CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #20

[catswhiskers]

I've always thought that the Walmart and Airport photos were released by LE to give the public a better idea of what Dylan was wearing and what he looked like before he went missing. And again, releasing the clearest single frames of Dylan they could find. I don't think I have ever seen a missing person poster/pic from LE that shows anyone else in the shot.

 

[MissJ]

For the tight-knit town that now has posters up everywhere, the thought of an abduction was completely unexpected, yet, investigators told Action 7 News that's exactly what they think happened.

http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico...17707274/-/pj5977z/-/index.html#ixzz2GMAEYHh0

Dylan's most recent poster from crimestoppers. Please post it on the internet and hand it out in your neighborhood -
http://www.durangolaplatacrimestoppers.org/Pictures/Reward Poster - Dylan Redwine 12-27-12 (rev).pdf

Here's a closeup of Dylan's face. Please remember it -

That news story was December 8th and sadly they seem to have nothing new!:banghead:

 

[TxLady2]

Well I think it would give a look at how they were together that night before this child went missing.
Im sorry I think its an important piece to this puzzle this is the last person to see Dylan.

I also think there is a reason LE has not released this info.
This is just my opinion and nothing more.
That child did not look happy in that pic they released and I thought maybe the rest of the video would show why? who knows!

Better question is Why NOT show Dad? They were together!

What video? There wouldn't be a video. Those cameras are not following shoppers around, they're focused on one small area. The cameras capture only a few seconds of any one person, in frames of a few seconds, then the next camera picks them up maybe 10-15 feet away. The security personnel are trained to focus on suspicious behavior if someone is caught trying to shoplift. They're not going to focus on a father and son merely walking through the store.
I think they would be lucky to have found more than a few frames captured of either one of them, and that wouldn't help much.

 

[white rabbit]

maybe dad wasn't in walmart at all. maybe he handed dylan a 20 and said 'go buy some snacks'.

 

[catswhiskers]

It might very well be an important part of the puzzle - for LE. Not for the general public. Again, I just can't see any way releasing it to the general public would help find Dylan. It's LE's job to build a case (if one is indeed being built,) not the public's. The public's "job" is to help LE find Dylan. Seeing Dad in Walmart is unlikely to help with that, IMO.

I also have to agree with those who mentioned "divide and conquer." At 13, my boys would take off for the electronics aisle as well. And I can guarantee you that unless we were there specifically to get them something they wanted, they would not look happy to be there, because they wouldn't be. Shopping with parents was never high on their "to do" list. They also would not want to be walking close to Mom or Dad. Definitely not the "cool" thing to do at that age, at least among my three sons and all their friends. Even walking through the parking lot, they were always a good ways ahead of, or behind me at that age.

I hope nobody ever looks closely at store footage of me when I shop with my boys - I would always look like am ready to explode! My 15yo has to almost be dragged out of the car and complains bitterly the entire time, while 13yo is the one who takes off and does his own thing - ensuring I spend half my time looking for him so we can move on. Oh and if they ever happen to be actually in the same aisle at the same time, they can't keep their hands off each other - hitting, flicking or clobbering each other with whatever is handy. Yes, security cams would capture some great pics of me!

 

[catswhiskers]

What video? There wouldn't be a video. Those cameras are not following shoppers around, they're focused on one small area. The cameras capture only a few seconds of any one person, in frames of a few seconds, then the next camera picks them up maybe 10-15 feet away. The security personnel are trained to focus on suspicious behavior if someone is caught trying to shoplift. They're not going to focus on a father and son merely walking through the store.
I think they would be lucky to have found more than a few frames captured of either one of them, and that wouldn't help much.

Exactly! Those pics of Dylan would be the very best they could come up with, and they would have been enhanced considerably by one of LEs experts in that field IMO.

 

[SCHMAE]

Well I think it would give a look at how they were together that night before this child went missing.
Im sorry I think its an important piece to this puzzle this is the last person to see Dylan.

I also think there is a reason LE has not released this info.
This is just my opinion and nothing more.
That child did not look happy in that pic they released and I thought maybe the rest of the video would show why? who knows!

Better question is Why NOT show Dad? They were together!

You can bet LE has seen them together in walmart. As for the public, even though we want MORE info, the only info we ' need' is to see what Dylan looked like that night. LE has probably seen them together in video, not just stills, and they were probably able to assess how they ' seemed' together, happy , sad, fighting, what not.
But I have wondered if a fishing pole was bought that night :O

 

[scorekeeper]

You can bet LE has seen them together in walmart. As for the public, even though we want MORE info, the only info we ' need' is to see what Dylan looked like that night. LE has probably seen them together in video, not just stills, and they were probably able to assess how they ' seemed' together, happy , sad, fighting, what not.
But I have wondered if a fishing pole was bought that night :O

I think if Mark did purchase a new fishing pole for Dylan at Walmart, he would have mentioned it in his interview....making a big deal out of it....saying how much Dylan was looking forward to using it...jmo

 

[azgrandma]

A court order means nothing if she felt her child was in danger. And has anyone seen that court order? I know she could have been held in contempt, but it would have been way down the road and she would have the opportunity to have it changed. jmo

Yes, she may have been held in contempt, she may have been ordered jail time for contempt. So what was her option, send her child for a court ordered visitation with NO idea that this was the outcome or don't send her child because she fears for his safety and just WHO do you think the courts would have given DR to while she was in jail? Hmmm MR, the other parent!

 

[azgrandma]

Absolutely!! First of all the NCP would have to complain, it would have to go to court, and we all know this takes time. In the meantime she could present her fears to the judge and most likely he would change the orders. ty

Not true, I had an emergency hearing (over the phone) concerning visitation. Set up immediately. The judge flat out told me that if I didn't put the kids on the plane I would go to jail.

Just because you think the other parent "might" do something, without hard evidence you are not going to change a thing.

If one parent defies a court order you can request an emergency hearing. They won't do it for something like non-payment of child support, but visitation and/or safety of the child is another thing.

 

[JustJeannie]

Yes, she may have been held in contempt, she may have been ordered jail time for contempt. So what was her option, send her child for a court ordered visitation with NO idea that this was the outcome or don't send her child because she fears for his safety and just WHO do you think the courts would have given DR to while she was in jail? Hmmm MR, the other parent!

I absolutely agree... no court is going to change an order based on a "feeling" or an "instinct." There would have to be some solid proof that the child would be in danger. It would not be worth risking losing custody permanently, or going to jail where you could not help your child.

And while ER has expressed her fears and concerns after the fact, I don't know that she really believed Dylan was in any true danger going to visit his father. And that is not a criticism of her in any way. But by her own statements, she texted Dylan to make sure he got there safely and his dad picked him up. Then she apparently (at least by what she has said) either did not text him after that, or if she did and he didn't reply, was not concerned enough by not hearing from him in what - 21 hours - to contact Mark or LE and ask why he wasn't responding. To me, that says that she was not terribly concerned about his safety while with his father. That she was assuming he was having a good time with his friends, and would probably contact her later that evening to let her know how things were going. To me, that doesn't sound like someone who had serious concerns that he was being put in an unsafe situation.

Again, that is not a criticism of her or her actions. Kids go to visit their NCP every day all over the country, whether they want to go or not. The vast majority of them return safely, thank goodness. Unless a specific and credible threat had been made, she would have no reason to believe that Dylan would not be one of them.

I'm sure she's feeling guilt now, as every mother in that situation would be... whether MR did something to Mark, or a random stranger did. I'm sure she's feeling anger at MR, again regardless of what happened. Dylan was in his care at the time he went missing. Those are normal reactions, and I can't blame her for them, anymore than I can blame her for sending her child off on a court ordered visitation. There are no crystal balls we can look into to see what will happen in the future. All any of us can ever do is the thing we think is best at the time. Sadly, that does not always turn out to be what would have been best in the end. But it does not mean we are at fault for not anticipating what did happen.

As always, JMO.

 

[i8mypaint]

Not true, I had an emergency hearing (over the phone) concerning visitation. Set up immediately. The judge flat out told me that if I didn't put the kids on the plane I would go to jail.

Just because you think the other parent "might" do something, without hard evidence you are not going to change a thing.

If one parent defies a court order you can request an emergency hearing. They won't do it for something like non-payment of child support, but visitation and/or safety of the child is another thing.

Thank you, sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who says this. Not only the contempt thing but my lawyer had told me (when I went through a nasty custody battle) that I could face losing custody.... And then my kid would be with that man all the time. I personally think my ex is crazy, doesn't always take his meds, but what can I do about it? That is what sometimes really sucks, there is nothing you can do if you think someone is off... Until they do something, and usually it's too late...
JMO

 

[white rabbit]

either what dylan and/or MR purchased in wal-mart is completely irrelevant (easymac and pepsi) or it's pertinent to the investigation (a fishing pole). why they haven't said either way is strange. because if an item was bought that is now missing, it's certainly something the 200+ searchers should have been looking for. IMO.

jeff easley and brittany smith were tracked on video from the entrance, to the aisle, to checkout. given that dylan was there the sunday before black friday one would think all walmart eyes would be on big-ticket item purchases and every single register.

JMO.

 

[i8mypaint]

Someone a couple pages back, sorry I can't find it now. Was asking what 50/50 custody meant. I have joint custody, and it means pretty much any big desicions such as schooling, religion, health concerns etc... Cannot be made by one parent alone. They have to be agreed on. If we can't agree then we go to arbitrators to help us agree.

 

[NC Analyzer]

Everything about this case seems to be that way

-He quit texting at 8 because he fell asleep
-He didn't get up because he was tired
-He didn't call his friends because his phone died/didn't charge/forgot charger
- He didn't use the landline because it was a foreign concept/didn't know #s
-He didn't use the computer because it was pass coded
-No scent items were available because he slept on couch without a fresh blanket or pillow & he never changed clothes

Just on and on. At some point you really have to stop and say enough is enough.

Just catching up this morning and came across this post...I have been saying this from the beginning!
TOO MANY COINCIDENCES, EXPLANATIONS, REASONS, EXCUSES, STORIES!

<Mod Snip>

 

[azgrandma]

I dunno either, but I don't know many "men" that will beat up a drunk. Haven't seen this myself. Actually I have never seen a fight. But it certainly seems like an unfair advantage and I don't know any children who are that disrespectful to a parent. jmo

Real men don't beat up their wives, real men don't take swings at their children. Unfair advantage? To whom was it unfair?
A child defending a parent, a child defending himself is NOT being disrespectful, what was he to do, Oh thanks Dad, hit me again because I respect you, hit mom again and I'll just sit here and watch because I respect you.

Respect is earned, not given.

 

[SCHMAE]

Real men don't beat up their wives, real men don't take swings at their children. Unfair advantage? To whom was it unfair?
A child defending a parent, a child defending himself is NOT being disrespectful, what was he to do, Oh thanks Dad, hit me again because I respect you, hit mom again and I'll just sit here and watch because I respect you.

Respect is earned, not given.

Azgrandma, I wonder if you can clear up a question we've been harping on the last few pages. In your opinion or experience does MR have a drinking problem or has he in the past ? Tks and if its' NON TOS I understand !

MODS if I just totally broke a rule, I'm sorry. It just struck me I have no idea if I'm allowed to ask. :|

eeks in advance

 

[NC Analyzer]

In defense of myself, I have been an enabler of this type you speak of. I didn't know that was what i was doing until years later and lots of therapy. Just my two cents.

In my experience, many women have fallen into the "enabler" trap. Usually happens once or twice when we are young and stupid. Once we see the pitfalls of this type of relationship, most of us manage to get out. Unfortunately, there are a few who find themselves "stuck" in this mentality for years. Tolerate a bad relationship because they "need" a man to feel complete. It is a pet peeve of mine.

 

[SCHMAE]

I think we all have a vested interest in Dylan being found and brought home, hopefully , prayerfully alive and well. I think none of us would have come here daily for 4 or 5 weeks now to see and read and share and sleuth and question every scrap of information we can get , without really feeling a kinship for this young boy. I think the lack of information is frustrating and it shows with us getting a bit snippy after a long day of NOTHING new. I think everyone's opinion is valid and possible. At this point, any scenario is possible. I hope LE has much more info than we do and are working diligently to help this little man . Our level of frustration is OBVIOUS, but with that in mind you have to know the level of frustration for Dylan's family is 100000 % worse than ours. If we had solid theories with good evidence to look down, we would likely not be getting snippy with each other. It is what it is... a sad , horrible, frustrating case that everyone wishes would come to an end. But none of us can hold a candle to the pain of his family. Let's LOVE Dylan and not take things personally. We have nothing against each other,, we're all upset about the same thing !

 

[LotusPawprint]

Naaaa for some reason he was cut out!
JMO

It would show the dynamics between them Why leave him out?
Seems strange to me.
Why not show them walking in together or out?
Why just one frozen shot of dylan?

We saw Casey at Walmart!
We saw Baby Lisas mom with her brother buying wine?
Why not show dad and dylan?

IIRC one of the main purposes for putting out the video of BLisa's mother was to show her with the (at the time) unidentified man, later identified as her brother. I could be remembering that wrong, but wasn't there some confusion that she was with some unknown guy in the hours before Lisa went missing? And they were trying to figure out if DB had Lisa with her. There's a difference between a mom having her infant child with her, who would be in a stroller or being held vs a father and his 13-year old son who is capable of walking around Walmart by himself.

Those Walmart cameras aren't like Big Brother cameras to show interactions and deduce the dynamics, from what I understand. I believe the goal was to show Dylan, give the public the best and most recent visual of what he looked like and was wearing and they accomplished that task.