ID MICHAEL VAUGHAN: Missing from Fruitland, ID - 27 July 2021 - Age 5

Search continues for missing and endangered 5-year-old in Fruitland, Idaho

Michael Vaughan was last seen near SW 9th Street and S. Arizona Ave. in Fruitland on Tuesday evening. Crews and neighbors were out all day looking for the boy.

www.ktvb.com

Search continues for missing and endangered 5-year-old in Fruitland, Idaho​

Michael Vaughn was last seen near SW 9th Street and S. Arizona Ave. in Fruitland on Tuesday evening. Crews and neighbors were out all day looking for the boy.

The search for a missing 5-year-old-year-old boy intensified Wednesday as it entered its second day.

Michael Vaughn was last seen near SW 9th Street and S. Arizona Avenue in Fruitland around 6:30 p.m. Tuesday.

The Fruitland Police Department said Michael is considered missing and endangered.

Michael is about three feet, seven-inches tall and weighs 50 pounds. He has blonde hair and blue eyes. He answers to the nickname "Monkey."

Michael was wearing a light blue shirt with a Minecraft picture on it, dark blue boxer briefs and sandals.

Idaho Mountain Rescue brought in highly-trained and rescue personnel to assist in the search.

Crews from multiple agencies searched the area near Michael's home by ground and air by drone and helicopter. They also went door to door, talking with neighbors.

Right next to the boy's home is a field where crews spent much of the day searching for him.

Neighbors say they learned about his disappearance about an hour after he was reported missing. They say Michael is a happy kid who lives with his parents and grandfather.

Cynthia Walker was walking her dog as the search was happening.

"At five years old, I don't know that he would wander too far without one us seeing him by now," she said. "There are volunteers, many, many volunteers out searching, scanning the fields and we just want to have Michael back, we just want him home safe."





MEDIA - MICHAEL VAUGHN: Missing from Fruitland, ID since 27 July 2021 - Age 5

 

[GrandmaBear]

And if the excavation was fruitless, I think that could be another reason.

True. I think this is the case isn't it where LE feels it should be charged but the DA holds back? I could be mixing up cases but I don't think so. And there is some reason he wants more to charge apparently. Often an issue between cops and DA's offices. DA is elected and wants that win record and to be fair wants to know they have enough to win it and bring it I guess.

 

[GrandmaBear]

There were a LOT of rumors flying around. I seem to recall something about a scooter. But nothing has ever been said by LE about a scooter. Only by, I think, a neighbor.

I'd love to dismiss her confession as delusions. But I have more trouble dismissing cadaver dogs hitting on the backyard.

Me too. So often in so many cases they don't hit at all. Here they did.

 

[GrandmaBear]

But what did they hit on exactly? That's my hangup.

I'm with Mel in that he was moved. More than likely. They were intent on and searching the neighborhood, I think moving him was very likely at a point.

They hit on decay of corpses. If not Michael, then who?

Assuming they are highly trained cadaver dogs with a good handler, I'd say it is significant. Very.

 

[GrandmaBear]

The smell of human decomp is what cadaver dogs hit on.
Was it Michael? We don't know for sure. Whomever was there was moved.

Totally agree.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Sorry, I don't understand that.

Do you mean you don't understand his saying that or don't know of it?

There is a very narrow window of when Michael disappeared and he places himself with TWO of the others over that time frame as not being around for a fair amount of time before during and after. And so then none of the three could have done it right? PER him.

 

[Regina]

True. I think this is the case isn't it where LE feels it should be charged but the DA holds back? I could be mixing up cases but I don't think so. And there is some reason he wants more to charge apparently. Often an issue between cops and DA's offices. DA is elected and wants that win record and to be fair wants to know they have enough to win it and bring it I guess.

There could be an issue regarding differing interpretations of facts and circumstances.
For example, just because dogs hit, I wouldn't conclude that the body was moved; if nothing was found, I'd question the credibility of the information.

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

There could be an issue regarding differing interpretations of facts and circumstances.
For example, just because dogs hit, I wouldn't conclude that the body was moved; if nothing was found, I'd question the credibility of the information.

Several different dogs? Plus ground radar detecting anomalies?
Obviously this doesn't prove anything conclusively, but this plus any other evidence they may have found (and they did remove things from the home) could certainly mean something. I'd have a hard time dismissing it as a juror (but again, I'm also not going to convict based on this alone).

I am getting impatient with them presenting to the grand jury. (They said the GJ hasn't convened, but it's been since last summer? That's strange.) But then, if the GJ said charges were warranted, we would likely see a probable cause affidavit. Until then, we're unlikely to know anything other than what's already been released.

 

[RoundPeg]

There could be an issue regarding differing interpretations of facts and circumstances.
For example, just because dogs hit, I wouldn't conclude that the body was moved; if nothing was found, I'd question the credibility of the information.

Cadaver dogs are something like 95% accurate. With multiple dogs, it stands to reason the accuracy would be more than 95%. Depending on what other evidence was found (I REALLY want to know), I would question the age of the chemicals detected. A hit is a hit but can be decades old.

 

[GrandmaBear]

There could be an issue regarding differing interpretations of facts and circumstances.
For example, just because dogs hit, I wouldn't conclude that the body was moved; if nothing was found, I'd question the credibility of the information.

I think there was more than that to it and I also feel they know more than we've been told. I think they did ground radar or something as well.

I don't think they are focusing here and on these people after all of this time for no good reason.

Does that mean we can be 100 percent or if a juror find guilt beyond reasonable doubt? Who knows, we don't know what LE does.

But in being a crime follower and just forming an opinion and speculating, I tend to believe in most cases LE is where they are at and only announce or charge for good reasons. I give the benefit of the doubt that way unless strong reasons not to.

Personally I've always thought this was someone in the neighborhood for a few reasons. Even with talk of a vehicle or two. Vehicle could still play in or not actually.

He however committed himself and two others to a timeline that I have a feeling won't or doesn't hold water. Not with all anyhow.

I think they are worried as to what LE has or knows and I think he was hoping to get a reaction, fishing maybe almost. He is really dumb imo to put himself out there, guilty or not, with such vague and opposing answers that don't quite fit together in the things he said.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Several different dogs? Plus ground radar detecting anomalies?
Obviously this doesn't prove anything conclusively, but this plus any other evidence they may have found (and they did remove things from the home) could certainly mean something. I'd have a hard time dismissing it as a juror (but again, I'm also not going to convict based on this alone).

I am getting impatient with them presenting to the grand jury. (They said the GJ hasn't convened, but it's been since last summer? That's strange.) But then, if the GJ said charges were warranted, we would likely see a probable cause affidavit. Until then, we're unlikely to know anything other than what's already been released.

I thought there was ground radar and some other reasons. Also clearly they need enough to get a warrant.

I'd have to look back but isn't it the DA who isn't yet charging and LE saying it will be or should be...? Or are they waiting on a GJ?

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

I thought there was ground radar and some other reasons. Also clearly they need enough to get a warrant.

I'd have to look back but isn't it the DA who isn't yet charging and LE saying it will be or should be...? Or are they waiting on a GJ?

Fruitland police sent probable cause to the Payette County Prosecutor last summer to be presented to a grand jury. Chief Huff said a grand jury hasn't convened yet but they will soon.

'I'm here to clear my name': One of the suspects in Michael Vaughan's disappearance says he wasn't involved

It's been two months since Stacey Wondra was released from federal custody, convicted of a gun crime unrelated to the disappearance of little Michael.

www.ktvb.com

 

[Regina]

Cadaver dogs are something like 95% accurate. With multiple dogs, it stands to reason the accuracy would be more than 95%. Depending on what other evidence was found (I REALLY want to know), I would question the age of the chemicals detected. A hit is a hit but can be decades old.

I don't know how many dogs but I wouldn't get hung-up on why they hit, I'd just re-evaluate.
And yeah, we don't know about other evidence but the DA does and the only charge in the case was dropped...

 

[GrandmaBear]

I don't know how many dogs but I wouldn't get hung-up on why they hit, I'd just re-evaluate.
And yeah, we don't know about other evidence but the DA does and the only charge in the case was dropped...

The dogs detected human decomp. LE believes Michael was moved. Reevaluate what exactly?

They mention other items of evidence found. What I wonder?

Funny how after talking to the news reporter, Wondra mentions on YT seeing a child, a child alone but older and not resembling Michael. What an odd thing to say, bring up,, note.

Sounds to me like they are simply waiting on a grand jury to convene.

Interesting that it's an ID case because in Kohberger when headed to a probable cause hearing, they instead circuited to a grand jury (also ID) and there seem to be strategic reasons to do so concerning the sharing of evidence and ability of defense to question witnesses, etc. or make such evidence public even.

Timing factor as well it seems.

Wondra says his atty. told him he is no longer a POI. LE came out and said that isn't true. News couldn't get a response to that from his attorney. Who do you believe? I'm going with LE.

Despite Wondra giving a story which would seem to alibi three of them for the timeline, apparently it doesn't hold up or they wouldn't be suspects/POIs.

These things show me Wondra is not truthful.

I don't think we know the half of things yet. Jmo.

 

[Regina]

Funny how after talking to the news reporter, Wondra mentions on YT seeing a child, a child alone but older and not resembling Michael. What an odd thing to say, bring up,, note.

I just take it that the reporter hadn't asked whether he'd seen any children.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I just take it that the reporter hadn't asked whether he'd seen any children.

I wouldn't assume that. Also, since it is referred to as "new" info, does that mean he never told LE this either?

This gives me tons of questions. Did they have power steering fluid with or did someone have to run get some while the others waited? He can't guess an age from 7 to 9? To me a 7 year old is vastly different than a 9 year old. He makes a point of saying he didn't find it odd or unsafe or whatever for a possibly 7 year old to be playing by himself. Does that mean he would with a 5 year old but not a 7 year old? He can remember dark hair (which with the age would make the kid not Michael and may well be intentional) but couldn't remember what the kid was playing with plus struggles to recall the memory at all yet hair color is clear as well as where they stopped).

What is the problem with this bunch with vehicles and are all licensed drivers? I mean we have taxi rides for distances, a vehicle needing power steering fluid and one they were going to get that had a spark plug issue or some such.

Did they really need power steering fluid or is he giving info to cover why they stopped and mentioning a kid in case anyone else in the neighborhood saw them stopped and saw a kid, so he covers what he wonders someone may have seen...?

Why didn't they put in power steering fluid at home? Did the vehicle only suddenly need it or was this like right at a gas station where they picked some up? Did the vehcile just suddenly lose power steering? The only time that ever happened to me it was a belt not fluid. If it suddenly happened to them and they had power steering on leaving home, are we to believe the vehicle just lost the last of its fluid as they drove the short distance this was? Were they questioned and did they answer and do all their stores align on this or was that info never provided until he said it on his YT.

Does anyone think if I checked out and asked him these questions on his YT channel he would answer lol?

Everything he shares is vague until he needs to show something specific to show it can't be the case. Obviously. The man would be wiser to shut his mouth. All attys advise their clients to keep their mouths shut, apparently it did not work in this case. Did his atty really tell him he was no longer a POI and LE really tell the atty. that? I SERIOUSLY can't see that and doubt it. And so the man is a liar. (Apparently he has an attorney since he claimed he is no longer a POI, told this by his atty he claimed but LE came out and said outright that's not true. And the atty. wouldn't give comment.)

I can't quite remember, what is the criminal history if any with this bunch?

I haven't checked it out, why does this man have a YT channel? Did he have one previous to this for some other purpose or does it relate only to this case?

I think we are clearly where LE knows they have their suspect(s) and have enough indications but perhaps need more evidence or they don't and are waiting on the GJ.

This by the way also places them right near Michael's home and outside.

I could easily go on...

Here is that part:

The day after he spoke to Romero, Wondra gave a YouTuber a new piece of information: He, Brandon and Sarah pulled over at SW 8th St and S Arizona Ave to put power-steering fluid in the car right after they left for Kuna the day Michael was abducted.
He said they saw a child playing by himself on the sidewalk down the street on SW 8th Street between South Arizona Avenue and South Washington Avenue, which is around the corner from the Vaughans' home.
Wondra struggled to recall the memory but claimed the child was playing with something and stated it was not Michael Vaughan.
"The kid I saw did not depict Michael at all. The kid I saw looked like he had very dark hair like mine," Wondra said. "It didn't look like a five-year-old kid at all. I'd say, if I had to guess, maybe seven, eight, nine. He wasn't a little kid, you know what I mean. That's why I said it didn't concern me he was out and about doing his thing."

 

[Regina]

What is the problem with this bunch with vehicles and are all licensed drivers? I mean we have taxi rides for distances, a vehicle needing power steering fluid and one they were going to get that had a spark plug issue or some such.

It sounds to me like the Wondra's may have had that truck plus two other vehicles. The towed vehicle was Brandon's and it's my impression that Adrien may not have had a vehicle.
Speaking of vehicles, I'd like to point out that LE said that the Honda Pilot isn't connected to any of those people, which btw, I think could be another issue.

 

[GrandmaBear]

It sounds to me like the Wondra's may have had that truck plus two other vehicles. The towed vehicle was Brandon's and it's my impression that Adrien may not have had a vehicle.
Speaking of vehicles, I'd like to point out that LE said that the Honda Pilot isn't connected to any of those people, which btw, I think could be another issue.

Taking a taxi how far in a place like ID is odd to me. These people have money for such a ride which I'd think would be expensive but then can't keep a vehicle running or in transmission fluid, etc.

I don't think the Honda Pilot is an issue at all. You pursue all avenues and leads in an investigation and in fact LE gets in trouble later if it is shown they did not. The investigation eventually led here.

It's interesting that the "alibi" covers all but Adrien imo and that it is believed that is the person who flipped/tattled isn't it...?

Yeah, I think the three in the "alibi" which was really a trip for another reason too or the real one, are guilty.

Jmo. Apparently LE does too. Enough to state it which doesn't happen in many cases.

 

[RoundPeg]

It sounds to me like the Wondra's may have had that truck plus two other vehicles. The towed vehicle was Brandon's and it's my impression that Adrien may not have had a vehicle.
Speaking of vehicles, I'd like to point out that LE said that the Honda Pilot isn't connected to any of those people, which btw, I think could be another issue.

Speaking of vehicles, if I remember correctly one of them was the taxi that Stacy drove.

 

[Regina]

Speaking of vehicles, if I remember correctly one of them was the taxi that Stacy drove.

Yes, that's what I was considering, that Stacey said Sarah, Brandon, and Adrien had left the house before he did and so there were at least two vehicles, possibly three if the truck is a different vehicle than what Stacey used earlier.

 

[Regina]

Taking a taxi how far in a place like ID is odd to me.

FYI, the Wondra's were running a taxi business.
It's evident to me that Stacey doesn't communicate effectively. I mean, in this instance, he said "my taxi ride" but it wasn't his ride, it was some other person's.

It's interesting that the "alibi" covers all but Adrien imo and that it is believed that is the person who flipped/tattled isn't it...?

I think it's in Sarah's arrest warrant that info- the "credible tip"?- came from Stacey.