Person of Interest Identified in Dylan Redwine case * MARK REDWINE ARRESTED**

[SCHMAE]

I have not seen the pictures mentioned, anyone have a link to that? I am wondering if there was any abuse of Dylan that was not photographed, yet Dylan knew or experienced. As Dylan was no longer living with dad and was no longer under his thumb and was going through his own puberty now, maybe he was going to expose the perpetrator now.

IMO any grown man who will pose in the pictures as reported would be capable of most anything. So many kids growing up do not know how wrong things are until they grow up and have more access to the outside world and information.

JMO's

I don't know of a specific link but last week I googled his name with pictures and the word diaper. You'll get an eyeful.

 

[alexwood]

MR is, IMO, unstable and a threat to himself and possibly others. He should be taken into custody and put on suicide watch.

Sorry, but I don't have a problem with him punishing himself.

I just want to get him to trial in one piece. If he "does himself in" (or someone else beats him to it) before that, we'll only be reading later: "It was believed by many that MR was responsible for his son's murder. This was never proven, however, as he [fill in the blank for 'MOD'] before he could be arrested." [MOO.]

 

[margarita25]

I don't know of a specific link but last week I googled his name with pictures and the word diaper. You'll get an eyeful.

(Have some eye bleach handy)

 

[katydid23]

(Have some eye bleach handy)

Those pix were on the top of my list of things I wish I could 'UNSEE.'

 

[IHAVENOCLUE]

(Have some eye bleach handy)

Yep....

can't "UNSEE" that mess...

uke:

 

[AnotherSetOfEyes]

Now we wait for the arrest.

I remember waiting for LE to find Dylan. There was the faintest glimmer of hope that he might be found alive, until the day his partial remains were found. Finding him was the only way to move forward. But it was such a sad day. So final.

Now we wait for the arrest. Which again, needs to happen. But until that day, one can delude oneself, just a tiny bit. Not face the reality of the betrayal Dylan must have known. It will be a sad day.

 

[MIKAYOYO]

Why can't he get a fair trial there?

I just want to get him to trial in one piece. If he "does himself in" (or someone else beats him to it) before that, we'll only be reading later: "It was believed by many that MR was responsible for his son's murder. This was never proven, however, as he [fill in the blank for 'MOD'] before he could be arrested." [MOO.]

BBM, see above. The whole ttown/county believes already he is guilty. i don' think you can find anyone local who has't heard of this case or doesn'tt have an opinionn of it.

I googled his name and diaper. Only one picture came u[ that was questionalbe. I can't evenn describe it. There's something hanging out of his mouth but i don' immediaely go to poopy diaper.

the photos to me are irrelevantt. if Elaine didn'tt have concernns enough to mentio it to the judge then I don't know. Truth here, I do not blame annyone but the person who kiled Dylan. But I sttill do wonder why this fetish wasnn'tt brought up in courtt. I just cannot wrap my hand around that one. Seems like it mighttt have been cause for not making Dylan have to visit with MR.

 

[RANCH]

You are so right. It seems obvious that MR is guilty, but I don't think hhe can get a fair ttrial their. It will be interesting to see how tthet present the case if an when he's tried. I justt would really like justice for Dylan.

Why can't he get a fair trial there?

It's too early for me to say if Mark Redwine can get a fair trial or not. There's just not much evidence released yet to say whether the State has a solid slam dunk case against him.

If the evidence is weak, then it may come down to the quality of defense counsel that Mark gets. I feel that a lot of cases are decided during jury selection.

A Public Defender with little experience may not be able to do a good job in Voir dire, which is critical in a case where emotions may be an overriding factor.

At the same time, if the evidence is overwhelming against Mark Redwine, then it really doesn't matter if his defense counsel is great or not.

JMO.

 

[katydid23]

It's too early for me to say if Mark Redwine can get a fair trial or not. There's just not much evidence released yet to say whether the State has a solid slam dunk case against him.

If the evidence is weak, then it may come down to the quality of defense counsel that Mark gets. I feel that a lot of cases are decided during jury selection.

A Public Defender with little experience may not be able to do a good job in Voir dire, which is critical in a case where emotions may be an overriding factor.

At the same time, if the evidence is overwhelming against Mark Redwine, then it really doesn't matter if his defense counsel is great or not.

JMO.

I doubt they have any 'slam dunk' evidence because he hasn't even been arrested yet. Maybe he never will be. But I do think he will get a fair trial.

 

[DeDee]

I just made myself quite ill by discovering there are groups of people who do that thang that MR does.

http://www.dailydiapers.com/content/about.html

 

[SCHMAE]

The idea of whether or not he can get a fair trial is valid. I personally don't always care about that kind of thing but the fact remains it is the law that you get a ' fair trial' and if everyone in CO knows about this case and the before and after Dylan disappeared, then it would be hard. Question for those of you who know better than I ... once MR went public and international on Dr Phil, does he , in essence, give up his right to a fair trial because he has given up his right to privacy at least surrounding the case facts? Because people all over the world saw Dr Phil. I wonder how that could work . Because even if you moved it 5 counties away, which is common in a venue change, people could still say " I never heard of it until Dr Phil show ''. Thoughts?

ETA I guess my point is or a better question is ' Could the DA say if he wanted no one to know about this case, he should not have gone on Dr Phil''

 

[Bravo]

Usually the question with a potential Juror is can they put aside what they may have heard in the press etc. Base their decision solely on what is presented in Court. Many a Trial has been held in the same County as the crime and we do see fair trials. IMO

 

[IHAVENOCLUE]

Those pix were on the top of my list of things I wish I could 'UNSEE.'

Hi Katydid!

Looks like we were posting this at about the same time!

:giggle:

 

[katydid23]

Hi Katydid!

Looks like we were posting this at about the same time!

:giggle:

Great minds think alike. LOL

 

[Ghostwheel]

The idea of whether or not he can get a fair trial is valid. I personally don't always care about that kind of thing but the fact remains it is the law that you get a ' fair trial' and if everyone in CO knows about this case and the before and after Dylan disappeared, then it would be hard. Question for those of you who know better than I ... once MR went public and international on Dr Phil, does he , in essence, give up his right to a fair trial because he has given up his right to privacy at least surrounding the case facts? Because people all over the world saw Dr Phil. I wonder how that could work . Because even if you moved it 5 counties away, which is common in a venue change, people could still say " I never heard of it until Dr Phil show ''. Thoughts?

ETA I guess my point is or a better question is ' Could the DA say if he wanted no one to know about this case, he should not have gone on Dr Phil''

You don't have to have a place where no one knows about the case. You just have to get enough jurors for a fair trial. Everyone doesn't watch Dr. Phil (I don't unless there is a specific case on there that was mentioned here). Not everyone knows about Dylan's case. They might conceivably move it to Durango and also get a fair trial. The point isn't whether a juror has heard of the case. It's if they have heard enough to have already formed an opinion about the case.

While I wouldn't qualify as a juror in this case because I do have an opinion based on the facts I have seen in the press, I know I could still reach a verdict based solely on the facts submitted in a courtroom. Saying that someone can't get a fair trial just because the community knows about the case is not really a valid argument. There has to be some other reason that proves there are not enough people to have an unbiased jury pool.

 

[Ghostwheel]

It is so weird that after at POI is named, tthere's very little discussion. I understatnd MR has been POI from day one but based on other cases here where somone cant be discussed unntil they're POI or suspect, it is just kind of strange. This thread should be lit up based on the naming of POI but instead it just blah and again Dylan is leftt in thte cold.

Plenty of discussion was had in previous threads. Most of us just know there is no point in rehashing it. It's great reading, though, and I encourage you to check it all out. For most of us, this is just "Yeah, what took you guys so long, anyway?" What's to discuss, you know? He's always been a POI here(some have misspelled that as from time to time, but I'm sure it was just a typo...), now it's official.

Now when we get some new evidence information, watch this light up like a Christmas tree....

 

[alexwood]

I don't know of a specific link but last week I googled his name with pictures and the word diaper. You'll get an eyeful.

Glad to know that MR was not able to destroy that evidence. I'm sure they will be "blown up" and used as trial exhibits.

 

[Redux]

It is so weird that after at POI is named, tthere's very little discussion. I understatnd MR has been POI from day one but based on other cases here where somone cant be discussed unntil they're POI or suspect, it is just kind of strange. This thread should be lit up based on the naming of POI but instead it just blah and again Dylan is leftt in thte cold.

At one point things got so heated on Dylan's threads (back when his case was still in the Missing / Located Discussion Forums) that the threads were locked for a while. If I recall correctly, by the time his threads were reopened, they had been moved to the Cold Case area. I, for one, don't go to the cold case area much, so I didn't even know Dylan's threads were active again until I went looking to see if there was any new activity.

I think after discussion was quelched for a while (rightfully so probably, there was a lot of bickering), it never really bounced back.

(that, coupled with what Ghostwheel said, that so much has been hashed out over and over again)

 

[MissJ]

Yes...it got pretty intense on the old threads. There were people who defended M.R. I wasn't one of them. He so clearly wasn't looking for Dylan as everyone in town was, he was a pretty obvious suspect in the minds of many. I for one thought it was premeditated because of child support. MR had been receiving it for years and suddenly he had to pay. He made one child support payment the day Dylan disappeared and even though Dylan was listed as missing, MR never made another payment. His treatment of Dylan's Mom on the Dr Phil show showed the kind of person capable of doing about anything IMO. I lost a lot of friends for my opinions. I didn't appreciate accusations made about his ex wives.

 

[asyousay]

Do we know what Mark is up to since he has been announced as a suspect ?


i keep popping in hoping for a arrest and nada so far.