click to expand...
My answer was in regards to them being charged with obstruction of justice. Lets say they did charge them with obstruction of justice and had a trial and they were found not guilty. they could not be tried again for that. But if they found evidence later that they did in fact murder him that would be an entirely different charge and they could be tried for that.
 
Jo in Calif said:
My answer was in regards to them being charged with obstruction of justice. Lets say they did charge them with obstruction of justice and had a trial and they were found not guilty. they could not be tried again for that. But if they found evidence later that they did in fact murder him that would be an entirely different charge and they could be tried for that.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't want to sound like a ____ but this is incorrect. You absolutely can't retry a person for the same "incident" once the first witness is sworn in. Prior to the first witness if the perp confesses to additional crimes or new evidence comes to light yes, after the trial effectively begins it's a wrap. The government is allowed 1 prosecution per "crime". If you kill someone and you are prosecuted for breaking and entering and the trial begins you can not be charged with murder as that is literally the definition of double jeopardy (subject to loss of freedom more than once for the same incident).

See below especially the bolded sections for clarity on this.

The U.S. Supreme Court curbed this discretion in Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S. Ct. 180, 76 L. Ed. 306(1932), in which it wrote that the government may prosecute an individual for more than one offense stemming from a single course of conduct only when each offense requires proof of a fact that the other offenses do not require. Blockburger requires courts to examine the elements of each offense as they are delineated by statute, without regard to the actual evidence that will be introduced at trial. The prosecution has the burden of demonstrating that within a pair or group of offenses, each has at least one mutually exclusive element. If any one offense is wholly subsumed by another, such as a lesser included offense, the two offenses are deemed to be the same, and punishment is allowed for only one.
 
Jo in Calif said:
I really think you are wrong on this as long as they don't charge them with murder they most certainly could go back and charge them if they found evidence that they did in fact murder him.
The Sidney and Tammy Moore trial for the Heather Elvis case is a perfect example of this. They are being tried for the kidnapping of her and you can bet your bottom dollar if the find more evidence for murder they will be tried for that. IMOO
Click to expand...

No. The prosecutors and the police took a gamble and they most likely lost. Once this trial begins they will never be able to charge the Moore's for murder. The gamble they made was that Sidney would crack while in jail for the kidnapping charge and help with the case against the murderer Tammy. No luck as Sidney held firm, as soon as that trial begins Tammy can start wearing Heather Elvis's bones in a necklace and never face murder charges.
 
The Apparition said:
I certainly don't want to sound like a ____ but this is incorrect. You absolutely can't retry a person for the same "incident" once the first witness is sworn in. Prior to the first witness if the perp confesses to additional crimes or new evidence comes to light yes, after the trial effectively begins it's a wrap. The government is allowed 1 prosecution per "crime". If you kill someone and you are prosecuted for breaking and entering and the trial begins you can not be charged with murder as that is literally the definition of double jeopardy (subject to loss of freedom more than once for the same incident).

See below especially the bolded sections for clarity on this.

The U.S. Supreme Court curbed this discretion in Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S. Ct. 180, 76 L. Ed. 306(1932), in which it wrote that the government may prosecute an individual for more than one offense stemming from a single course of conduct only when each offense requires proof of a fact that the other offenses do not require. Blockburger requires courts to examine the elements of each offense as they are delineated by statute, without regard to the actual evidence that will be introduced at trial. The prosecution has the burden of demonstrating that within a pair or group of offenses, each has at least one mutually exclusive element. If any one offense is wholly subsumed by another, such as a lesser included offense, the two offenses are deemed to be the same, and punishment is allowed for only one.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, I believe you are incorrect here. Lying to police in an interview is a completely separate incident from the crime in question.
 
http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2016/06/jeffrey_willis_cousin_said_he.html

@The Apparation: Here's a good example of why I believe you're incorrect. Jeffrey Willis's cousin confessed to helping Jeffrey dispose of a body, then he retracted that statement in the same interview and said he made it up. He was charged with lying to police in two different investigations. IMO there is no way they would have charged him with lying to police at this point if that meant he couldn't be later charged with other crimes related to the murder.
 
Ok. Maybe I wish I was still on vacation so I didn't feel compelled to respond... I am not a lawyer but was a paralegal for some years. Put in basic terms Double Jeopardy applies to the same crime. A kid is missing, if they try you for obstruction, child abuse, exploiting a minor, etc.. it still comes from the same missing kid. If they swing and miss they are done. You can still be civilly sued for the same kid but you can not be put in criminal court again ("Nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb"). If you did a car jacking, strangled a kitten, stole some Valium, and killed a kid they can charge you for each and every crime as they are not dependent. This will certainly be my last post on this issue, but query me this; if I am wrong why hasn't the law swept in and charged the parents with "lying to the police", obstructing an investigation, or child neglect?

When I made my earlier statement and said I would stand for correction I meant if there was a criminal attorney or law professor reading who might fine tune my wording or phrasing. I am certain the basics of what I am saying is correct.
 
The Apparition said:
No. The prosecutors and the police took a gamble and they most likely lost. Once this trial begins they will never be able to charge the Moore's for murder. The gamble they made was that Sidney would crack while in jail for the kidnapping charge and help with the case against the murderer Tammy. No luck as Sidney held firm, as soon as that trial begins Tammy can start wearing Heather Elvis's bones in a necklace and never face murder charges.
Click to expand...

So Enrique Arochi won't be able to be charged with murder for Christina Morris if her remains are found after his kidnapping trial begins?
 
The Apparition said:
Ok. Maybe I wish I was still on vacation so I didn't feel compelled to respond... I am not a lawyer but was a paralegal for some years. Put in basic terms Double Jeopardy applies to the same crime. A kid is missing, if they try you for obstruction, child abuse, exploiting a minor, etc.. it still comes from the same missing kid. If they swing and miss they are done. You can still be civilly sued for the same kid but you can not be put in criminal court again ("Nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb"). If you did a car jacking, strangled a kitten, stole some Valium, and killed a kid they can charge you for each and every crime as they are not dependent. This will certainly be my last post on this issue, but query me this; if I am wrong why hasn't the law swept in and charged the parents with "lying to the police", obstructing an investigation, or child neglect?

When I made my earlier statement and said I would stand for correction I meant if there was a criminal attorney or law professor reading who might fine tune my wording or phrasing. I am certain the basics of what I am saying is correct.
Click to expand...

To clarify, I am in agreement with the majority of what you have been saying. When it comes to obstruction and lying to police, however, I am under the impression that it is a completely separate issue and does not apply to double jeopardy. Would be nice for a legal expert to weigh in on this. Are there any verified lawyers on WS?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 151 more.
Total: 1,242 (members: 152, guests: 1,090)

Online statistics

Members online
152
Guests online
1,090
Total visitors
1,242
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
596,495
Messages
18,048,797
Members
230,015
Latest member
squidsquidsquid
Back
Top