CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #18

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
ICUDOUCME said:
OK but there is always that chance that it could happen...palm to the nose with an upward blow can kill you, so think about a fight in the same manner.
Click to expand...

Ok, but a palm strike to the nose would cause a very bloody crime scene.

And....I have never heard of a child killed in this manner.

I'm going on statistical probability


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
cluciano63 said:
I never felt that Dylan leaving on his own or taking off was out of the question until I read the texting. He seems very, very anxious to meet up with his friend at the given time, with no qualms about the early hour except to be sure he would be let in. I find it hard to believe he would not get up, especially if his phone had crashed the night before.
Click to expand...

BBM

I agree. ER said Dylan takes a shower and gets his clothes ready the night before so he’s ready to go out in the morning yet his father never said Dylan took a shower at his place Sunday night and that raises another red flag.

Dylan’s mother also said her son is happiest being around those he loves and she didn’t include his father Mark. “Wherever his friends were, wherever his brother was, those were his favorite places,” she said.

http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20121215/NEWS01/121219687/-1/news01&source=RSS
 
catswhiskers said:
I had parents who watched over me like hawks as well - even into my late teens I still had to do a lot of convincing to get them to allow me to do things most of my friends had been enjoying for years. I offer my own kids a lot more freedom, but the funny thing is they are in no hurry to necessarily take it. They are also very conscious of personal safety, and were both horrified when I recently asked them if they would ever hitchhike. My 16yo loves to watch Criminal Minds with me - he reckons it's the reason he is always on the lookout for suspicious vans :) Sorry for being OT, but IMO teen behaviour is very unpredictable. Plus as a teacher over the years I have had discussions with many parents who have have flat out argued and insisted that their child would never ever do something that I have either heard or seen their child say or do right in front of me at school.
:moo:
Click to expand...

I agree. The one thing I learned for sure by raising one,... I will Never say," my kid would NEVER do -----"

Just when my arm was tired from patting myself on the back my kid did exactly what I thought and even BRAGGED he'd never do!

Btw there was hell to pay! He lost his phone for a month!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Okay, so good news on another thread I was following today...

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8651200#post8651200"]CANADA Canada - Police ask for help identifying mystery woman ‘Linda’ - Page 7 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

Now lets have some EXCELLENT news and bring Dylan home too.
 
aust amateur slueth said:
on the other hand parents often warn kids not to do things and the kids had no intention to do those things anyway. I know I've given my daughter a lot of general warnings over the years to make her aware of what risks there are.

we don't know why she talked to him about it. it could be that they saw someone hitchhiking, it could be that his older brother had hitchhiked, or even that Mom in her younger years had hitchhiked.

For me its not about not wanting to agree with it because it doesn't fit a theory, its because we have nothing to indicate that thats what Dylan did that day and because I really think he would have contacted his mate first, but then we know there was no activity at all on Dylans phone after 8pm sunday.

Maybe if sunday night was all accounted for I'd think differently, but it's not.
Click to expand...

Sunday night was accounted for, by his dad. It's just that a lot of people refuse to believe him. Maybe LE does, though.

Just to clarify... I have seen posts that clearly, (to me) state he could not or would not have hitched a ride. As if they know it is not a possibility. I am just saying that it is, IMO. No offense to anyone here, I know it's hard to explain the lack of activity on his phone, but explanations for that have been offered as well. Yet it's quickly discounted because it doesn't fit the theory.

What if Dylan's phone just died that night, and he didn't have a charger? Thought he packed it, but not there. Or the battery wouldn't take a charge. So he was tired and went to sleep, after Dad said he would pick up a new battery the next day. He didn't remember his friends' numbers off the top of his head. Got up after his dad left and said, 'heck with this, I'm just gonna hitchhike over there.' Took his backpack because he planned to stay a couple days. Took his fishing pole, too. Somebody came along who he thought he recognized, maybe barely knew, and.... something happened.

Pick out the holes in that scenario all you want to, I'm not even calling it a theory. I'm just saying, it's possible. Maybe not probable, but then how much ever is?
 
Abby Normal Again said:
At this point we're between 1) a NCP murdering their teen while staying behind to play innocent AND managing to do so with the search of their house adding nothing of value, and their cars being returned uneventfully without fanfare- which implies no cadaver hit. or 2) an abduction

Either way the chances are very very statistically low. There are more documented cases of abduction than the former. That doesn't mean that's what it is, because things don't always play into the odds. But EITHER event is statistically unlikely and rare at this point. I've been looking and looking and I can't find a single case of a NCP disappearing a teen in this way.

IMO I don't see how people can keep saying it was an accident or temper based crime. His cars and home were cleared, they offered nothing of value to investigators. The only place you can go from there (IMO) is 1)someone else did it OR 2)murder at a distance from home and cars so he never had to have Dylan in his car or home not living. This also means he didn't carry or move a non-living Dylan either, to get that scent on his own clothes and then get in his car. Unless we've stopped believing in the insane abilities of cadaver dogs. IMO the only options left are someone else or premeditation and calculated homicide. If they find evidence it was MR, I will never believe it was accidental at this point. MOO:moo:
Click to expand...
Most filicidal research does not break down statistically into children's ages and custodial status though. As a very general rule supported statistically by several studies mothers on average most often kill younger children (less than 5) while fathers murder older children (older than 5). Paternal filicides also are born of a revenge motivator more often than maternal filicides. Also, as generalities, men tend to be more physically violent during the crime. Men who do commit filicide have been found to have a higher occurrence of psychosis than the general public (by roughly 10%) and pose a high suicide risk of 60% on average.

A filicide of a teen may be rarer than that of a toddler but in just this one study they still accounted for 12% of victims.
http://www.jaapl.org/content/33/4/496.full

One very telling case of paternal revenge filicide is the Schepp case. There the (NCP) dad presumably murdered 6 year old Swiss twins (Alessia and Livia) while on holiday in France and later killed himself in Italy. Before committing suicide he sent a letter to the girl's mother - telling her he murdered the girls and she would never see them again. Their bodies have yet to be located and their mother holds out hope they are alive somewhere.

ETA: A handful of teen victim filicides (Dastardly Dads has a bevy of information):
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/a...father-kills-teen-son-man-in-bitter-cust.html
http://dastardlydads.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/dad-kills-two-teen-sons-was-upset-about.html
http://dastardlydads.blogspot.co.uk/p/the-killer-dads-and-custody-list-usa.html
http://articles.timesofindia.indiat.../33951785_1_judicial-custody-mother-neighbour
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-12-16/delhi/35850019_1_poonam-subhash-patel-nagar
 
I have a few questions that I am not sure have been answered or maybe they have and I've just missed them:

1.) Do we know for a fact that MR has a current land line?

2.) Do we know for a fact that MR's home internet service was working on Sunday & Monday (bill current, any outages)?

3.) Do we know for a fact MR has wifi or is his home computer just on a line/cable?

TIA
 
TxLady2 said:
Sunday night was accounted for, by his dad. It's just that a lot of people refuse to believe him. Maybe LE does, though.

Just to clarify... I have seen posts that clearly, (to me) state he could not or would not have hitched a ride. As if they know it is not a possibility. I am just saying that it is, IMO. No offense to anyone here, I know it's hard to explain the lack of activity on his phone, but explanations for that have been offered as well. Yet it's quickly discounted because it doesn't fit the theory.

What if Dylan's phone just died that night, and he didn't have a charger? Thought he packed it, but not there. Or the battery wouldn't take a charge. So he was tired and went to sleep, after Dad said he would pick up a new battery the next day. He didn't remember his friends' numbers off the top of his head. Got up after his dad left and said, 'heck with this, I'm just gonna hitchhike over there.' Took his backpack because he planned to stay a couple days. Took his fishing pole, too. Somebody came along who he thought he recognized, maybe barely knew, and.... something happened.

Pick out the holes in that scenario all you want to, I'm not even calling it a theory. I'm just saying, it's possible. Maybe not probable, but then how much ever is?
Click to expand...

All of what you say is possible. But it also includes a lot of leaps, IMO. That the phone died, that he forgot his charger, that he would not leave a note, that he forgot phone numbers. All of which could have happened and I am not saying it didn't. It is just difficult for some to imagine all of that happening.

I admit, I am stuck on the phone business. I can't get past his lack of contact in some way with R after Sunday evening, when it seemed as though the conversation was not over. And I can't get past my belief that if all was well between Dad and Dylan, Dylan would not have told his Dad that his phone died, was broken, could not text his friend back, etc. And yet Dad seemingly knew nothing about Dylan's phone not working.

What we are kind of forced to believe, IMO, is that Dylan didn't care that he couldn't reach R again even though to me he seemed most eager to see him and to text him. And if so tired, when did the nerf ball stuff happen? I've just never heard of a kid his age who is phone-happy not checking his phone again before bed when he was busy texting for the next day's plans.

Here I am rambling on about the phone yet again...can't help it.
 
FootballMom said:
I have a few questions that I am not sure have been answered or maybe they have and I've just missed them:

1.) Do we know for a fact that MR has a current land line?

2.) Do we know for a fact that MR's home internet service was working on Sunday & Monday (bill current, any outages)?

3.) Do we know for a fact MR has wifi or is his home computer just on a line/cable?

TIA
Click to expand...

ER stated that he has a landline and internet. Now could he have not paid his bill and both had been shut off? That's certainly a possibility. That or the lines were down....sure it's possible. BUT again that would mean so many odd coincidences when a little boy goes missing. His phone battery or phone dies AND MR's internet is not working AND his landline is not working? Way too many coincidences for me...and honestly IMO absolutely absurd to imagine all these things happening when Dylan goes missing.
 
BritsKate said:
Most filicidal research does not break down statistically into children's ages and custodial status though. As a very general rule supported statistically by several studies mothers on average most often kill younger children (less than 5) while fathers murder older children (older than 5). Paternal filicides also are born of a revenge motivator more often than maternal filicides. Also, as generalities, men tend to be more physically violent during the crime. Men who do commit filicide have been found to have a higher occurrence of psychosis than the general public (by roughly 10%) and pose a high suicide risk of 60% on average.

A filicide of a teen may be rarer than that of a toddler but in just this one study they still accounted for 12% of victims.
http://www.jaapl.org/content/33/4/496.full

One very telling case of paternal revenge filicide is the Schepp case. There the (NCP) dad presumably murdered 6 year old Swiss twins (Alessia and Livia) while on holiday in France and later killed himself in Italy. Before committing suicide he sent a letter to the girl's mother - telling her he murdered the girls and she would never see them again. Their bodies have yet to be located and their mother holds out hope they are alive somewhere.
Click to expand...

Also the Skelton boys; weren't they also on a visit to their father? Or in a shared custody situation of some kind?
 
Psychic Sleuth said:
It all depends on just how hard and where he hit him. He could kill a grown man if he hit him in the head in the right spot.
Click to expand...

Or a strong backhanded fist to the chest? Kids have been killed when hit in the chest with a batted baseball--heart rhythm interrupted, etc. And probably little to no blood then? But maybe bowels\etc. would release?

Sorry for the graphic thought. I wish we weren't having this conversation. . . .

(Posting before I'm all caught up on reading this thread.)
 
SuziQ said:
My thoughts on the fishing pole...

1-MR threw that idea out to give an explanation as to why Dylan would leave the house. Like the husbands who say their wives went jogging and never came back.

2-To give an innocent explanation to why Dylan's body would be found in the lake.
Click to expand...

In my mind a diversion, possibly planned well ahead. imo
 
Bravo said:
Yes and never found for those not familiar.
Click to expand...

Somehow it does seem to be true that those missing kids who have a parent/step not cleared by LE are less likely to be found. Maybe not statistically, I don't know, but just from WS; Ayla, Hailey, Haleigh, Kyron, Isabel,Skelton brothers,Lisa, Sky and others. Whereas those murdered by others, like Jessica, and the little girls killed last year in apartment and/or mobile home complexes,were found fairly quickly. Makes it appear that non-family perps are less careful about disposal. JMO
 
aust amateur slueth said:
I thought it was approximately 8pm, not spot on 8pm.

those few texts after 8pm could have been done in a minute or two.

but if we want to start at the first text that received no reply that was about 9.45pm IIRC
Click to expand...

The article says the texts are unedited but I think perhaps some texts were not printed. For example, the narrative says that Dylan's friend texted throughout the day, becoming more urgent. I imagine the texts between 10 AM and 4 PM are not included. By the same logic, texts between 8:01 and 9:27 Sunday night may also not be included. Just sayin'.....
 
cluciano63 said:
I never felt that Dylan leaving on his own or taking off was out of the question until I read the texting. He seems very, very anxious to meet up with his friend at the given time, with no qualms about the early hour except to be sure he would be let in. I find it hard to believe he would not get up, especially if his phone had crashed the night before.
Click to expand...

Well, see that's where people differ in opinions. We don't know him, so it's just as easy for me to believe that he was half asleep, his conscious mind didn't put everything together, and he rolled over and went back to sleep. Many people do the same thing. He was in a place he was not as familiar with, he wasn't fully awake enough to sort out his thoughts, so he didn't get up. Dad may not have tried the 2nd or 3rd time to wake him, and just left while he was only semi-awake.
I've raised 3 boys. Two of them were very good at getting up when they were supposed to most of the time. The last one is just like his daddy, he is extremely hard to wake up and get him moving. They will both talk to me and then go back to sleep.
I know that they say Dylan apparently went to sleep early so should have been slept out enough to hop up and be ready to go, but I also know that when kids are very, very tired, they can sleep for 14 hours at a stretch, and still be sleepy when they wake up.
I'm just saying.
 
Abby Normal Again said:
At this point we're between 1) a NCP murdering their teen while staying behind to play innocent AND managing to do so with the search of their house adding nothing of value, and their cars being returned uneventfully without fanfare- which implies no cadaver hit. or 2) an abduction

Either way the chances are very very statistically low. There are more documented cases of abduction than the former. That doesn't mean that's what it is, because things don't always play into the odds. But EITHER event is statistically unlikely and rare at this point. I've been looking and looking and I can't find a single case of a NCP disappearing a teen in this way.

IMO I don't see how people can keep saying it was an accident or temper based crime. His cars and home were cleared, they offered nothing of value to investigators. The only place you can go from there (IMO) is 1)someone else did it OR 2)murder at a distance from home and cars so he never had to have Dylan in his car or home not living. This also means he didn't carry or move a non-living Dylan either, to get that scent on his own clothes and then get in his car. Unless we've stopped believing in the insane abilities of cadaver dogs. IMO the only options left are someone else or premeditation and calculated homicide. If they find evidence it was MR, I will never believe it was accidental at this point. MOO:moo:
Click to expand...

I thgink Ayla Reynolds might be an example of when a NCP murdered their child, and then stayed behind, and played innocent. Although she was only 18 months old, her father tried to say she wandered outside and took off, early one morning. :mad:
 
cluciano63 said:
Somehow it does seem to be true that those missing kids who have a parent/step not cleared by LE are less likely to be found. Maybe not statistically, I don't know, but just from WS; Ayla, Hailey, Haleigh, Kyron, Isabel,Skelton brothers,Lisa, Sky and others. Whereas those murdered by others, like Jessica, and the little girls killed last year in apartment and/or mobile home complexes,were found fairly quickly. Makes it appear that non-family perps are less careful about disposal. JMO
Click to expand...

It would make sense if those perps who know they'll be the suspect numero uno try to be more careful, hoping for a no body case. The parents also might have more time if they're the ones who decide when the child gets reported missing.

Some of the WS effect might be a little illusory though, as I think many cases in which the parents dispose of the body carelessly, it is found quickly and the parent is arrested in short order never get that much attention on WS to begin with as there's little mystery about it and LE thinks it's solved so there may not be that much publicity either.
 
TxLady2 said:
Sunday night was accounted for, by his dad. It's just that a lot of people refuse to believe him. Maybe LE does, though.

Just to clarify... I have seen posts that clearly, (to me) state he could not or would not have hitched a ride. As if they know it is not a possibility. I am just saying that it is, IMO. No offense to anyone here, I know it's hard to explain the lack of activity on his phone, but explanations for that have been offered as well. Yet it's quickly discounted because it doesn't fit the theory.

What if Dylan's phone just died that night, and he didn't have a charger? Thought he packed it, but not there. Or the battery wouldn't take a charge. So he was tired and went to sleep, after Dad said he would pick up a new battery the next day. He didn't remember his friends' numbers off the top of his head. Got up after his dad left and said, 'heck with this, I'm just gonna hitchhike over there.' Took his backpack because he planned to stay a couple days. Took his fishing pole, too. Somebody came along who he thought he recognized, maybe barely knew, and.... something happened.

Pick out the holes in that scenario all you want to, I'm not even calling it a theory. I'm just saying, it's possible. Maybe not probable, but then how much ever is?
Click to expand...

BBM

If he needed a new battery and Dad was going to pick one up, I think we would have heard that already.

And if his dad was going to bring him a new battery and drive him to his friends, why hitch hike there? Why not wait an hour and get a ride and your cell fixed?

And if he hitched, why didnt anyone in the neighborhood see him out there?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 143 more.
Total: 2,476 (members: 144, guests: 2,332)

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
2,332
Total visitors
2,476
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,442
Messages
18,108,861
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top