CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #16

[cluciano63]

Can you think of a scenario where LE might ask someone to steer clear of discussing their case with the media? Still free to get the word out on their missing child but not the case? Obviously it's to protect some element of the case /not jeopardize something, ... any thoughts?

Perhaps if the family knew a cause of death due to finding a victim, or had been the one to discover a crime scene and certain elements were ones that LE meant to keep private in order to screen suspects?

 

[Confusion]

If LE asked you not to discuss details with the media - not ordered but asked - would you?

I think I would... I'd assume the police wanted me to not talk about something for a reason, and wouldn't want to jeopardize the case or ruin the trust I had with them.

I really don't see LE telling a "civilian" something and telling them not to talk about it. If it's confidential, why would they share it with anyone not in LE? Obviously, there are exceptions; like things found during a search, items removed from your home by LE, etc. I can't see them saying things like, "I'm not supposed to give you confidential information about another person's interview or test results, so don't tell the press I did." and expecting nobody to hear about it. :twocents:

I can see asking a person not to speak about something they may know that was important to the investigation, and I'd have to question why a parent would even consider speaking about one of those things if it could jeopardize the child's life.

 

[ICUDOUCME]

http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico...3728/17616906/-/129kycz/-/index.html#comments

I must of missed this whole story, and the one they ran on the news was extreamly cut...and I see it now.

 

[ICUDOUCME]

That link makes it sound as though his flight this time was not round trip

 

[Confusion]

Can you think of a scenario where LE might ask someone to steer clear of discussing their case with the media? Still free to get the word out on their missing child but not the case? Obviously it's to protect some element of the case /not jeopardize something, ... any thoughts?

If LE thinks it's that important that the subject shouldn't be discussed in order to protect the case, is it really a good idea for us to try to sleuth what that subject is so we can discuss it? Maybe it doesn't matter, but I'm not sure I'd feel real comfortable about it. MOO

 

[asyousay]

Any news ?

Is the MR interview new ?

 

[ICUDOUCME]

Any news ?

Is the MR interview new ?

It is the uncut version, so I don't know if someone had this linked or not, and it has alot more information than what they aired on the news.

 

[LotusPawprint]

If LE thinks it's that important that the subject shouldn't be discussed in order to protect the case, is it really a good idea for us to try to sleuth what that subject is so we can discuss it? Maybe it doesn't matter, but I'm not sure I'd feel real comfortable about it. MOO

That's probably one of those questions you already have your own answer to and the latter sounds like your answer.

 

[cluciano63]

If LE thinks it's that important that the subject shouldn't be discussed in order to protect the case, is it really a good idea for us to try to sleuth what that subject is so we can discuss it? Maybe it doesn't matter, but I'm not sure I'd feel real comfortable about it. MOO

I thought the poster was asking a general question, not specifically about this case, but the types of things LE might ask families not to comment on.

 

[PaulR]

http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico...3728/17616906/-/129kycz/-/index.html#comments

I must of missed this whole story, and the one they ran on the news was extreamly cut...and I see it now.

Listening to him at 1 minute... he seems to be forgiving his ex-wife for the statements she made against him, and making excuses as to why she would have done it.

 

[cluciano63]

Any news ?

Is the MR interview new ?

It is dated December 4th.

 

[Confusion]

That's probably one of those questions you already have your own answer to and the latter sounds like your answer.

I have my answer for me, but that doesn't mean it's everybody's answer for themselves. MOO

 

[ICUDOUCME]

MR talks more in detail about what he and Dylan had discussed....including that Dylan knew when MR got back from town he was going to take him to his friends house, and Dylan knew this...
The last time Dylan had seen MR was early Sept. and stayed 3 or 4 days with him.

 

[Donjeta]

The constant head shaking makes me nervous.

 

[ICUDOUCME]

I can't believe I am still awake, and have listened to MR on this interview over and over, and it's weird to hear him, because it seems he answeres alot of questions so many on WS have....I keep hearing him, and although his head is shaking I wonder, if it isn't just nervousness.

 

[Donjeta]

I think LE might sometimes reveal civilians some information that came up elsewhere if they have to ask for confirmation. "We were told that you... is this true...?" But skillful interviewers would probably often be able to elicit such information without revealing too many details about other people's interviews.

I don't see why they would ever have to discuss anyone's polygraph results with anybody else if they want to keep it hushed, but sometimes they might leak the info if they want to put pressure on the person but indirectly...?

 

[asyousay]

I just watched the video and there was a whole week befor they even searched MR house . So surely anything on the breakfast bowl or the bed ( DNA) would of been lost ?

 

[ICUDOUCME]

I just watched the video and there was a whole week befor they even searched MR house . So surely anything on the breakfast bowl or the bed ( DNA) would of been lost ?

Yes, I have to agree, I think LE is way in over the top of there heads in this case, they haven't had a child go missing is so long(or at all)...leading the investagation in the wrong directions, and letting good evidence to go the way side, because they haven't done this type of thing before. They

As far as the poly I know why they don't want them to talk about it, but to be honest the dang thing won't hold up in court so the stupid test doesn't matter either way. So to tell them not to talk about it is just down right silly. I do however have a feeling that there attorney said not to talk about it.

 

[Confusion]

I think LE might sometimes reveal civilians some information that came up elsewhere if they have to ask for confirmation. "We were told that you... is this true...?" But skillful interviewers would probably often be able to elicit such information without revealing too many details about other people's interviews.

I don't see why they would ever have to discuss anyone's polygraph results with anybody else if they want to keep it hushed, but sometimes they might leak the info if they want to put pressure on the person but indirectly...?

Do you mean like asking questions during a polygraph that leaves the person when later asked what they were asked about saying, "Just stuff you know that sees if I'd be a good candidate for a polygraph"? That must take some rather subtle questions. I think it might hurt a lot of cases if people were to tell what questions they were asked, rather than just the results. :moo:

 

[ICUDOUCME]

Off to bed I guess, gotta sneak my prayers in tonight, and make em fast, don't want to fall asleep before I finish....Here's praying Dylan is home soon.