CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #12

[revampz]

I have just got on here and read the last couple of pages and quite frankly I think finding out if the so called hanky panky with a friend under mums window while the kids were there is quite important....

The first thing I thought when i read that was, uh huh dad has a big problem with mum and he is trying to get to her....BIG TIME! If it was at a party and he slipped out with some gal, then yep..just a another , but if he took this woman to his exwifes house and did that on her lawn......wow, this guy has a problem with her and it would make me very suspicious of him.

 

[cluciano63]

If LE had enough evidence to charge him, they would charge him. Maybe not with murder, but with some other charge. At this point, they must not have it. At this point, he could be charged with custodial interference, for example, since the time has long expired when Dylan should have been returned to his mother, if LE had proof he was responsible for his going missing.

 

[scorekeeper]

here you go.....

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDpvzCzwHjk"]Kristen Kelly - Ex-Old Man - YouTube[/ame]

ex-old man and ex-best girlfriend

 

[vasportsmom]

I have just got on here and read the last couple of pages and quite frankly I think finding out if the so called hanky panky with a friend under mums window while the kids were there is quite important....

The first thing I thought when i read that was, uh huh dad has a big problem with mum and he is trying to get to her....BIG TIME! If it was at a party and he slipped out with some gal, then yep..just a another , but if he took this woman to his exwifes house and did that on her lawn......wow, this guy has a problem with her and it would make me very suspicious of him.

Exactly! MR has said a lot of things that make me suspect he has boundary and control issues where ER is concerned. This is just one more piece of the puzzle and it is fair game for discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PaulR]

I'm just saying it is close to his work and he would be aware of it

All of Durango is aware of that lake. Everyone is chomping at the bit waiting for it to open.

Durango hustles to open Lake Nighthorse by 2013
Opening for Lake Nighthorse faces delay

 

[Seajay]

No offense, but I hope that most jurists don't make their decisions that quickly. Personally I'd prefer to wait for some evidence one way or the other before making up my mind. MOO

Yeh, me too. I'm kinda funny that way. And every time I do jury duty, they ask that of me. Listen to all the evidence from both sides, deliberate and then after looking at ALL the facts, make a decision.

 

[Crosby87]

Did mark buy Dylan a fishing pole at walmart that night? I hadn't heard this. I had pretty much thought that Dylan just had a fishing pole at dads and dad said it too was missing.
The fishing pole story has always caused questions with me. It doesn't make sense.

It sure doesn't.

In the picture LE released of Dylan at Walmart, he didn't have anything in his hands and he wasn't wearing his backpack. Often when kids shop with their parents, they pick out and carry the toys or whatever items they want and Dylan didn't have anything in his hands.

We didn't get a chance to see what Mark bought so why is LE keeping this information "private"? To protect someone?

LE would be able to find out if they stopped at McDonalds and so far they haven't confirmed they did so it looks like Dylan met with foul play after he left Walmart and his phone was turned off.

Committing this crime outside the house in a remote area and leaving it there means the dogs brought to the house to search for Dylan's scent won't be able to find it so they won't find his body. Clever if you ask me.

I have a hard time believing Dylan had his own fishing pole at his dad's house anyway. This may have been the second time Dylan ever stayed at his father's place. ER said MR didn't exercise his visitation rights when they lived in Durango and MR worked out of town alot.

We don't know what MR and Dylan did together when Dylan visited in September but I doubt Dylan wanted to go fishing by himself when he arrived in November. We don't know what Dylan and his friends planned to do on Monday and when MR discussed their tentative plans for the week, he didn't include any camping and fishing outtings with his son so they could go hunting and fishing together and I believe there was a camper parked on Mark's property when LE confiscated his two vehicles.

 

[Abby Normal Again]

So .... I wonder how that even went down? They showed up, out of the blue, and start going at it under moms window?

It boggles the mind


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

same circle of friends in the neighborhood and partying outside is my best guess. Normal in some circle. The partying around yards, not the...erm...other.

 

[vasportsmom]

Yeh, me too. I'm kinda funny that way. And every time I do jury duty, they ask that of me. Listen to all the evidence from both sides, deliberate and then after looking at ALL the facts, make a decision.

And that is exactly what you are supposed to do as a jurist. Luckily, this is a message board not a court room and we aren't held to those standards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Seajay]

I have just got on here and read the last couple of pages and quite frankly I think finding out if the so called hanky panky with a friend under mums window while the kids were there is quite important....

The first thing I thought when i read that was, uh huh dad has a big problem with mum and he is trying to get to her....BIG TIME! If it was at a party and he slipped out with some gal, then yep..just a another , but if he took this woman to his exwifes house and did that on her lawn......wow, this guy has a problem with her and it would make me very suspicious of him.

That's a really good segue to murder.

 

[katydid23]

Yeh, me too. I'm kinda funny that way. And every time I do jury duty, they ask that of me. Listen to all the evidence from both sides, deliberate and then after looking at ALL the facts, make a decision.

But we are not in jury deliberations here. We are in a DISCUSSION forum. The point of the forum is to hash out, speculate, theorize and rehash, converse and consider various opinions. NONE of us are making any decisions.

 

[Seajay]

If LE had enough evidence to charge him, they would charge him. Maybe not with murder, but with some other charge. At this point, they must not have it. At this point, he could be charged with custodial interference, for example, since the time has long expired when Dylan should have been returned to his mother, if LE had proof he was responsible for his going missing.

Or maybe child negligence, child endangerment or something for losing the kid. They should be able to pin something on him until they can pin the big First degree M on him.

 

[jennapuppy]

It sure doesn't.

In the picture LE released of Dylan at Walmart, he didn't have anything in his hands and he wasn't wearing his backpack. Often when kids shop with their parents, they pick out and carry the toys or whatever items they want and Dylan didn't have anything in his hands.

We didn't get a chance to see what Mark bought so why is LE keeping this information "private"? To protect someone?

LE would be able to find out if they stopped at McDonalds and so far they haven't confirmed they did so it looks like Dylan met with foul play after he left Walmart and his phone was turned off.

I have a hard time believing Dylan had his own fishing pole at his dad's house anyway. This may have been the second time Dylan ever stayed at his father's place. ER said MR didn't exercise his visitation rights when they lived in Durango and MR worked out of town alot.

We don't know what MR and Dylan did together when Dylan visited in September but I doubt Dylan wanted to go fishing by himself when he arrived in November. We don't know what Dylan and his friends planned to do on Monday and when MR discussed their tentative plans for the week, he didn't include any camping and fishing outtings with his son so they could go hunting and fishing together and I believe there was a camper parked on Mark's property when LE confiscated his two vehicles.

IMO We don't have enough information from this photo to make those kind of assumptions. For all we know, this photo could have been taken as they entered the market, before anything was purchased.

I don't think LE is keeping evidence private in order to protect anyone, but rather to protect the integrity of the case.
MOO

 

[Dee10]

Or maybe child negligence, child endangerment or something for losing the kid. They should be able to pin something on him until they can pin the big First degree M on him.

There a few cases I had hoped they would do just that, but didn't. The only case I can think of that LE found to pin something big on to lock them up was Ron & Misty, adding in Tommy for good measure.

 

[LotusPawprint]

Exactly! MR has said a lot of things that make me suspect he has boundary and control issues where ER is concerned. This is just one more piece of the puzzle and it is fair game for discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree.... and I don't find the discussion inappropriate so much as I find the behavior and bickering Dylan was exposed to inappropriate. This was his life and these are the people who influence him the most, so it's extremely relevant, imo, to talk about what was going on in Dylan's presence. Especially what might've gone on during the time when he "went missing". imo.

 

[Confusion]

But we are not in jury deliberations here. We are in a DISCUSSION forum. The point of the forum is to hash out, speculate, theorize and rehash, converse and consider various opinions. NONE of us are making any decisions.

I do believe you look at all the evidence, even if you don't find the same items important as I do. That doesn't mean that nobody here is making decisions. I've seen several people (not just the post I responded to) say that they had decided who was guilty as soon as they heard the timeline. What was known at that time was what was left of what MR told the mutual friend (whose name I forgot), and she told the press. I was just saying that I think that was jumping the gun a bit. MOO

 

[Linda7NJ]

Or maybe child negligence, child endangerment or something for losing the kid. They should be able to pin something on him until they can pin the big First degree M on him.

Based on what? He claims his son disappeared into thin air while he running errands. Dylan isn't 3, he's 13 and therefore can be left home alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Crosby87]

Or maybe child negligence, child endangerment or something for losing the kid. They should be able to pin something on him until they can pin the big First degree M on him.

MR alleges Dylan was fine and half-asleep when he left him at 7:30 Monday morning and leaving a
13-year-old boy at home alone at this time of the day isn't child negligence or child endangerment is it?

 

[Linda7NJ]

I do believe you look at all the evidence, even if you don't find the same items important as I do. That doesn't mean that nobody here is making decisions. I've seen several people (not just the post I responded to) say that they had decided who was guilty as soon as they heard the timeline. What was known at that time was what was left of what MR told the mutual friend (whose name I forgot), and she told the press. I was just saying that I think that was jumping the gun a bit. MOO

That would have been me. I decided. You're right about that! I'm not shy about it either....it almost killed me waiting to discuss my feelings about dad here!

Again... I am not a juror, this is not a courtroom. Presumption of innocence is reserved for a court of law, not message boards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cluciano63]

Apparently, CO does not have a set age when a child can be left alone. They use 12 as a guideline but it is not the law.