CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #48

[Ghostwheel]

I guess here again, we have an example what some what to hear/vs what others hear. Each to their own sort of thing ... "truth" again!!

To me:
MR is saying when HE had DR at his house, DR was hard to wake up since it wasn't a school day and most of the time when MR had DR it wasn't a school day.
DR could ride the school bus to MR house when he "could" and neither parent had to see/get involved with the other = good thing since they don't get along.

I guess I understand what the guy was saying and other's don't. K.

I understand exactly what he was saying. The words are pretty clear. What I don't understand is why he was saying it. Why do you think he was saying it? What bearing did it have on the question asked? He wasn't asked if Dylan was hard to wake up, or why hadn't Mark taken Dylan with him, or even why didn't Dylan get up. If he had been asked any of those questions, his answer would have made sense.

Tell me what train of thought might have gotten Mark from the question "So, so you guys watched the movie and then, and then, you had plans to go, and then what happened? Did he just?" (admittedly a very poor question) to Mark's description of how convenient a school bus was for both parents. I jump tracks in my thought process all the time, so I allow that this could happen. Even if someone is a word salad person, my thought process would go through the rest of the evening first, then to the next morning, and if I were easily distracted by my own words, maybe to how convenient life was for me when my missing son rode a school bus (kind of reminiscing, perhaps?) I am at a loss, and would like another take that I could look at and say "Oh, OK. Not something I would do, but I can see why someone would do that."

 

[NC Analyzer]

We are here to find answers, not to zero in on one person. I hope LE is looking at everything and not focusing solely on MR. What if MR is innocent? I know many can't fathom that, but what if he is? Then what?

But WE are not LE and nothing WE say or suspect has any impact on LE or this investigation. I am focusing MY suspicions right where I think they need to be. It is MY opinion that MR is responsible and if I am wrong, I don't think it will matter to MR or LE one little iota, considering I personally don't know the man, never met the man, live on the opposite side of the country, and, other than posting on an anonymous website, I have nothing to do with this case, so MR will NEVER know MY opinion. IOW, My opinion of MR is no different than my opinion of Obama. It just doesn't matter.


Isn't everything we discuss here our opinion? We have no facts that point to one specific person as being ultimately responsible for Dylan's disappearance.

Of course everything we discuss on here is our opinion. Which is why I felt it necessary to explain that our opinion means nothing to LE, the outcome of this case, or Mark Redwine in general.

Snipped and BBM above.

 

[Redhead72]

Hi everyone... You've all been busy talking today! LOL I'm catching up and I'll take it a page at a time. Apologies if these things have already been discussed/debated/etc... Not meaning to throw this in the middle of anything else.

Guys do you all remember that interview he did with MB that one part...

He went to the marshalls I mean i went to ryans or nandos he lost it there he couldnt keep his story straight. I may not have it word for word but thats the guist of it.

He has a script as I see it and forgot! He got way ahead of himself.

then there was that time he says the marshalls never reported Dylan missing or something along thos lines and thus the time lapse between Bayfiels PD and the marshalls reports. When we find out he never reported him missing he asked if they had seen him.

BBM

The statement you're talking about he said, "When I went to the Marshal's Office, or Ryan's, or Fernando's or whatever...". As if he couldn't remember where he had been at all, and notice he didn't talk about going to T's house at all in that time - where many times previously he spoke about going to T's to see if D was there, said he spoke to someone there, and then later when B questioned him on the DP show he stated, "How could I talk to someone when no-one was there?"

His inconsistencies - and these are just two - I definitely take as signs of being untruthful. He's never stated anything like, "I don't really remember" and being exasperated with himself for mixing things up, either. It truly does seem at this point he's told so many versions of the events of that afternoon when he supposedly went looking for DR that he can't remember what he's said to who, or when!

All of the above is MOO - except for the factual inconsistencies referred to out of MR's interviews, and media statements.

KateNY, thanks for the link. I know a ton of LE officers and they are always going to specialized training such as this. There are always conferences throughout CO that offer this information for LE. Amazing!

Great post! I am confident that CBI, FBI and some of the local LE has had training in interviewing techniques. JMHO
Wasn't there an earlier article that mentioned the CARD team being on the case? I would imagine with the custodial interference, parental abductions and variety of child abductions that these fine folks are highly qualified and skilled. I just can't see them NOT gathering valuable information based on basic Q & A sessions. IMO

BBM - I agree!

Just to buttress these posts - I had an acquaintance years back that was a CO County Sheriff in a "rich & famous" area. He, along with others from CO and elsewhere, participated in training at the FBI Academy at Quantico. He went through 2 weeks (iirc) of intensive training with the FBI's missing persons unit (specializing on missing children's cases). This was a little more than a decade ago (maybe further back) when they were just starting to really use technology to be able to network together when a child went missing.

So, it's definitely not uncommon for State Sheriffs, and others to receive specialized training, and it is offered to them from the most specialized units in the country (world). These LEOs are way more qualified than people seem to give them credit for.

As you stated the CBI and FBI are also involved in DR's case, so thinking that the LEOs would be uneducated to the point that they couldn't detect when someone was being evasive and/or untruthful is ridiculous, imo.

As always, all of the above is MOO! (With the exception of relating the experience of the Sheriff.)
:cow:

 

[Ransom]

Could you tell me what it was then? I have listened to the video you posted, thinking perhaps I missed it. I still get the same question. Would you please say what question was asked? Thank you. And sorry if I have misquoted.

He expounded upon many, many things before your quote: tired from traveling, going into town, payroll, etc. before this:
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9175990&postcount=757"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #48[/ame]

All I was saying was "context" and provided the actual video for all to see and not an excerpt. Make up your own minds. AND his answer was related to the question asked, IMO. TIA.

 

[Angelonline]

In my opinion in the interviews we have seen of MR, he rarely responds to the questions he is asked, instead he seems to dance all around the question, sometimes discussing something that is totally irrelevant to the question. Is this a sign that he did something to Dylan? Or just his normal speech patterns? I have no idea, but I do find his answers often baffling, because I have never meet anyone that speaks as he does. I can certainly see why his on camera interviews have many of our posters concerned.

 

[Ransom]

Real question: Dylan Redwine is no longer at his home in Colorado Springs. Is that not one truth? If it isn't, how could this be construed as another truth?

THE only truth is = we don't know where Dylan is located. That's the only truth that I know. JMO and :twocents:

Some seem to "know" the truth of what happened to DR. I'm not one that KNOWS any truth, other than a precious boy is missing. That's all I KNOW.:seeya:

 

[aust amateur slueth]

I understand exactly what he was saying. The words are pretty clear. What I don't understand is why he was saying it. Why do you think he was saying it? What bearing did it have on the question asked? He wasn't asked if Dylan was hard to wake up, or why hadn't Mark taken Dylan with him, or even why didn't Dylan get up. If he had been asked any of those questions, his answer would have made sense.

Tell me what train of thought might have gotten Mark from the question "So, so you guys watched the movie and then, and then, you had plans to go, and then what happened? Did he just?" (admittedly a very poor question) to Mark's description of how convenient a school bus was for both parents. I jump tracks in my thought process all the time, so I allow that this could happen. Even if someone is a word salad person, my thought process would go through the rest of the evening first, then to the next morning, and if I were easily distracted by my own words, maybe to how convenient life was for me when my missing son rode a school bus (kind of reminiscing, perhaps?) I am at a loss, and would like another take that I could look at and say "Oh, OK. Not something I would do, but I can see why someone would do that."

thank you wasn't near enough for your post. I think many of us understood his words but are bamboozled at the convoluted answer that didn't really answer the question clearly.

 

[Ransom]

I understand exactly what he was saying. The words are pretty clear. What I don't understand is why he was saying it. Why do you think he was saying it? What bearing did it have on the question asked? He wasn't asked if Dylan was hard to wake up, or why hadn't Mark taken Dylan with him, or even why didn't Dylan get up. If he had been asked any of those questions, his answer would have made sense.

Tell me what train of thought might have gotten Mark from the question "So, so you guys watched the movie and then, and then, you had plans to go, and then what happened? Did he just?" (admittedly a very poor question) to Mark's description of how convenient a school bus was for both parents. I jump tracks in my thought process all the time, so I allow that this could happen. Even if someone is a word salad person, my thought process would go through the rest of the evening first, then to the next morning, and if I were easily distracted by my own words, maybe to how convenient life was for me when my missing son rode a school bus (kind of reminiscing, perhaps?) I am at a loss, and would like another take that I could look at and say "Oh, OK. Not something I would do, but I can see why someone would do that."

".... then what happened"? He expounded on that. It was a narrative of what happened ... NEXT. It was clear to me, but I guess I talk funny too. lol

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

I think that the LE officers working this case know the manner and the content of the "contact" that Mark had with the Bayfield Marshall's office. MOO.

Again I think you're missing my point. MR has given us his answer several times and still we don't know the answer.
I'm sure LE only knows the answer from asking the Marshals office.

 

[SuperMom1995]

I would be more suspicious of Mark if he had zero inconsistent statements. I'm not aware of him having a significant amount of them either. MOO.

Word inconsistency and meaning inconsistency are different and i think a happy medium would be normal and more indicative of truth, ie., where statements are not word for word the same but each statement presenting the same meaning, inference whatever.

 

[Redhead72]

So you would feel someone who answered with word salad was more likely to be a liar than someone who answered questions with the same story over and over as if memorized?

Again, apologies if this was addressed, but if someone was telling the truth why wouldn't the story stay the same? It wouldn't change if it was the truth! We're not talking about misspoken words - like switching someone's name for another - or accidentally saying a word that is close in sound or meaning to another one, etc...

The inconsistencies in MR's statements really are "different stories" of things that supposedly happened on Sunday night, and all day on Monday. There are some parts of the story that stays the same, and others that are consistently inconsistent.

Sunday: He picked DR up from they airport, they visited Walmart, they went through the drive-thru at McD's, and that after they got home there was a movie involved - but the details on what they did before, during, and after the movie start to get sketchy. Mark has made statements about tossing around a football, watching a movie with DR, Dylan watching a movie and him doing stuff around the house (including pacing the floor), he says he went up to bed early, then he says he went to bed after the movie was over, etc... etc...

Monday: MR says he left in the early morning (by 7:30 although early on he said he had left earlier at 6:30), he states that he went to his payroll office, and his attorney's office, and that he arrived back home at 11:30. He states that he noticed the TV turned on to "Nickelodeon", and the cereal bowl on the counter. He says he didn't notice anything amiss, and took a nap.

When he woke up from that nap is again another thing he has been inconsistent about - and not just stating a "time-frame" type thing, but different by hours - he once said 1:30, now says 2:30. He has stated that he drove to the lake and spoke to T (who lives by the marina), then he said he didn't talk to him because no-one was home. He states he went to the MO, but it's unclear if he actually went there, or called.

He states he spoke to someone at the MO, but yet LE states he "contacted" MO "attempting" to find out if they had seen his son. He states he went to the MO's, or R's house, or F's house. He texts ER at 5:30 and tells her he is "at the MO taking care of it", but yet the MO closed at 3pm, and city hall closed at 5pm. And, if he woke up at 2:30 as he stated, he never would have made it to the MOs office after checking with DR's friends as he said he did.

Why would any of the above order of events not stay the same were he telling the truth? Why wouldn't it be a consistent story - it's not like one can go back in time and change what order things happened in, but there is no real clear statement as to what happened. People don't usually change order of events, or events themselves as time goes on - they may make mistakes here and there if under stress, but will usually catch themselves, and correct themselves almost immediately. The truth doesn't change, but a lie that doesn't seem to be working certainly would.

All of the above is MOO - except where it can be referenced insofar as MR's statements of events over the months.
:cow:

ETA: OK, I see from the page after this posted that people are still talking about this subject... Don't mean to bring up anything that's already been mentioned.

 

[Ransom]

In my opinion in the interviews we have seen of MR, he rarely responds to the questions he is asked, instead he seems to dance all around the question, sometimes discussing something that is totally irrelevant to the question. Is this a sign that he did something to Dylan? Or just his normal speech patterns? I have no idea, but I do find his answers often baffling, because I have never meet anyone that speaks as he does. I can certainly see why his on camera interviews have many of our posters concerned.

The question was: And then what happened ....... He answered what happened in a narrative ...

AGAIN around 14:11 or so......
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGEwCBPy90w"]KUSA - Dylan Redwine - Dad's uncut interview - YouTube[/ame]

 

[aust amateur slueth]

Again I think you're missing my point. MR has given us his answer several times and still we don't know the answer.
I'm sure LE only knows the answer from asking the Marshals office.

I think thats also how LE learned that MR did not report Dylan missing, from the Marshals office.

I'm curious as to why MR tried to mislead people into thinking he had reported Dylan missing when he did not. IMO an innocent person would not do that.


IMO MOO ETC ALL JUST MY OPINION

 

[Ghostwheel]

THE only truth is = we don't know where Dylan is located. That's the only truth that I know. JMO and :twocents:

Some seem to "know" the truth of what happened to DR. I'm not one that KNOWS any truth, other than a precious boy is missing. That's all I KNOW.:seeya:

BBM: Ah. I respectfully disagree. That is your opinion, not a fact, that that is the only truth.

I know other truths.

 

[Ransom]

BBM: Ah. I respectfully disagree. That is your opinion, not a fact, that that is the only truth.

I know other truths.

Glad you do, because I don't know any other truths other than DR is MISSING and is LOST, as of right now. AND I said it was JMO. :seeya:

Good night all. :sleep:

 

[Ghostwheel]

".... then what happened"? He expounded on that. It was a narrative of what happened ... NEXT. It was clear to me, but I guess I talk funny too. lol

Ah. My sequence of events, what you call NEXT, would be in the order they happened, starting with what actually happened next, not an explanation of things that were not next in the sequence of events or even in the events of those two days at all.

Thank you for your response, I won't bother you again.

 

[RANCH]

Word inconsistency and meaning inconsistency are different and i think a happy medium would be normal and more indicative of truth, ie., where statements are not word for word the same but each statement presenting the same meaning, inference whatever.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Words have meaning. That's how we communicate. We use words to let others know what we mean.

I guess that some people "infer" the meaning of words and phrases differently than others. Is that what your saying?

 

[aust amateur slueth]

I think thats also how LE learned that MR did not report Dylan missing, from the Marshals office.

I'm curious as to why MR tried to mislead people into thinking he had reported Dylan missing when he did not. IMO an innocent person would not do that.


IMO MOO ETC ALL JUST MY OPINION

jumping off my own post

can anyone think of any reason why an innocent person would try to mislead everyone?

Thats just one more thing that isn't sitting well with me in regards to MR, that doesn't mean I've convicted him or that he is guilty, it means that I have serious questions about things he has said and done since the day Dylan disappeared.

 

[ColdHands]

I hope that if LE does have a suspect, that the location of Dylan (if found...) is helpful in tying this person to the crime, or not. But then, if they had a solid suspect and the detailed locations of this person during the hours of interest, it seems as though there would be lots more searching going on by LE.

So perhaps they can't track the movements of a possible POI, they do not have a POI, or are more interested in the lake than they appear.

BBM - I wonder this too. I wonder what would have happened if the family hadn't taken it into their own hands to set up for another search of the lake. Would LE have gone back to the lake this spring?

 

[Angelonline]

The question was: And then what happened ....... He answered what happened in a narrative ...

AGAIN around 14:11 or so......
KUSA - Dylan Redwine - Dad's uncut interview - YouTube

Yes I saw that Ransom. I have watched all the videos, this particular one several times, including watching this part again tonight. In my opinion, he did not directly answer the question. He went straight into trying to wake him up and then on to the bus route, amoung other things. What exactly does the bus route have to do with the question? IMO, nothing. Like I said I have never seen anyone who answered questions in that manner. I also have a theory as to why he brought up the bus route.. does anyone else?