ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #5

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
nervous_nellie said:
I know you didn't ask me but I think that if it is stuff that is all listed out in the first posts of a thread or in a media/maps thread or you are just sure that its "upthread" and it really is and your sure someone will find it if they look, then I think it is fine to tell them to go find it... jmho lol no need for all the :panic:
Click to expand...

Just jumping off your post, nervous nellie. I think some people ask for a link if what is being posted is not what they believe.

If I ask you for a link, it is because I am keeping track of the media links and am trying to make sure we have most of the relevant articles in the Timeline and Media thread.
I promise I won't :pillowfight: if you don't have a link.
 
CatsInTheCradle said:
BBM
You bring up a good point. I understand why people ask for links so that gossip, preconceived personal opinions, etc. do not become "facts" and grow legs. The mods insist on links constantly. Personally I get nervous when someone asks me for a link, not because I'm making something up, but I worry that I won't be able to put my hands on the article, or the article has been edited, or my computer decides it is time to throw me offline (happens numerous times). Thankfully I have been able to verify what I stated or a kind poster comes along and posts whatever is being asked for.

My question is do we have to provide a link for information that has been put here on this forum numerous times? Do we have to go find it every time someone asks or can we just direct people to look themselves? (not being snarky - I really want to know because the "link please" always sends me into a :scared: )
Click to expand...

I can't answer your specific question, but do want to point out, in general, that verified experts should be respected as such and taken at their word. We certainly don't need to agree with them, but we shouldn't be asking them to source their knowledge unless it is a question of statistics. I woulld certainly hate that if I became verified, wouldn't any of you?

At the same time, it should go without saying that everyone here has varying skills and experience too, so should be given the same respect. The difference is that we know gitana1 has a law degree, specifically in family law. We know Sarx is a SAR expert. The rest of us are just anonymous posters. Verification is a good step for those who can complete it, if offering professional expertise is important to you.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?521-Verified-Professional-and-Insider-Members
 
wondering25 said:
Why would you hold on to a dirty diaper for 2/3 days? If someone thought it was evidence she would have handed it over for dna or whatever.. so this is just extremely odd.. and wouldnt a dirty diaper left at the scene throw the dogs off as to baby's scent? jmo
Click to expand...

Most campsites don't have trash pickup. You don't leave it at the campsite for someone else to deal with, and you don't leave the campsite every day to dispose of trash. You hold onto your trash until you leave, and then you dispose of it responsibly when you can.
 
ClaireNC said:
When saying pack in, pack out in this case, it means that you need to pack out your own garbage. There is no trash removal, so you have to take it with you. It would make sense that they had bag specifically for stinky diapers and this one was left there for a day or two. With all the commotion going on, I'm sure taking out the trash was not a high priority.

If they were sleeping in a camper, the non-smelly diapers could have been left in a trash can in the camper. Just the stinky one from that morning was left outside. (Probably in a bag hanging in a tree or something.)
Click to expand...
So, no one from the search looked into that hypothetical bag to see what was inside and just left it there..since a diaper would have the baby's scent on it.. wouldnt that confuse the dogs and lead the dogs back to the campsite?
 
Mickshawn said:
I wonder if this is what happened...

1.) DeOrr starts with GGP at the campsite
2.) Parents walked off to explore
3.) GGP actually watched DeOrr walk in the direction of his parents
4.) GGP kept looking up, kept seeing him and then....he was out of sight, so he assumed he went to catch up to his parents???
Click to expand...

Possible.....I just would have hoped ggp would have called out to the parents that baby Deorr was following them, especially in their environment. Jmo
 
​
wondering25 said:
So, no one from the search looked into that hypothetical bag to see what was inside and just left it there..since a diaper would have the baby's scent on it.. wouldnt that confuse the dogs and lead the dogs back to the campsite?
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC the search dogs kept returning to the campsite which is what they would do even without the diaper, simply because that's where little Deorr WAS and his scent is there.
 
Mickshawn said:
I wonder if this is what happened...

1.) DeOrr starts with GGP at the campsite
2.) Parents walked off to explore
3.) GGP actually watched DeOrr walk in the direction of his parents
4.) GGP kept looking up, kept seeing him and then....he was out of sight, so he assumed he went to catch up to his parents???
Click to expand...

This is kind of what I have thought but I just don't understand why they have found NO trace or picked up his scent. And by now I would have thought his body would have surfaced if he was in the water? This is surely one of the strangest cases - all the secrecy from investigators, the rumors/mysteries, and the lack of communication from any witnesses, it's just bizarre, imo.
 
desert-blue said:
This is kind of what I have thought but I just don't understand why they have found NO trace or picked up his scent. And by now I would have thought his body would have surfaced if he was in the water? This is surely one of the strangest cases - all the secrecy from investigators, the rumors/mysteries, and the lack of communication from any witnesses, it's just bizarre, imo.
Click to expand...

Actually it's not strange at all if a mountain lion took Deorr. This case is exactly like other cases when a mountain lion took the child, or in SOME cases, an adult. There's no other scenario that fits, as I see it. Before anyone dismisses the mountain lion as the predator they need to at least read everything that's been posted about mountain lions right here on WS. Of course there's much more information available as well as many more victims than we have noted but what's here is necessary reading for ANYONE who is TRULY interested in solving this case. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, in all likelihood, it's a duck!
 
desert-blue said:
Why does every article seem to state that the police don't believe he has been abducted but the parents insist that he has? It's like the parents don't agree with the police but no reasoning is ever provided.
Click to expand...

This has been the parental reaction in similar cases as well. The parents "hope" that the child being abducted by a human advances the possibility that the child is still alive. The other possibilities don't.
 
desert-blue said:
Why does every article seem to state that the police don't believe he has been abducted but the parents insist that he has? It's like the parents don't agree with the police but no reasoning is ever provided.
Click to expand...

I'd think it would be natural to "hope" for abduction (for lack of a better word) in a situation like this. I'd MUCH rather think of my toddler being kidnapped by someone than to think of him wandering around in a scary environment full of predators. A "lesser of the two evils" sort of thing. Not that an abductor would have good intentions, but at least there's a chance he's still alive -- whereas if DeOrr was lost, he's most likely not still alive.
 
ILOKAL said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC the search dogs kept returning to the campsite which is what they would do even without the diaper, simply because that's where little Deorr WAS and his scent is there.
Click to expand...
The dogs would go away from the site if he was led away..walked away.. was carried off by a Mt. lion etc. So, what i am trying to say is if his scent DOMINATES in one spot and nothing leads the dogs AWAY that means his scent is there.. whether he was really there or not.. and the presence of a diaper or blanket would mark his scent.. the dogs didnt go sprinting through the area and lose his scent..right? Not reported they did..jmo
 
Post Register - Aug. 2nd

http://www.postregister.com/articles/featured-news-daily-email/2015/08/01/lemhi-sheriff%E2%80%99s-seeks-fbi%E2%80%99s-help-search-toddler

Experts have indicated that most children of DeOrr's age can travel about 1.2 miles alone and on foot but that does not account for the rugged landscape where the toddler was said to have gone missing.
Click to expand...

Bowerman said he has ruled out abduction in the case, even though his office continues to field reports of sightings from across the nation and overseas.
Click to expand...

Search dogs taken to the site early on showed interest in a man-made lake but it was ultimately learned that a woman had illegally poured the cremains of a loved one into the water just several days after the hunt for the toddler began, the sheriff said.
Click to expand...

Bowerman also believes no harm came to DeOrr from wild animals such as mountain lions that inhabit the area.
Click to expand...

Todd Palmer, spokesman for the FBI office in Salt Lake City, said services made available to state and municipal law enforcement departments that request aid include behavioral analyses and testing of any physical evidence gathered in investigations.
Click to expand...
 
ILOKAL said:
This has been the parental reaction in similar cases as well. The parents "hope" that the child being abducted by a human advances the possibility that the child is still alive. The other possibilities don't.
Click to expand...

I can see that - it would give them hope. I just wish they'd elaborate. If the child was only unattended for a very short time (4 or 10 minutes have both been suggested), it just seems so unlikely. On the other hand, if he was unattended for longer than they've indicated, I do feel that would slightly increase the odds that he could have been taken by a person or animal. I still don't understand why they haven't found a boot or any clothing, if it's the latter, though... I wish something would turn up to help solve his disappearance - it's so sad.
 
wondering25 said:
The dogs would go away from the site if he was led away..walked away.. was carried off by a Mt. lion etc. So, what i am trying to say is if his scent DOMINATES in one spot and nothing leads the dogs AWAY that means his scent is there.. whether he was really there or not.. and the presence of a diaper or blanket would mark his scent.. the dogs didnt go sprinting through the area and lose his scent..right? Not reported they did..jmo
Click to expand...

In previous similar searches the dogs didn't detect the lion's scent.
 
desert-blue said:
I can see that - it would give them hope. I just wish they'd elaborate. If the child was only unattended for a very short time (4 or 10 minutes have both been suggested), it just seems so unlikely. On the other hand, if he was unattended for longer than they've indicated, I do feel that would slightly increase the odds that he could have been taken by a person or animal. I still don't understand why they haven't found a boot or any clothing, if it's the latter, though... I wish something would turn up to help solve his disappearance - it's so sad.
Click to expand...

If you think only a longer period of time would be sufficient for a mountain lion to take Deorr then you haven't read the material that's been presented as well as the accounts of similar cases posted by myself and others. The material also answers various reasons for not locating his clothes or boots. You can do your own search for information or you can read what I have posted, but reading will certainly answer all your questions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 140 more.
Total: 3,170 (members: 141, guests: 3,029)

Online statistics

Members online
141
Guests online
3,029
Total visitors
3,170
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,118
Messages
17,963,541
Members
228,687
Latest member
Pabo1998
Back
Top