CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #17

[scorekeeper]

Well then, I guess I would have to say there are about as many ex's that DON'T speak negatively about their children's NCP as there are that do. IMO, there is no reason not to listen to MR ex's. I sincerely doubt they would be making statements about MR character if Dylan wasn't missing...so that to me simply indicates how important they believe his history is to this child's safety.
I also haven't seen<Mod Snip>online today, so I think it's rather unfair to say she "won't elaborate" about further questions. Perhaps she is busy today? It is Christmas and she does have a family...

She may have been out all day putting up posters or searching....

 

[kkdj]

I agree. I really believe this comes down to "did MR love Dylan more than he hated ER" and the answer is a resounding no. There is no indication that he shared that type of bond with ANY of his children.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Precisely!

 

[Simply Caustic]

Well then, I guess I would have to say there are about as many ex's that DON'T speak negatively about their children's NCP as there are that do. IMO, there is no reason not to listen to MR ex's. I sincerely doubt they would be making statements about MR character if Dylan wasn't missing...so that to me simply indicates how important they believe his history is to this child's safety.
I also haven't seen <modsnip> online today, so I think it's rather unfair to say she "won't elaborate" about further questions. Perhaps she is busy today? It is Christmas and she does have a family...

And, jumping off your post - part of TOS is (please forgive me for paraphrasing) - not commenting in regards to another poster's decision NOT to respond to a question. I worded that awkwardly, but the gist of it is - no one here at WS should feel cross-examined, nor should they be put in the spotlight of 'She/he didn't answer this question, so I infer this, accordingly.....' We shouldn't attack a new member - not sheerly due to TOS, but due to a basic level of respect for each other.

It was in the McStay family thread that precisely this issue arose, and I think it was Bessie (mod) who clarified for us....but, we don't speculate as to other WS members. In any fashion.

As it should be, in my opinion. We all have value and opinions here - merely being verified as a case insider/verified professional does not negate that we can post as we see fit, within TOS.

 

[scorekeeper]

Thanks, Confusion for your outline.

 

[mmmagique]

BBM

I'm sorry, but could you please supply the link to this?


Thank you.

I didn't catch that one either. I would love a link as well.

 

[Simply Caustic]

I believe anyone who wants to do that sleuthing is free to do so. IMO.
Nobody's forcing anyone to take anyone else's word as gospel -- clearly it isn't effective.
If you see violations of TOS in the thread, shouldn't you alert a mod? Or are you just venting that you're over the thread and sick of the "witch hunt"?

:goodpost: You took the words right out of my mouth. Except, worded much better. I love when that happens. :floorlaugh:

 

[NC Analyzer]

And, jumping off your post - part of TOS is (please forgive me for paraphrasing) - not commenting in regards to another poster's decision NOT to respond to a question. I worded that awkwardly, but the gist of it is - no one here at WS should feel cross-examined, nor should they be put in the spotlight of 'She/he didn't answer this question, so I infer this, accordingly.....' We shouldn't attack a new member - not sheerly due to TOS, but due to a basic level of respect for each other.

It was in the McStay family thread that precisely this issue arose, and I think it was Bessie (mod) who clarified for us....but, we don't speculate as to other WS members. In any fashion.

As it should be, in my opinion. We all have value and opinions here - merely being verified as a case insider/verified professional does not negate that we can post as we see fit, within TOS.

Absolutely! Thank you for this. Good grief, she could be doing any number of things that are completely unrelated to WS :rocker:

Just because I don't have a life, doesn't mean <modsnip> doesn't! :floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[cluciano63]

Everyone is free to bring forward their own theories or to disagree with those posted by others. I don't understand the hostility because some posters have strong feelings about MR; there are circumstances that make one wonder what his true motives for having Dylan, etc. really were. This was hardly the Hardy family reunion of father and son, as far as I can tell. If you do not agree, that is fine. I have not seen anyone trying to force their opinions on anyone else. JMO

 

[Coldpizza]

And, jumping off your post - part of TOS is (please forgive me for paraphrasing) - not commenting in regards to another poster's decision NOT to respond to a question. I worded that awkwardly, but the gist of it is - no one here at WS should feel cross-examined, nor should they be put in the spotlight of 'She/he didn't answer this question, so I infer this, accordingly.....' We shouldn't attack a new member - not sheerly due to TOS, but due to a basic level of respect for each other.

It was in the McStay family thread that precisely this issue arose, and I think it was Bessie (mod) who clarified for us....but, we don't speculate as to other WS members. In any fashion.

As it should be, in my opinion. We all have value and opinions here - merely being verified as a case insider/verified professional does not negate that we can post as we see fit, within TOS.

I agree, and mentioning a members real name is against TOS,

We are thankful that someone from Dylans family has spoken out, but to get so casual as to refer to them by their first name is wrong and against TOS. I'm not a mod but I do respect the reasons the rules are in place.

And to add, we all want Dylan to be found. Just please be respectful of family that do post in the main forum.

 

[Cardinal47]

Fortunately in our case the judge awarded my daughter full legal and physical custody. But he had monitored visitation with a police officer.
Didn't stop his abuse towards her tho. Letting him not pay did.
My feeling with dylans case is that money is at the root of it.
Dad had 5 more years to pay of child support, mom had a live in who also made money. Her life was easy street financially, had a fiancé, had her kids. Dad felt taken advantage of and downright peeved! Found a way to get out of child support and make the ex feel pain. Satisfaction to dad.
Its a thought to think about. Makes a lot of sense to me.
Imo

I have thought about those very things you write about. Five more years. The older boys have nothing to do with him. Ex wife moving on.

Somebody up thread mentioned about life insurance. I wonder about that. Was there any life insurance on Dylan?

I cannot believe how quiet everything is. It's like everybody's hiding out. Hearing nothing anywhere. Sure would like to know if LE has even a clue as to what happened.
MOO

 

[kkdj]

Ok. My initial logic had me immediately suspicious of MR. As we learn more, my suspicion grows that dylans disappearance is related to MR. I suspect Dylan is in water and has been since Sunday eve. But I don't know that.
I wonder ( but don't think this) if MR could have sold him or handed him off to someone.
But bottom line, without accusing MR, he has my full attention on this one!
Jmo

 

[sreshowtime]

I am sorry I haven't been staying on top here, butI am curious- was it ever stated any where that LE checked any computers that Dylan may have used back at his mother's/school/library, to look at anything he may have been doing on it, in the days immediately prior to leaving to go to his father's?

Also , is it known if Dylan was involved in any sport teams, boy scouts, youth groups, clubs...any extracurricular activities?

I find myself interested if he may have older acquaintances that no one else really is/was aware of....

 

[NC Analyzer]

I agree, and mentioning a members real name is against TOS,

We are thankful that someone from Dylans family has spoken out, but to get so casual as to refer to them by their first name is wrong and against TOS. I'm not a mod but I do respect the reasons the rules are in place.

And to add, we all want Dylan to be found. Just please be respectful of family that do post in the main forum.

I'm sorry...mea culpa and 50 lashes with a wet noodle. I wasn't thinking. I did see another post with her nick name and I jumped off that. Won't happen again. :blushing: We might want to tell her the same thing...she is very open with her name. :twocents:

 

[beach]

Mod Note:

MR's ex-wife and verified poster should ONLY be referenced by her screen name - azgrandma. Even though she revealed her first name, only she gets to do that. Everyone else please refer to her by her Websleuth's screen name


eta: I certainly don't think any harm was done intentionally. Just a mod note falling at random.

:tyou:

 

[SCHMAE]

Everyone is free to bring forward their own theories or to disagree with those posted by others. I don't understand the hostility because some posters have strong feelings about MR; there are circumstances that make one wonder what his true motives for having Dylan, etc. really were. This was hardly the Hardy family reunion of father and son, as far as I can tell. If you do not agree, that is fine. I have not seen anyone trying to force their opinions on anyone else. JMO

Hey good point , especially re: the hostilities here between opinions. Since none of us know if MR is guilty or if he is innocent, it is a little forward of anyone on either side of the fence to get huffy with those on the other side of the fence. MR's done some things that look pretty shady. Does that make him guilty? Absolutely not, but until LE rules him out as a suspect or Dylan is found and in no way was it connected to MR, then its' absolutely fair to point a finger of ' suspicion ' at him. That is not a finger of GUILT, it is merely SUSPICION. He has done very little to rule himself out and LE has not ruled him out either, so that is what it is. I personally hope he's not involved because if he is not involved, I feel the odds of finding Dylan alive somewhere are much greater ! So sue me.........( not directed at u cluciano63 )

 

[Cardinal47]

Ok. My initial logic had me immediately suspicious of MR. As we learn more, my suspicion grows that dylans disappearance is related to MR. I suspect Dylan is in water and has been since Sunday eve. But I don't know that.
I wonder ( but don't think this) if MR could have sold him or handed him off to someone.
But bottom line, without accusing MR, he has my full attention on this one!
Jmo

So I read what you wrote and I thought me too. I pegged MR right away. So I asked myself why?

Then I answered myself and said because Dylan was in his care and I don't think either of them wanted to be together. Dylan could not wait to be with his friends and MR didn't care about Dylan when he lived there and a 7 year divorce battle...yipes. Dylan got off the plane and wanted his dad to drive him to his friends...what???. Too late but maybe tomorrow and then after I run errands...Then the disappointment began. Dylan was hurt and angry and MR scored one.

Then the interesting part. If MR was clean and LE believed he had nothing at all to do with Dylans disappearance they would have given the dad some kind of slack. They know everybody's gunning for him. Maybe not going so far as to say he was not a person of interest but they might have said he is great and cooperating.

Also they are really searching everything about dad. The house and towing two cars and asking for all video.

So with all that I am not giving MR a pass. Too many things just don't fit.

MOO

 

[kkdj]

I agree. I really believe this comes down to "did MR love Dylan more than he hated ER" and the answer is a resounding no. There is no indication that he shared that type of bond with ANY of his children.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's right IMO. It looks like all of his children were result of relationships and
used to control, probably during the marriages and the after. It appears it wasn't about the best interests of his children, but controlling and abusing the exes. I found it interesting that he kept his first wife in court for many many years. Then he kept his second wife in court for many years. I can't help but think this is about money and power.
Atty's aren't cheap either! And he engages them for many years!
Jmo

 

[Confusion]

Hey good point , especially re: the hostilities here between opinions. Since none of us know if MR is guilty or if he is innocent, it is a little forward of anyone on either side of the fence to get huffy with those on the other side of the fence. MR's done some things that look pretty shady. Does that make him guilty? Absolutely not, but until LE rules him out as a suspect or Dylan is found and in no way was it connected to MR, then its' absolutely fair to point a finger of ' suspicion ' at him. That is not a finger of GUILT, it is merely SUSPICION. He has done very little to rule himself out and LE has not ruled him out either, so that is what it is. I personally hope he's not involved because if he is not involved, I feel the odds of finding Dylan alive somewhere are much greater ! So sue me.........( not directed at u cluciano63 )

The problem is that I have a lot more fingers, and I don't like only being able to point with one of them. :banghead:

 

[Confusion]

That's right IMO. It looks like all of his children were result of relationships and
used to control, probably during the marriages and the after. It appears it wasn't about the best interests of his children, but controlling and abusing the exes. I found it interesting that he kept his first wife in court for many many years. Then he kept his second wife in court for many years. I can't help but think this is about money and power.
Atty's aren't cheap either! And he engages them for many years!
Jmo

Do you have any links to show that he was the one to initiate any court appearances? TIA

 

[NC Analyzer]

Hey good point , especially re: the hostilities here between opinions. Since none of us know if MR is guilty or if he is innocent, it is a little forward of anyone on either side of the fence to get huffy with those on the other side of the fence. MR's done some things that look pretty shady. Does that make him guilty? Absolutely not, but until LE rules him out as a suspect or Dylan is found and in no way was it connected to MR, then its' absolutely fair to point a finger of ' suspicion ' at him. That is not a finger of GUILT, it is merely SUSPICION. He has done very little to rule himself out and LE has not ruled him out either, so that is what it is. I personally hope he's not involved because if he is not involved, I feel the odds of finding Dylan alive somewhere are much greater ! So sue me.........( not directed at u cluciano63 )

Well said! I completely agree. I've been feeling like a "bad" person for having suspicions about MR. I don't know him so obviously I have no agenda for suspecting him but the hostility that is conveyed whenever his name is mentioned in connection to Dylan's disappearance is mind boggling. I don't think I've had this experience on other WS threads...but maybe I just followed cases that didn't promote this type of reaction? I don't know.