CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #24

[The Cheese]

That's weird considering he was really only there like 12 hrs..........TOPS !

I don't think it's weird. They have to figure out if the person was doing preparatory stuff prior to abducting, if they were stalking other kids, on the prowl, etc. And post abduction where they went, what they did, opportunities to kill the child, molest the child, hide the child, hide their body, etc

 

[Amster]

WTH!?
Why do I have no recollection of ever seeing this ?
I remember countless times talking about the ' we are not calling ' him a suspect. I don't remember ever them saying he's not considered one ! UGH !

My observation in this case is.....it doesn't matter what LE says. :twocents:

 

[The Cheese]

"And then the conversation ends. ...But Dylan never responded.


His friend clearly states that Dylan NEVER RESPONDED after 8 pm. To me, 'never responded' would include phone calls.

And he never says that he spoke to Dylan. Why would he leave that out?

I understand what you're saying, katy. To me though, that's talking about the texts. I see room for there to have been a phone call, and R asked by police to keep it to himself.

 

[asyousay]

My observation in this case is.....it doesn't matter what LE says. :twocents:

I agree , even if they announce he is a suspect without any kind of EVIDENCE then it goes nowhere IMHO

 

[Confusion]

If Dylan used the phone, he would have spoken to someone or left a message. Then we would know he was actually there.

I doubt MR knew DR's passwords, but, you never know I guess.

If there were hairs in a brush, I would not think MR planted it.

There is nothing...just nothing that shows he may have been there.

Nothing that we've been told about, and that's a big difference. MOO

Really? Could some people not be out to frame MR and just want answers to find Dylan, just maybe?

That would be me! :seeya:

If that was the case then we could sleuth most family's in other threads and its strictly not allowed .

From what i can gather this is quite rare that the rules was changed in this thread. Please show me if i am wrong.

You can not simply explain away lack of phone use and you can not also simply explain away the fact nobody besides MR claims to have seen him after Sunday night , after his phone mystically stops working .

Then the fact Dylan took all most of his stuff with when he vanished , again not normal when you are off to fish .

MOO, IMHO, IMO

There's nothing 'mystical' about a cell phone not working. There have been possible explanations for the phone being inactive, and I wouldn't expect there to be a peeping tom or anyone like that stepping up to say he'd seen Dylan at the house that night. Nobody has said that he went to fish; MR said that his fishing pole was missing and might be with him. MOO

WTH!?
Why do I have no recollection of ever seeing this ?
I remember countless times talking about the ' we are not calling ' him a suspect. I don't remember ever them saying he's not considered one ! UGH !

I posted that a couple nights ago, with the link.

When your sons were at home with you, they had no reason to worry about charging their cells. But I bet if they were shipped off on a visitation, where their cell was their only way of being in contact with you, or each other or their friends, then in that case they WOULD make sure to charge their phone. imo.

When my kids would go to visit their grandparents, they were very reliant upon their cells. They felt isolated without them because they were hours away from home and their usual routines.

If my kids had cell phones when they were that age, they'd probably purposely forget them at home so I wouldn't be checking up on them! :blushing: Especially when going to visit dad, who lived near all of their old friends.

I am not really sure what you consider MSM. I have several sources of my info, but not sure exactly what is considered MSM. Eileen, I believe what you say here is true also, but not totally sure of that one. I am not a cell phone tower professional :0

There have been links, posted not too long ago, to information from people who are cell phone tower professionals.

 

[katydid23]

I understand what you're saying, katy. To me though, that's talking about the texts. I see room for there to have been a phone call, and R asked by police to keep it to himself.

I guess I don't see it like that.

If LE asked him to keep the phone call to himself, why would he give the press access to all of his unedited texts?

And why would R say that D ' never responded' if, in fact, he had responded by landline? Sorry, but that makes no sense, imo.

 

[SCHMAE]

Nothing that we've been told about, and that's a big difference. MOO



That would be me! :seeya:


There's nothing 'mystical' about a cell phone not working. There have been possible explanations for the phone being inactive, and I wouldn't expect there to be a peeping tom or anyone like that stepping up to say he'd seen Dylan at the house that night. Nobody has said that he went to fish; MR said that his fishing pole was missing and might be with him. MOO


I posted that a couple nights ago, with the link.


If my kids had cell phones when they were that age, they'd probably purposely forget them at home so I wouldn't be checking up on them! :blushing: Especially when going to visit dad, who lived near all of their old friends.



There have been links, posted not too long ago, to information from people who are cell phone tower professionals.

I'm sorry Confusion. I hope I'm not the only one *( but I'll be first to admit it ) that on occasion , comes back from work or errands, finds myself 10 to 15 pages behind and sometimes ........skips one or two pages now and then while trying to get current. :blushing:

 

[Dee10]

I don't think it's weird. They have to figure out if the person was doing preparatory stuff prior to abducting, if they were stalking other kids, on the prowl, etc. And post abduction where they went, what they did, opportunities to kill the child, molest the child, hide the child, hide their body, etc

Here is the quote again:

Phippen said all of the local registered sex offenders had been checked out and had alibis for the 48-hour period from when Dylan arrived at the airport to the time he was reported missing.

Does anyone believe they haven't done the same with MR for the 48 hour period, because it looks as if that is the period of time LE is looking at? Or do you believe he has been cleared & they just aren't saying?

 

[basilcat]

hey there, katydid,
with all due respect, my boys did honour visitation order with their dad ( he lives in Ontario and I live in Nova Scotia)..
They would both rely on their phones to a certain extent, but not always. We were often in "cottage country" where there wasn't service. My youngest never and still doesn't) communicate by cell phone - although it is considered "mainstream"; not everyone feels the need to communicate this way.
My youngest was with his dad in Ontario cottage country and had forgot to charge his phone ...then there was no signal....if he had hitched a ride somewhere and not returned I am sure that many would have suspected foul play...
All I am saying is that I think too much emphasis is being placed on what people perceive that Dylan would have done (charged his phone, left a note etc.) rather than on what a 13 year old boy would do on impulse ...which IMO, is the most likely alternative...

 

[asyousay]

There's nothing 'mystical' about a cell phone not working. There have been possible explanations for the phone being inactive, and I wouldn't expect there to be a peeping tom or anyone like that stepping up to say he'd seen Dylan at the house that night. Nobody has said that he went to fish; MR said that his fishing pole was missing and might be with him. MOO

.

I thought that is why they checked the lake because of the pole missing?

 

[The Cheese]

I guess I don't see it like that.

If LE asked him to keep the phone call to himself, why would he give the press access to all of his unedited texts?

And why would R say that D ' never responded' if, in fact, he had responded by landline? Sorry, but that makes no sense, imo.

We are seeing it very differently. And that's okay. I don't see why R couldn't keep a phone call to himself, but go ahead and provide the texts. I don't see where R said that Dylan never responded. I see the reporter writing that, and I think the whole thing is about the texts - not any potential phone calls.

What makes no sense to me would be assuming so much about a potential phone call based on an article about texts. We all think differently, and that's great.

 

[katydid23]

Here is the quote again:

Phippen said all of the local registered sex offenders had been checked out and had alibis for the 48-hour period from when Dylan arrived at the airport to the time he was reported missing.

Does anyone believe they haven't done the same with MR for the 48 hour period, because it looks as if that is the period of time LE is looking at? Or do you believe he has been cleared & they just aren't saying?

Good post. :goodpost:

 

[katydid23]

hey there, katydid,
with all due respect, my boys did honour visitation order with their dad ( he lives in Ontario and I live in Nova Scotia)..
They would both rely on their phones to a certain extent, but not always. We were often in "cottage country" where there wasn't service. My youngest never and still doesn't) communicate by cell phone - although it is considered "mainstream"; not everyone feels the need to communicate this way.
My youngest was with his dad in Ontario cottage country and had forgot to charge his phone ...then there was no signal....if he had hitched a ride somewhere and not returned I am sure that many would have suspected foul play...
All I am saying is that I think too much emphasis is being placed on what people perceive that Dylan would have done (charged his phone, left a note etc.) rather than on what a 13 year old boy would do on impulse ...which IMO, is the most likely alternative...

Thank you for the reply. I guess all kids are different, and I am reminded of that by various posts. My kids clung to their cells at that age, but other kids, not so much.

By the way, is that a picture of YOUR cat. Because it is a GORGEOUS creature. lol

 

[The Cheese]

Here is the quote again:

Phippen said all of the local registered sex offenders had been checked out and had alibis for the 48-hour period from when Dylan arrived at the airport to the time he was reported missing.

Does anyone believe they haven't done the same with MR for the 48 hour period, because it looks as if that is the period of time LE is looking at? Or do you believe he has been cleared & they just aren't saying?

Oh I'm sure they've looked at that 48 hour period for a lot of people - Mark, Elaine, Mike, Cory, other family members on both sides, friends, 'enemies', neighbors, acquaintances, etc. All the standard people they would look at. What people are doing before and after the 'zero hour' when a child goes missing is important.

The discussion though was about the RSOs, so that's why I responded as I did.

 

[The Cheese]

I thought that is why they checked the lake because of the pole missing?

That was speculation here. What was reported in MSM is that the lake was checked because of the broken pole that was found there. It was in an ABC article I remember, as well as others.

edit - here's one of the articles -

A few days ago, there was a spark of hope after part of a fishing pole was found on a dam, prompting a two-day search of the area that turned up empty.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/11/29/no-sign-of-colorado-boy-visit-dad/

 

[vasportsmom]

I guess I don't see it like that.

If LE asked him to keep the phone call to himself, why would he give the press access to all of his unedited texts?

And why would R say that D ' never responded' if, in fact, he had responded by landline? Sorry, but that makes no sense, imo.

ITA! There has been nothing released to suggest that anybody ever heard from Dylan in any way after his last reported text. LE has no reason to hide the fact that Dylan made it to MR's but they have never indicated they have proof of that.

I really can't buy that Dylan was lax about charging his phone either. For starters, he had a flip phone not a smart phone. Flip phones have a much better battery life than the majority of phones available. More importantly we have been told Dylan did not want to make this visit. He had good reason to be wary of his father. Mark had demonstrated his willingness to expose his child to his drinking and violence in the past. I don't believe for a second that a child in that situation would be so careless or unconcerned with his main lifeline to his mother should history repeat itself and things get out of control. Dylan was nearly 14. He wasn't unwise to who his father was and the threat he posed to him when drinking. IMO.

 

[asyousay]

That was speculation here. What was reported in MSM is that the lake was checked because of the broken pole that was found there. It was in an ABC article I remember, as well as others.

edit - here's one of the articles -

A few days ago, there was a spark of hope after part of a fishing pole was found on a dam, prompting a two-day search of the area that turned up empty.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/11/29/no-sign-of-colorado-boy-visit-dad/

cheers me dears


sometimes its hard to keep up on here and im here a lot and yet i still do not know some stuff.

I keep hoping i will log on and there will be news but still nothing :banghead:

 

[jjenny]

That was speculation here. What was reported in MSM is that the lake was checked because of the broken pole that was found there. It was in an ABC article I remember, as well as others.

edit - here's one of the articles -

A few days ago, there was a spark of hope after part of a fishing pole was found on a dam, prompting a two-day search of the area that turned up empty.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/11/29/no-sign-of-colorado-boy-visit-dad/

But they determined later on the broken pole was not Dylan's.

 

[Confusion]

I'm sorry Confusion. I hope I'm not the only one *( but I'll be first to admit it ) that on occasion , comes back from work or errands, finds myself 10 to 15 pages behind and sometimes ........skips one or two pages now and then while trying to get current. :blushing:

I thought that is why they checked the lake because of the pole missing?

What I've read is that dogs led them to the lake, but I'll have to look for the link...it's been posted several times, and I believe it's in the time line somewhere.

 

[jjenny]

We are seeing it very differently. And that's okay. I don't see why R couldn't keep a phone call to himself, but go ahead and provide the texts. I don't see where R said that Dylan never responded. I see the reporter writing that, and I think the whole thing is about the texts - not any potential phone calls.

What makes no sense to me would be assuming so much about a potential phone call based on an article about texts. We all think differently, and that's great.

If you read his texts, it's rather clear he didn't talk to Dylan. There was also an article which states his friends tried to text and phone him on Monday but got no response.