ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #9

Status
Not open for further replies.

lesajo

Active Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2015
Messages
232
Reaction score
45
Has dad's 911 call been released yet?

No I do not believe it has, wonder why? Maybe it was cut short because mom already had them on the line, but I would still like to hear it.
 

Arnie M

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
2,079
Reaction score
1,912
.

The only TV interview of IR that I saw was the one early on a Monday morning , he was not dressed , not fully awake , and said nothing about fishing.

Was there another interview ?

.
 

wondering25

New Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2015
Messages
793
Reaction score
14
.

Furthermore .... if it was the friend who did something .... he would have to be be the fastest child snatcher who was able to hide a body so well that hundreds of searchers could not find it .



All within a few minutes , and within a hundred feet of parents and grandfathers.

Not impossible , but nearly.

We were told there is a receipt from the store they went to "as a family" On Friday. Did they arrive "as a family at the store" and more importantly, did they return to the campsite after the store "as a family"? JMO .
 

MzOpinion8d

Former Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2014
Messages
3,950
Reaction score
223
.

People get fixated on the scent of the child from the moment he went missing , as though that would be what dogs would track

Doesn't work that way. The child had been there since the previous day and his scent should be in many places around the campground

Unless he was kept beside the fire pit for those 17 hours , but that seems unlikely. Even allowing 7 hours for sleep leaves 10 active hours

The only way a tracking dog would be useful is if a scent trail led away from the area he had commonly been in ..... and we know that did not happen , so either the child is still within the campground area (water) , or the dogs were no good , or he was carried away , or was driven away from the campground

To be carried away or driven away requires 4 nearly blind people , or 4 people who have done a magnificent job of sticking to a fictional story.

Considering the story is basically "he just vanished!", it's not hard to stick to.
 

bessie

Verified Insider
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
31,766
Reaction score
1,324
FARGO--If police call you a "person of interest," it's not a friendly remark about how fascinating you are.
It means you know something and police want to talk with you about it.

"We use that term when we really don't know what their involvement is," said Fargo police Lt. Mike Mitchell.

Unlike another common police term--"suspect"--the words "person of interest" do not imply culpability.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/new...5-how-does-someone-go-person-interest-suspect
Officially, "person of interest" means..well, nothing. No one has ever formally defined it — not police, not prosecutors, not journalists. The terms "accused," "allege," "arrest" and "indict" all are dealt with in the Associated Press Stylebook, but there is no listing for "person of interest." Similarly, the U.S. Attorneys' Manual — the official guide to federal criminal prosecution — uses the terms "suspect," "subject," "target" and "material witness," but "person of interest" gets no mention.

http://ajrarchive.org/Article.asp?id=4042


What’s the difference between a suspect and a person of interest?

Q: In some stories, you list a criminal as a “person of interest.” Sometimes you actually call them a “suspect.” Why do you keep changing between the two? Do police tell you to do this?

A: There’s a difference between a suspect and a person of interest.

A person of interest is someone police want to talk to for information about a case; a suspect is somebody officers think may be involved in the crime, Bellevue police spokesman Greg Grannis said.

“Sometimes a person of interest becomes a suspect, but not always,” he said.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattle91...e-between-a-suspect-and-a-person-of-interest/


What does 'person of interest' mean? Nothing

[...]
"It's a really bad term to use, because the public reads 'suspect,' " said Kelly McBride, ethics group leader at the Poynter Institute, a national journalism training institute in St. Petersburg, Florida.

Donna Shaw, a journalism professor at The College of New Jersey, said she believes federal law enforcement officials invented the phrase in the mid-1990s to satiate journalists hounding them for information. Soon, local law enforcement officers began to pick up on the phrase.

Shaw studied a year's worth of stories with the term "person of interest" in 2006, interviewing representatives from local police departments on why the term was utilized.

"Some of the police told me, ' We don't know what it means but it makes reporters happy,' " Shaw said.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/17/yale.person.of.interest/index.html?iref=24hours#cnnSTCText


Person of Interest Law & Legal Definition

Unlike "suspect" and "material witness," "person of interest" has no legal definition, but generally refers to someone law enforcement authorities would like to speak with or investigate further in connection with a crime. It may be used, rather than calling the person a suspect, when they don't want their prime suspect to know they're watching him closely. Critics complain that the term has become a method for law enforcement officers to draw attention to individuals without formally accusing them.
http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/person-of-interest/
 

CatsInTheCradle

Verified Baylor Bear!
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
1,126
Reaction score
2
I don't have any issues with the parents. But I am suspicious of the family friend. He told inconsistent versions of where he was when the baby went missing. He originally said he was ' fishing at the creek' but in the tv interview he said he was with GGP at the firepit. That bothers me that he has told 2 versions. And he has a criminal history which includes an arrest for sexual assault. And he has a history of drug/alcohol abuse. And was one of the last people to see the baby. So I don't think it is necessarily 'creating monsters' that don't exist. I have followed way too many cases here where the monsters DO exist.

Same here. However since the parents were not forthcoming with their time of arrival, whether it be through omission or evasiveness, that bothers me. Then theres GGP who we have heard nothing from. How many things can we ignore going on in one case and just chalk it up to some reasonable explanation that so far doesn't exist? JMO
 

CatsInTheCradle

Verified Baylor Bear!
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
1,126
Reaction score
2
Not necessarily. He had a much bigger window than a few minutes and few hundred feet.

How do we know how big of a window he had? I've heard three different times mentioned, the latest being that GGP just turned his head for a minute. If one thing could just get nailed down, besides the fact that little DeOrr is missing, it would be easier to discuss this case :banghead: IMO
 

ehg2001

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2011
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
I had to step away from this case for a while because it was getting too conspiratorial for me. I came out of lurkdom to say THANK YOU for this wonderful post! Common sense and logic does it for me.

I know it's probably too "boring" but I still think that little DeOrr is either in the water somewhere or in the woods having died due to exposure.

I have tried and tried to jump on some 'other' bandwagons, but there just isn't enough evidence to convince me of anything sinister here just yet.

TBH, this is new to me because I'm usually always jaded and cynical wrt parents and other bystanders in a missing child's case, but this one just seems different to me for some reason.

IR is still in my sights though.

This is virtually the exact scenario I have imagined the entire time. Wandered away, fell in the creek, knocked out, swept down the river, stuck somewhere or under something. He is there. They will find him. My heart breaks for everyone involved.

IMVHO
 

ILOKAL

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
2,711
Reaction score
5
This is virtually the exact scenario I have imagined the entire time. Wandered away, fell in the creek, knocked out, swept down the river, stuck somewhere or under something. He is there. They will find him. My heart breaks for everyone involved. IMVHO

I think the reason many of us veered away from that scenario is because the sheriff was emphatic in saying how thoroughly and completely the reservoir and creek were searched therefore it was virtually impossible for little Deorr to not have been found. Really? After having seen that creek with the rapid rushing fast water flowing a distance of approximately three miles, PLUS the reservoir, how could those waters have been searched that carefully in that period of time? He also went on to say that with the experience of the dogs, he was surprised (or some similar word) that Deorr wasn't found the FIRST day! I truly hope searches of those waters are continuing each day until every inch has been touched and looked at and no stone is left unturned.
 

Onebest

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
583
Reaction score
1,239
Sadly, If this little guy did fall in water and drown then he very possibly could have been taken by wild animals after the fact. Note at the 8:40 or so mark the Chief Deputy says something like...~There could have been some type of interference with a predator sometime in the scenario at the beginning or partway through~ and Sheriff Bowerman agrees. I did see this posted on another list but since it is on the video I think its OK to share...Heartbreaking thoughts! and I doubt any of this family thought there would be bears and wolves running through their camp sight.

https://youtu.be/FV-h82eVQ1M
Un cut interview
 

ILOKAL

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
2,711
Reaction score
5
Sadly, If this little guy did fall in water and drown then he very possibly could have been taken by wild animals after the fact. Note at the 8:40 or so mark the Chief Deputy says something like...~There could have been some type of interference with a predator sometime in the scenario at the beginning or partway through~ and Sheriff Bowerman agrees. I did see this posted on another list but since it is on the video I think its OK to share...Heartbreaking thoughts! and I doubt any of this family thought there would be bears and wolves running through their camp sight.

https://youtu.be/FV-h82eVQ1M
Un cut interview

I think Poster neesaki suggested that as a possibility. Mountain lions, bears and wolves are listed as some of the wildlife that habitate the forest. I believe there are warnings about bears but I don't think there are warnings about mountain lions and wolves.
 

ninij9

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Messages
4,536
Reaction score
528
How do we know how big of a window he had? I've heard three different times mentioned, the latest being that GGP just turned his head for a minute. If one thing could just get nailed down, besides the fact that little DeOrr is missing, it would be easier to discuss this case :banghead: IMO
I always thought the parents exaggerated how long they were gone, not because they committed foul play, but because they felt bad for leaving and this happened. I think they got cornered into that statement and couldn't retract it. Which l feel also accounts for moms looks of frustration in the interview.
The whole point being that it presents a lot more time for another POI to have done something. Gramps cant contradict time and IR wouldn't want to. Just a thought.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 

ninij9

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Messages
4,536
Reaction score
528
To me parents are victims, persons present are witnesses, and people you may suspect have had a hand in events or know more than they say are persons of interest. Jmo

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 

concernedmother

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
7,183
Reaction score
6,448
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/17/yale.person.of.interest/index.html?iref=24hours

(CNN) -- It's a familiar scenario: A major crime is committed. Police investigate possible leads while the media asks for information. Soon, authorities say they have a "person of interest."

Steven Hatfill, seen here in 2002, denies any connection to the deadly 2001 anthrax attacks.
Raymond Clark was named a person of interest, and then charged with murdering Yale grad student Annie Le.

But what does this term mean?

"The 'person of interest' tells you nothing," says Cynthia Hujar Orr, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "They are suspicious of that person, but the police don't have the evidence they need."



Didn't they start using the term POI after the Richard Jewell case?
 

ILOKAL

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
2,711
Reaction score
5
To me parents are victims, persons present are witnesses, and people you may suspect have had a hand in events or know more than they say are persons of interest. Jmo

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

It's possible the sheriff shares your definition, however, he placed everyone there in his POI category because he doesn't want to isolate a particular person who he believes DOES know more. If he gets more information, he might change that category for one, some, or all. Do I believe the parents or GGP are anything more than victims, no I don't. IR might know more . . . . The sheriff seems to think so. He had to have a reason to take IR up there a second time. The sheriff must have thought he knew more than he indicated during the first visit.
 

ninij9

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Messages
4,536
Reaction score
528
It's possible the sheriff shares your definition, however, he placed everyone there in his POI category because he doesn't want to isolate a particular person who he believes DOES know more. If he gets more information, he might change that category for one, some, or all. Do I believe the parents or GGP are anything more than victims, no I don't. IR might know more . . . . The sheriff seems to think so. He had to have a reason to take IR up there a second time. The sheriff must have thought he knew more than he indicated during the first visit.
I share similar views with you on this. I do very much believe there will be charges eventually in this case. I'm not as confident that we will find this baby though.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 

katydid23

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
62,169
Reaction score
180,648
.

The only TV interview of IR that I saw was the one early on a Monday morning , he was not dressed , not fully awake , and said nothing about fishing.

Was there another interview ?

.

You are correct. In the tv interview he said nothing about fishing. But the sheriff was told that he was fishing at the creek when the baby went missing. That interview was not televised but I hope it was recorded.
 

bluesneakers

not today satan
Joined
Aug 6, 2014
Messages
19,147
Reaction score
9,345
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/17/yale.person.of.interest/index.html?iref=24hours

(CNN) -- It's a familiar scenario: A major crime is committed. Police investigate possible leads while the media asks for information. Soon, authorities say they have a "person of interest."

Steven Hatfill, seen here in 2002, denies any connection to the deadly 2001 anthrax attacks.
Raymond Clark was named a person of interest, and then charged with murdering Yale grad student Annie Le.

But what does this term mean?

"The 'person of interest' tells you nothing," says Cynthia Hujar Orr, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "They are suspicious of that person, but the police don't have the evidence they need."



Didn't they start using the term POI after the Richard Jewell case?

The first time I remember hearing it was when JonBenet died.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top