CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #35

[Ronald99]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...0YKQdLavI2qygsLuJYSVKlw&bvm=bv.42452523,d.eWU
( The Task Force is still requesting any recreational video footage or photographs that include vehicles traveling on any routes between Durango and Vallecito Lake, taken between 6 p.m. on Sunday, Nov. 18 through noon on Monday Nov. 19 )

I've always found it interesting Law Enforcement requesting video or photos the prior evening, instead of just the time frame the Father claimed to have taken off running erands.

Even though they haven't named him a suspect or POI, they must have doubts concerning the time frame he provided concerning dylan being on the couch at 7:30 am that Monday morning. JMO.

 

[Seajay]

I've been thinking about that fishing pole, as it keeps popping up. What IF, in the beginning, when the case was fresh, Mark looked around, didn't see the fishing pole and told LE this? It made the news.

Then at a later date, Mark found the fishing pole when he was puttering around (NOT PACING) the house or yard or garage and found said fishing pole, and told LE about that and it dind't make the news??? What if the fishing pole is a dead issue and has been for LE and the search for Dylan all this time

As far as what you'll see as "inconsistancies" in MR's different interviews as to what happened to Dylan? I discount that as to it being where his head is at that moment about what could have happened to his son. Look how many times we have changed the possibility of what we think happened to him. That includes all you who continuously have said Mark did it. You have changed how he did it or why he did it based on new information. In other words, you have not been insistant as far as everything your originally thought. My thought is, we all do this and I see MR are being no different.

I think the reason he sounds the way he does is because when doing one interview he's feeling Dylan was abducted by a stranger, in another he thinks maybe Elaine had something to do with it, and then during another, he thinks maybe he did run away because of all the drama. It's where his head was at that point in the case. Nothing nefarious, just mentally working out different possibilities the way we do. JMO.

 

[Seajay]

Really? Why? It is just speculation. I am confused.

Because his someday-gonna-be-step father is on the "safe" list, of those considered family of Dylan who cannot be discussed.

The only person we are allowed to name and try to work out theories about is Mark Redwine, period. No one else. WS is a victim friendly site and everyone else is considered victims.

 

[cluciano63]

Because his someday-gonna-be-step father is on the "safe" list, of those considered family of Dylan who cannot be discussed.

The only person we are allowed to name and try to work out theories about is Mark Redwine, period. No one else. WS is a victim friendly site and everyone else is considered victims.

And everyone else was far away.

 

[Confusion]

How long before November 18 was this trip decided upon by the courts? I was under the impression it was not very far in advance. It should be not beyond the scope of possibility for the parents to have listed everyone who not only knew about it and when it would take place, but also knew where MR loved. How many people could that be? And especially, how many that LE would not have been aware of and checked their alibis and made sure they are not also "missing"?

I am sorry, but that the idea of some slight acquaintance of MR's or ER's having this knowledge AND being some sort of child predator/kidnapper/what-have-you is pretty much beyond the pale to me. If we are talking an oddball neighbor or co-worker, surely such persons have been checked out.

Again, after three months, the abductor would also have to be missing, unless we are to assume he/she has Dylan tied to a chair in some cabin someplace and drives out there once a day to feed him. If so, what would be the purpose of even taking him? Most predators want to be with their victim, for however long they keep alive.

I really think the idea of Dylan being kidnapped in some premeditated manner is unlikely. Dylan should have been with his friends on Monday. He wasn't meant to even be there at the house. And if he was there, most likely MR would have been with him. When a child goes to visit a parent he sees only once in a while, the odds of catching that child are alone seem pretty much close to zero to me.

IMO, The only two possibilities now, if this was a crime and not some bear attack who also consumes backpacks and possibly fishing poles, is what LE said; something happened to Dylan at the house, or he accepted the wrong ride.

I do not believe he would head out to try to meet up with his friends without finding out where they were, nor do I believe he would watch TV and eat cereal without texting. If his phone would not work, even more reason to wait for his dad, who would at least drive him around town to look for R and friends, once they got to Bayfield.

LE thinks the fact that Dylan stopped communicating as of Sunday important and so do I.

BBM
Sorry, I can't resist when it's someone other than me who has a typo. I would hope that not every casual acquaintance knows where he loves! :giggle:

On a more serious note. I don't believe it was a casual acquaintance of one of them, I think it was someone who is well known by at least one of them. I also don't think it would be necessary for the person to disappear if Dylan was in a place that wouldn't be searched and/or there was someone else who is staying with him. I really doubt that LE, FBI, CBI, etc. have searched all of the property owned by all friends, relatives and co-workers of every friend/relative of every family member. In addition to that, they have most likely not looked to see if a friend/relative of one of those friends/relatives has gone on an unexpected trip, or just left with no explanation. I believe that something happened at the house, which is that he accepted a ride with the wrong person. MOO

 

[Ronald99]

The Father admitting after arriving home from his four hour errands, he lays down and sleeps, Dylan's cell was not working since the prior night, So how can an adult Father that's Responsible for his 13 y/o son that recently arrived , be so relaxed to rest a few hours, instead of utilizing every option locating Dylan.

The more we've learned concerning the activities involving Dylan arriving at the airport, the limited texting for a known avid texter, The complete loss or explanation of Dylan's cell phone or Signal the prior Sunday night, The Fathers lack of explaining why he was texting, and wasn't calling Dylan's cell and saying he's not getting any ringing sounds, or it's going straight to Dylan's voice mail, or the voice mail is full.

 

[KateNY]

BBM

On a more serious note. I don't believe it was a casual acquaintance of one of them, I think it was someone who is well known by at least one of them. I also don't think it would be necessary for the person to disappear if Dylan was in a place that wouldn't be searched and/or there was someone else who is staying with him. I really doubt that LE, FBI, CBI, etc. have searched all of the property owned by all friends, relatives and co-workers of every friend/relative of every family member. In addition to that, they have most likely not looked to see if a friend/relative of one of those friends/relatives has gone on an unexpected trip, or just left with no explanation. I believe that something happened at the house, which is that he accepted a ride with the wrong person. MOO

Snip/BBM


Could it be someone not known to either one of them, but someone who knew of them....

?

 

[Ghostwheel]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...0YKQdLavI2qygsLuJYSVKlw&bvm=bv.42452523,d.eWU
( The Task Force is still requesting any recreational video footage or photographs that include vehicles traveling on any routes between Durango and Vallecito Lake, taken between 6 p.m. on Sunday, Nov. 18 through noon on Monday Nov. 19 )

I've always found it interesting Law Enforcement requesting video or photos the prior evening, instead of just the time frame the Father claimed to have taken off running erands.

Even though they haven't named him a suspect or POI, they must have doubts concerning the time frame he provided concerning dylan being on the couch at 7:30 am that Monday morning. JMO.

Not necessarily. They may be trying to run down anyone ELSE who was in the area that might have seen something odd that night or later.

Example (this did not really happen): I travel to Las Vegas in the winter and go through Red Rock Canyon. I take pictures, other people take pictures, maybe my car is in one of their pictures. As it happens, I go hiking and while hiking I run into another hiker who has no jacket. Looks weird, but I continue on, finish my trip and head home. Turns out somebody went missing in Red Rock Canyon, but I am long gone and know nothing about any missing person because I am no longer in the area. However, a local person has my car in a picture and gives it to the police so the police can track me down and find out if I saw anything odd. See how that COULD work?

 

[Confusion]

The Father admitting after arriving home from his four hour errands, he lays down and sleeps, Dylan's cell was not working since the prior night, So how can an adult Father that's Responsible for his 13 y/o son that recently arrived , be so relaxed to rest a few hours, instead of utilizing every option locating Dylan.

The more we've learned concerning the activities involving Dylan arriving at the airport, the limited texting for a known avid texter, The complete loss or explanation of Dylan's cell phone or Signal the prior Sunday night, The Fathers lack of explaining why he was texting, and wasn't calling Dylan's cell and saying he's not getting any ringing sounds, or it's going straight to Dylan's voice mail, or the voice mail is full.

Some of those things are why I'm not convinced that his father had anything to do with it. Why would a parent say they took a nap rather than searching for the child, knowing that many people would think it was totally irresponsible, if it wasn't true? It's already been said that text service was much more reliable in the area than voice service, so why not use the method most likely to make contact?

There's also no evidence that the phone did stop working on Sunday night, so why would he be expected to mention it? If the phone was turned off, put on the charger, or the battery just went dead after MR went to bed, how would he know that? If I had gotten up early for appointments close to an hour away, I don't think the first thing I'd think to do before leaving would be to see if my son's phone was on the charger and/or if it was working. MOO

 

[cluciano63]

Some of those things are why I'm not convinced that his father had anything to do with it. Why would a parent say they took a nap rather than searching for the child, knowing that many people would think it was totally irresponsible, if it wasn't true? It's already been said that text service was much more reliable in the area than voice service, so why not use the method most likely to make contact?

There's also no evidence that the phone did stop working on Sunday night, so why would he be expected to mention it? If the phone was turned off, put on the charger, or the battery just went dead after MR went to bed, how would he know that? If I had gotten up early for appointments close to an hour away, I don't think the first thing I'd think to do before leaving would be to see if my son's phone was on the charger and/or if it was working. MOO

By saying he took a nap, he is making it out that Dylan would have just taken off, he was so unreliable like that, etc. that MR was not even concerned.

 

[Confusion]

Snip/BBM


Could it be someone not known to either one of them, but someone who knew of them....

?

That's always possible. I just feel like it was someone close enough to have been told about the custody issues, and about him going there for the week. It would also make sense to me that it would be someone who knew about at least one of his appointments in Durango ahead of time. Obviously, that doesn't have to be true, but it's what fits in my head this week. MOO

 

[Ghostwheel]

Some of those things are why I'm not convinced that his father had anything to do with it. Why would a parent say they took a nap rather than searching for the child, knowing that many people would think it was totally irresponsible, if it wasn't true? It's already been said that text service was much more reliable in the area than voice service, so why not use the method most likely to make contact?

There's also no evidence that the phone did stop working on Sunday night, so why would he be expected to mention it? If the phone was turned off, put on the charger, or the battery just went dead after MR went to bed, how would he know that? If I had gotten up early for appointments close to an hour away, I don't think the first thing I'd think to do before leaving would be to see if my son's phone was on the charger and/or if it was working. MOO

BBM-Oh,see, I would, especially if I were going to be an hour away and leave my son alone in a house he just arrived at. I'd be dang sure I could contact him or he could contact me in case of an emergency. So I suppose it makes sense a person would feel either way.

 

[cluciano63]

I don't mean to keep posting, but the idea that someone close to a parent has Dylan hidden inside their home is just too out there for me. Again, he is fourteen. He would have to be tied up. Kept a prisoner. He is not simply going to agree to stay put, surrender his life, friends, brother, dog, etc. because, perhaps, someone tells him they are doing it for him.

IMO, Dylan is no longer alive. He is not of an age that makes me believe any scenario that someone has him to "keep" him. He either met evil at his father's home, on the "road", or fell into a well, backpack and all.

 

[Confusion]

BBM-Oh,see, I would, especially if I were going to be an hour away and leave my son alone in a house he just arrived at. I'd be dang sure I could contact him or he could contact me in case of an emergency. So I suppose it makes sense a person would feel either way.

I guess I'm another irresponsible parent. :blushing: It's a good thing my sons grew up before anyone figured that out! MOO

 

[Ghostwheel]

By saying he took a nap, he is making it out that Dylan would have just taken off, he was so unreliable like that, etc. that MR was not even concerned.

You know, this concept really creeped me out. I cannot even imagine coming home, finding your son who just arrived the day before missing along with all the belongings he brought for the entire trip, including phones (and I assume charging cords) and being so unconcerned as to take a nap. Even if they WERE unreliable. Foreign concept.

 

[Ghostwheel]

I guess I'm another irresponsible parent. :blushing: It's a good thing my sons grew up before anyone figured that out! MOO

Yeah, but were you ever IN that position? Did you ever have to leave your 13 year old behind alone in an unfamiliar place (to him) when you'd be over an hour away? If you don't run into that situation, you don't think about it. I leave my 13 year old at home when I'm an hour away all the time, but I KNOW we have a land line that I can get him on in an emergency. And I have had occasion where he called having locked himself in the safe room (back bathroom with reinforced door, a phone and a lock) because someone was beating on the front door (he had 911 on the other line). So we kind of go with our experiences.

 

[Ghostwheel]

I don't mean to keep posting, but the idea that someone close to a parent has Dylan hidden inside their home is just too out there for me. Again, he is fourteen. He would have to be tied up. Kept a prisoner. He is not simply going to agree to stay put, surrender his life, friends, brother, dog, etc. because, perhaps, someone tells him they are doing it for him.

IMO, Dylan is no longer alive. He is not of an age that makes me believe any scenario that someone has him to "keep" him. He either met evil at his father's home, on the "road", or fell into a well, backpack and all.

I think I agree with the theory that he is no longer alive , but I can't rule out him having been taken by some bad luck-of-the-draw stranger. 11-14 year old boys do get taken. (Shawn Hornbeck was 11, Ben Ownby was 13)

 

[Money Girl]

We have a lot of "uneducated" people in our church. They all talk like MR does. He has stated that he is "uneducated" (his exact term?). I am used to this kind of talking and have no problems with it myself. Guess a lot would depend on where you live. If you deal with "educated" people all the time, this kind of talk might indeed seem strange. But if you deal with "uneducated" people all the time, this kind of talk just seems "normal."

Heck, my brother called my house one night and scared the babysitter. He talked like our cousin, Jr. Johnson. The babysitter was a city girl and had never heard real country boys talk. She got so afraid and thought it was just someone calling and pretending to be my brother. She thought I could not possibly have a brother who "talked like that." LOL

 

[Confusion]

Yeah, but were you ever IN that position? Did you ever have to leave your 13 year old behind alone in an unfamiliar place (to him) when you'd be over an hour away? If you don't run into that situation, you don't think about it. I leave my 13 year old at home when I'm an hour away all the time, but I KNOW we have a land line that I can get him on in an emergency. And I have had occasion where he called having locked himself in the safe room (back bathroom with reinforced door, a phone and a lock) because someone was beating on the front door (he had 911 on the other line). So we kind of go with our experiences.

Actually, I did fairly often. When my son was 13-14, I'd leave him home alone almost every time I went shopping because he never wanted to go. Between driving time and shopping time, I was usually gone for 2-3 hours, and sometimes longer. During that time, there was no way for him to contact me because I never had a cell phone. He had the land line there (just as Dylan did) that he could use for emergencies, and he could use it to call anyone else he wanted to talk to - luckily, all of his friends were local calls at the time, even if there were close to an hour drive from us. He was 13 when we moved to that house. MOO

 

[BeginnersLuck]

Yeah, but were you ever IN that position? Did you ever have to leave your 13 year old behind alone in an unfamiliar place (to him) when you'd be over an hour away? If you don't run into that situation, you don't think about it. I leave my 13 year old at home when I'm an hour away all the time, but I KNOW we have a land line that I can get him on in an emergency. And I have had occasion where he called having locked himself in the safe room (back bathroom with reinforced door, a phone and a lock) because someone was beating on the front door (he had 911 on the other line). So we kind of go with our experiences.

Was the house unfamiliar to Dylan? I thought his dad talked about him doing things around there in the past. I agree, we go with our experiences. Mine are more cautious than a lot of others but there are many kids that age that are left at home for lengthy times alone. He is old enough to be alone at home and if you really feel like you live in a safe area where there is no crime, you don't think of bad things happening.

I think reading on here for a significant period of time and following cases where we see that bad things can happen anywhere, makes at least me more aware and take more safety precautions than most others.