cluciano63
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 41,198
- Reaction score
- 27,304
They appear to be stuck at this point, with no evidence of anything.
I have no idea why they released so little.
I fear they have little more.
They appear to be stuck at this point, with no evidence of anything.
I have no idea why they released so little.
I fear they have little more.
Can you elaborate a little further on where your going with your thoughts, depending on which device he may have sent his last text from? I'm lost. lol
Can you elaborate a little further on where your going with your thoughts, depending on which device he may have sent his last text from? I'm lost. lol
Well they certainly know more than they released.
When did the cell phone stopped pinging?
Was the message send by cell phone?
What was in the message? Who was the recipient of the message?
C/BBM
she didn't seem to disagree.
well that's interesting
:waitasec:
Can you elaborate a little further on where your going with your thoughts, depending on which device he may have sent his last text from? I'm lost. lol
Dylan's mother was saying the cell phone was last used around 8:00 pm.
Now we find out that there was a message at 9:37 pm.
So we are trying to figure out why the discrepancy.
Also, at 9:37 pm Dylan should have already arrived at MR's home.
So that message presumably verifies Dylan actually arrived at MR's home.
Trying to catch up but so many new pages just since yesterday! Did anyone have the link for the last interview. I can't find it on Google. tia
Yes jjenny is correct. Also I wonder why if ER stated last text on cell was around 8:00 pm from her phone records, why did he stop using phone and then switch to IPOD? Also Dylan and phone are missing and an IPOD was recovered by LE from MR's house. (Per 9news video report)
http://www.9news.com/rss/story.aspx?storyid=302378
IMO LE have released the info about there being a text from Dylans 'electronic device' to put the wind up the sender and the receiver of that text hoping that they would then fess up what happened to Dylan.
I'm still not convinced that Dylan was at the house sunday night.
Or the text could have been from Dylan and received by someone we're not yet allowed to sleuth.
General question, how many iPods have texting capabilities? Is it all of them? Granted I've only looked at the "old school" iPods but I haven't seen one that had texting, or at least if so it wasn't obvious you could do anything other than listen to music (other than the really new iPods that have video and such). I know the recent iPods have texting, video, etc. but if Dylan was still waiting/hoping for an updated cell phone, was his iPod one of the more recent versions? I don't know if it even matters, just thinking, hoping something will spark an important idea for someone.
General question, how many iPods have texting capabilities? Is it all of them? Granted I've only looked at the "old school" iPods but I haven't seen one that had texting, or at least if so it wasn't obvious you could do anything other than listen to music (other than the really new iPods that have video and such). I know the recent iPods have texting, video, etc. but if Dylan was still waiting/hoping for an updated cell phone, was his iPod one of the more recent versions? I don't know if it even matters, just thinking, hoping something will spark an important idea for someone.
WOW. THANK YOU FOR THAT INCREDIBLE ANALYSIS!!! And I believe he was the most evasive and deflective in addressing (he certainly didnt answer it) that last question. In other words I have not heard him give a reliable denial of involvement in Dylan's disappearance.posted by SuperMom1995 in the previous thread:
I majored in sociology/psych, and have spent the past several years studying speech patterns, body language, etc. My next step is completing Mark McClish's Statement Analysis course - amazing stuff - and it's from reading Mr. McClish's work (I asked him to help out on the Keddie murders case, and his work was of immense help) that I've begun to scrutinise exactly what you're saying - the 'senstive' areas in people's statements, their pronoun use, etc. Not an expert (yet) but still, studying McClish's methods has opened my eyes a lot to the way people speak, and what they are -not- saying.
It will probably take me weeks to comb over the transcripts. But right away, I notice MR's use of pronouns when he's asked to make statements regarding what he's say to Dylan when Dylan comes home, and what he'd like to say to Dylan's abductors.
Primarily, MR uses "I" a great deal in relation to his son - and there's also a LOT of both simmering and blatant hostility toward his ex wife throughout the interview.
Yet when asked the above questions, MR switches to primarily using "we". So.. who is "we", kimosabe? Him and.... who? The ex wife who hates his guts and thinks he took their son? There's no unity in this relationship, and none in the matter of Dylan's disappearance - yet, he speaks in terms of "we", not "I".
To me, this seems like "we" is a bit of shield, where "I" might be an uncomfortable pronoun. It's enough to make me think this is, as you say, a "sensitive" area.
This is probably the big sticker-outer for me, right now (BBM and respectfully snipped from the transcript) :
Melissa Blasius:
*snip* Did you have anything whatsoever to do with Dylans disappearance?
Mark Redwine:
Absolutely not. I would never do anything to harm that boy. I know theyre looking at me as being involved in some kind of kidnapping scheme, which is one of the reasons why I want them to look closely at me, because the more that they look at me, the more theyre going to realize that I have nothing to do with this. Theres no possible way I would do anything to cause harm or misery to my son.
Melissa Blasius:
Do you have any idea what did happen to him then?
Mark Redwine:
I can only speculate, and . Its hard for me to voice my opinion as far as that goes, because Ill be honest with you, the only thing that matters and the only thing in my mind that should matter to anybody is finding Dylan.
Im not interested in pointing fingers. Im not interested in blaming anybody. My only interest is finding Dylan, and I think that once we find Dylan and bring him home, it will bring all the answers to the questions that we dont have. I could speculate all day long.
I bolded the phrases of interest I intend to come back to at some point ("I would never do anything to harm that boy"- compare this to statements like "I have never had sexual relations with that woman"..) but I think it's enough to say for now that nowhere does MR make the simple statement, "I didn't hurt my son", or "I am not involved in Dylan's disappearance." Instead, there's a lot of deflection and passive aggressive comebacking to Elaine ("I'm not interested in pointing fingers" - this makes no sense at all in the case of possible stranger abduction, it only makes sense in context of MR deflecting from a direct answer by passive aggressively blaming Elaine, or making a comeback to other people's 'finger pointing').
But the loudest sub-text I am seeing in this interview is anger - at Elaine, and very possibly at some dichotomy between the highly idealised relationship with Dylan MR is describing, and a reality in which that intense bond has been degraded -- or maybe doesn't actually exist as MR would like it to, or would like us to believe.
I can't say if this makes him guilty. But I'm eyeballing him, based on the facts I listed in a former post, and now these initial perceptions of his statements.
Just the touch can text ( iPod touch)