Found Deceased CO - Dylan Nicholas Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 Nov 2012 *father arrested* #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
katydid23 said:
I've got to disagree, Ranch.

I can't imagine it ever helping the defense if the jury heard that he threatened to kill his sons. :eek:

What kind of a father makes a treat like that? I cannot imagine my husband ever saying that about our kids. EVER. He would die for them.

So this 'all talk and no action' excuse makes no sense to me because WHO talks that way about their children? Only a sick cruel narcissist, would say something like that, IMO
Click to expand...
One theory in this case is that Mark Redwine was so angry with Elaine that he killed Dylan to hurt her. The defense could use his statement to Betsy about killing their son's as showing that while he can get angry at his ex wife he never acted out on his threats.

Later on in his battle with Elaine he may have been angry but he acted like he did in the past and didn't hurt Dylan. JMO
 
Emerald1328 said:
I found it interesting that the defense was fighting so hard to get testimony in about Mark’s emotional state after the remains were found. He basically said that since the prosecution brought up Brandon’s interpretation of Mark’s emotional state based on conversations they had when Dylan went missing (they only referenced a few conversations before the remains were found) that it should open up questions to Brandon about ALL conversations with Mark, even after they were found. It makes me think that Mark showed no distress or concern about Dylan’s welfare until his remains were found. Only then, not knowing what evidence the remains may show, did he play the grieving father. I would sure love to listen to those recordings Brandon did.
Click to expand...
The judge stopped the cross on Brandon because the defense couldn't quickly separate by date the statements he wants to give to the jury. The defense can only cross on what the witness gave on direct which was before Dylan's remains where found. JMO
 
RANCH said:
The judge stopped the cross on Brandon because the defense couldn't quickly separate by date the statements he wants to give to the jury. The defense can only cross on what the witness gave on direct which was before Dylan's remains where found. JMO
Click to expand...
Oh I agree, but he sure wanted to get in the time period after the remains were found too. Just seemed to me that there was more evidence helpful to the defense that occurred after the discovery than before, based on what he was arguing.
 
RANCH said:
One theory in this case is that Mark Redwine was so angry with Elaine that he killed Dylan to hurt her. The defense could use his statement to Betsy about killing their son's as showing that while he can get angry at his ex wife he never acted out on his threats.

Later on in his battle with Elaine he may have been angry but he acted like he did in the past and didn't hurt Dylan. JMO
Click to expand...
But there is a difference between that earlier marriage and the second one. In the second marriage, there was a very long drawn out contentious divorce, and his anger was heightened.

And, his younger sons had the pictures of him wearing female clothing and a diaper and eating something shocking, so that further heightened his anger and intensified everything.

So one cannot assume it was always an empty threat. Just the sick fact that he even made threats to kill his children is horrible enough to make him seem a credible suspect.

You can not say he 'never' acted out on his threats just because he didn't act out that one specific time. But it does go to how his violent mind works when he is angry. He jumps to 'I will kill the kids.'
 
Emerald1328 said:
Oh I agree, but he sure wanted to get in the time period after the remains were found too. Just seemed to me that there was more evidence helpful to the defense that occurred after the discovery than before, based on what he was arguing.
Click to expand...
I agree. I can't blame the defense for trying to put Mark in the best light. We will see in the morning how much they found that is before June 2013. JMO
 
katydid23 said:
But there is a difference between that earlier marriage and the second one. In the second marriage, there was a very long drawn out contentious divorce, and his anger was heightened.

And, his younger sons had the pictures of him wearing female clothing and a diaper and eating something shocking, so that further heightened his anger and intensified everything.

So one cannot assume it was always an empty threat. Just the sick fact that he even made threats to kill his children is horrible enough to make him seem a credible suspect.

You can not say he 'never' acted out on his threats just because he didn't act out that one specific time. But it does go to how his violent mind works when he is angry. He jumps to 'I will kill the kids.'
Click to expand...
So why didn't the prosecution have Betsy testify about this statement?
 
RANCH said:
So why didn't the prosecution have Betsy testify about this statement?
Click to expand...
Because the judge denied it on various legal grounds, maybe it was too prejudicial, or there wasn't enough documentation to support that claim. And in a murder trial, the judge has to be very careful about what accusations are allowed in.

It could over turn the verdict upon appeal if that accusation was thrown out.
 
katydid23 said:
Because the judge denied it on various legal grounds, maybe it was too prejudicial, or there wasn't enough documentation to support that claim. And sun a murder trial, the judge has to be very careful about what accusations are allowed in.

It could over turn the verdict upon appeal if that accusation was thrown out.
Click to expand...
I don't remember a ruling on this. Betsy's statements about hiding a body in the woods is prejudicial and without documentation but it was allowed.

I'll have to see if I can find out more on this. JMO
 
Warwick7 said:
What does that mean?
Click to expand...
Moran was doing one objection after another. The judge wanted direct to continue so told him that. Sometimes I think Moran does this just to distract and chop up testimony so nobody can focus on it.

This judge has said no yes or no answers and allow the witnesses to speak. He wants the jury to have enough information.
 
BUF said:
Dylan’s atm card was the only card issued on that account that was in both their names.

MR got rid of all of Dylan’s things…but kept his card that LE found in a wallet in luggage in his truck.

Hope the jury is seeing this!

Sept 3, 2012 card was attempted to be activated 2X, but failed. Then again on 9/16 2012
Click to expand...
^^bbm

Peoples Exhibit #8 talks about money in Dylan's account (linked below).

In an email dated 11/11/2012, MR makes a statement about Dylan must not need money that's in his personal account.

It follows that whether or not the user has the debit card/pin for the account, the account cannot be accessed if the card has not been activated.

I believe MR probably provided Dylan the debit card but never activated the card so it was useless to him. IMO, most bank cards have to be activated using the phone connected to the account.

If Dylan was the party trying to activate the account on 9/3, 9/16/12, and unsuccessful, the account probably linked to Mark's phone number.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/user...rict/La_Plata/Redwine/Exhibits/8 redacted.pdf
 
RANCH said:
One theory in this case is that Mark Redwine was so angry with Elaine that he killed Dylan to hurt her. The defense could use his statement to Betsy about killing their son's as showing that while he can get angry at his ex wife he never acted out on his threats.

Later on in his battle with Elaine he may have been angry but he acted like he did in the past and didn't hurt Dylan. JMO
Click to expand...

He didn't have the chance to kill those boys because Betsy took them far away. I don't think Mark had alone time with them.to

Plus he was pretty wrapped up making Elaine, Cory and Dylan miserable.

I'm kind of surprised he's even on trial. Looking at those pictures makes me think he's crazy and should be locked up in a mental institution.

I give the jury at most five hours to return with a guilty verdict!
 
BUF said:
Moran was doing one objection after another. The judge wanted direct to continue so told him that. Sometimes I think Moran does this just to distract and chop up testimony so nobody can focus on it.

This judge has said no yes or no answers and allow the witnesses to speak. He wants the jury to have enough information.
Click to expand...
This judge is doing a good job IMO. He wants this trial to run as smoothly as possible for the juries sake. JMO
 
Cardinal47 said:
He didn't have the chance to kill those boys because Betsy took them far away. I don't think Mark had alone time with them.to

Plus he was pretty wrapped up making Elaine, Cory and Dylan miserable.

I'm kind of surprised he's even on trial. Looking at those pictures makes me think he's crazy and should be locked up in a mental institution.

I give the jury at most five hours to return with a guilty verdict!
Click to expand...
I think that Mark Redwine abandoned his kids he had with Betsy. Lucky for them.

Kind of hard to lockup people with mental problems these days. JMO
 
Cardinal47 said:
He didn't have the chance to kill those boys because Betsy took them far away. I don't think Mark had alone time with them.to

Plus he was pretty wrapped up making Elaine, Cory and Dylan miserable.

I'm kind of surprised he's even on trial. Looking at those pictures makes me think he's crazy and should be locked up in a mental institution.

I give the jury at most five hours to return with a guilty verdict!
Click to expand...
I don't think he belongs in a mental institution. Dennis Rader used to dress up in women's underwear and pose himself in all sorts of bondage poses before he started killing. He was acting out what he wanted to do to his victims.

This guy obviously has sick fantasies, but he's not insane, imo. He knows right from wrong and he knows what he's doing.

MOO.
 
RANCH said:
One theory in this case is that Mark Redwine was so angry with Elaine that he killed Dylan to hurt her. The defense could use his statement to Betsy about killing their son's as showing that while he can get angry at his ex wife he never acted out on his threats.

Later on in his battle with Elaine he may have been angry but he acted like he did in the past and didn't hurt Dylan. JMO
Click to expand...

That's why there needs to be full disclosure about what exactly happened. I recall that following a visitation, he refused to return the boys on time to Betsy, and that she was very distressed over it. She may have even involved law enforcement. Whatever . . . Something happened to force MR to return the sons to her. That testimony needs to be allowed so that the jury can decide for themselves whether or not MR is capable of a heinous murder. It goes to intent and capacity.

I have always maintained that MR hated Elaine more than he loved Dylan. That is how he was able to kill their son.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 211 more.
Total: 623 (members: 212, guests: 411)

Online statistics

Members online
212
Guests online
411
Total visitors
623
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,593
Messages
18,241,996
Members
234,401
Latest member
CRIM1959
Back
Top