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

[FruitTingles]

Thank you so very much for those wonderful and kind words. The pain that my children are going through is nothing compared to what ER and CR are going through and they very well know and understand that. Our focus is Dylan, once he is home safe and sound then we can work on the other challenges being put before all of us, but for now, Dylan needs to be home, comfy and cozy in a bed and trying to figure out his Christmas gifts.

Fair call. I do respect your post. But since we do not know if MR IS involved in Dylan's disappearance, I tend to believe that he is also suffering.

JMO.
:twocents:

 

[TxJan1971]

AZGrandma, are there any searches planned in the near future?

 

[vasportsmom]

Do you have a link for that information, or are you a verified professional? That hasn't been the case in most of the cases I know personally, but I'm not even close to knowing MOST abusers. TIA

Just one quick link for now but you can Google countless others.

To understand the dynamics of domestic violence, one only needs to put a kettle of water on the stove...left there long enough, it will eventually reach a boiling point. Therein lies the problem with most people's concept of domestic violence. Too many are conned into thinking that unless the abuse is life threatening there is nothing to worry about. A push or a slap, what's the big deal? Nobody's been permanently scarred or maimed. That's true...not yet. But over time, the violence almost always escalates in both frequency and severity.

http://www.hruth.org/domestic-violence-dynamics.asp


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[katydid23]

That's fair. What do you think she was trying to say?

Quote:
GRACE: What do you know about the father`s polygraph?

REDWINE: You know, I don`t know much. I know that, you know, everyone is encouraging him to take that. So hopefully, he will do that soon so we can get him out of the picture, and you know, focus on where Dylan is.

GRACE: Has the father taken a polygraph?

REDWINE: You know, I`m not sure. I know he`s been asked to.

GRACE: Do you know if he took it?

REDWINE: I do not at this time, no.

GRACE: Is it your understanding that he`s failed a polygraph?

REDWINE: No, I don`t think he failed a polygraph. You know, I don`t know the specifics behind that. I don`t think he necessarily failed. But you know, I don`t have any information on that. So it`s real -- it`s real tough for me to answer that question.

GRACE: Elaine, when you were speaking earlier to our producers, you mentioned it was your understanding that he had failed a polygraph.

REDWINE: No, I didn`t say he had failed the polygraph.

GRACE: OK. Good. I`m glad you can clarify that. So what is your understanding, then?

REDWINE: I think it was inconclusive.

Rereading this, I don't see any lying. I think she started by saying " I don't really know anything..." Because she was trying to avoid the subject.


But of course NG ius like a dog with a bone. So she went at it again. And once again, ER said she was ' not sure' ...

So NG asks and re-asks the question in various ways. And again, both times she says " I don't have any info on that, so it is really ' tough for me to answer that question."

Finally NG says ' didnt you tell our producer he failed his poly?'

So NOW ER is pushed into a corner. So she has to reveal a little more info, which is that it was inconclusive, which may or may not mean he failed.

 

[StJohn]

When your child is missing, it is very important to be truthful and not lie, certainly not to the press and the public who wants to help find Dylan.

As far as I know, ER hasn't apologized for her remarks and IMHO she should.

We don't know the circumstances that led to ER's statements about the polygraphs. For all we know, ER may have shared what she believed to be true about MR's polygraph with Nancy Grace's producer, not knowing that Nancy Grace planned to ask her about it during the live interview. Isn't it possible that LE became aware of the situation and asked ER not to disclose information about the polygraph, forcing ER to backtrack on what she had told NG's producer? Lot's of possibilities to consider, other than ER telling a boldfaced lie, which I don't believe she did MOO.

 

[gngr~snap]

As an aside... I haven't mentioned this but my own father had pretty bad anger issues while I was growing up. He was never physical to me, but I still remember his verbal outbursts.

He is a changed man and if you met him today you would find it hard to believe what he used to be like. As a victim of the anger, you still never really forget it.

o/t kinda

My children have also cut off almost all communication with their dad.
My daughter says if I am still married to him when she has kids that I will have to see them somewhere other than my home. She will never bring her children around him because of the mind games he has always played on people. (he always thought teasing pre schoolers was funny)~ it ticked me off but it really stuck with them!
He angers easily,causes chaos....has NO friends and none of the
neighbors will even speak to him.
He "seemed" normal at 16 and at 26 then I opened my eyes...
years later... at 47 he has NOT changed.
Do I believe he would ever harm my child? NO!
BUT my child won't subject her child to his "games"
I keep praying...
He sees nothing wrong with how he acts... even after seeing therapists.


In Dylan's case the children of this man tell the biggest story...
moo
but, not always being "nice" does not make someone a murderer....
just suspicious...

 

[PaulR]

Rereading this, I don't see any lying. I think she started by saying " I don't really know anything..." Because she was trying to avoid the subject.


But of course NG ius like a dog with a bone. So she went at it again. And once again, ER said she was ' not sure' ...

So NG asks and re-asks the question in various ways. And again, both times she says " I don't have any info on that, so it is really ' tough for me to answer that question."

Finally NG says ' didnt you tell our producer he failed his poly?'

So NOW ER is pushed into a corner. So she has to reveal a little more info, which is that it was inconclusive, which may or may not mean he failed.

I don't think ER had to reveal anything at the end. She could have said "no, I didn't tell your producers anything." If LE asked her not to talk about the polygraph, which I think is a very real possibility, then she should have just stuck to her guns in the beginning.

There's an old saying about how telling the truth is easier than lying because then you don't need to keep your story straight.

 

[PaulR]

We don't know the circumstances that led to ER's statements about the polygraphs. For all we know, ER may have shared what she believed to be true about MR's polygraph with Nancy Grace's producer, not knowing that Nancy Grace planned to ask her about it during the live interview. Isn't it possible that LE became aware of the situation and asked ER not to disclose information about the polygraph, forcing ER to backtrack on what she had told NG's producer? Lot's of possibilities to consider, other than ER telling a boldfaced lie, which I don't believe she did MOO.

If LE asked ER not to disclose information about the polygraph, and if she said something to the producers, then she betrayed LE's trust and could have jeopardized an investigation MOO.

 

[katydid23]

I totally agree that some parents alienate the relationship between their kids and the ex-spouse. I have seen that happen way too many times. It is horrible.

But I don't think that happened here at all. I think his 'menacing' charges helped convince me that he did indeed have a volatile temper and a drinking problem [ at one time anyway.]

And I have always felt that he was a con man. His versions of the story keep getting revised and embellished with just the perfect details to make him seem less and less suspicious. It went from he was 'out like a light' to " I gently nudged his shoulder and assured him I would return by 11, and he totally understood." GMAB.

 

[gngr~snap]

fftobed:
prayers to Dylan...
and to everyone involved in the Sandy Hook Elementary School horror!

I'll leave the light on....

 

[vasportsmom]

I don't think ER had to reveal anything at the end. She could have said "no, I didn't tell your producers anything." If LE asked her not to talk about the polygraph, which I think is a very real possibility, then she should have just stuck to her guns in the beginning.

There's an old saying about how telling the truth is easier than lying because then you don't need to keep your story straight.

It is quite possible that after being asked so many times ER felt pressured to answer NG. After all, there was a woman (one with a large audience and a reputation for crusading for missing children) willing to take Dylan's story national and that had to feel like a God send at the time. I won't hold a grieving mother responsible for latching on to the promise of help for her missing child even if that offer came from a well known viper.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[katydid23]

I don't think ER had to reveal anything at the end. She could have said "no, I didn't tell your producers anything." If LE asked her not to talk about the polygraph, which I think is a very real possibility, then she should have just stuck to her guns in the beginning.

There's an old saying about how telling the truth is easier than lying because then you don't need to keep your story straight.

I agree. You are absolutely correct. She should have stuck to her guns and would have come off better. But how would any of us fare trying to talk to Nancy Grace on live television, and attempt to keep a secret? And I bet ER was exhausted and out of her mind with grief and fear at the same time. JMO

 

[Confusion]

I totally agree that some parents alienate the relationship between their kids and the ex-spouse. I have seen that happen way too many times. It is horrible.

But I don't think that happened here at all. I think his 'menacing' charges helped convince me that he did indeed have a volatile temper and a drinking problem [ at one time anyway.]

And I have always felt that he was a con man. His versions of the story keep getting revised and embellished with just the perfect details to make him seem less and less suspicious. It went from he was 'out like a light' to " I gently nudged his shoulder and assured him I would return by 11, and he totally understood." GMAB.

His story didn't change, the first time he spoke publicly he was accused of lying and changing his story. How can I change what I told you if I've never spoken to you? :anguish: The changes people have complained about were the differences between what the press had originally said and what he actually said later. Maybe he did tell them something else in the beginning, or maybe they just paraphrased badly. I wasn't there, so I'm not going to say it was definitely one way or the other. The things people are saying he lied about aren't things I consider to be crucial anyway. Again, MOO

 

[katydid23]

I'm sorry, but nowhere did I see that someone who is abusive when young will murder someone when older, or even that violent people won't become less violent when they get older. I don't have to read on the internet to know what abuse looks like, I've seen it all my life. I don't/won't live in an abusive relationship, but I still know plenty who do/have. That included more than one who was murdered, but I don't see many similarities to those people here. MOO or something.

I am really curious what you are trying to convey. You seem to be agreeing that abusive people may escalate and commit murder. But you are also saying that violent people may get less violent, which we all agree MIGHT happen sometimes. But this is the important sentence in that article she posted, imo:

But over time, the violence almost always escalates in both frequency and severity.

http://www.hruth.org/domestic-violence-dynamics.asp

 

[vasportsmom]

I am really curious what you are trying to convey. You seem to be agreeing that abusive people may escalate and commit murder. But you are also saying that violent people may get less violent, which we all agree MIGHT happen sometimes. But this is the important sentence in that article she posted, imo:

But over time, the violence almost always escalates in both frequency and severity.

http://www.hruth.org/domestic-violence-dynamics.asp

Thanks. I'm glad I wasn't the only one shaking my head over that. If murder isn't an escalation of abuse then what is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[katydid23]

His story didn't change, the first time he spoke publicly he was accused of lying and changing his story. How can I change what I told you if I've never spoken to you? :anguish: The changes people have complained about were the differences between what the press had originally said and what he actually said later. Maybe he did tell them something else in the beginning, or maybe they just paraphrased badly. I wasn't there, so I'm not going to say it was definitely one way or the other. The things people are saying he lied about aren't things I consider to be crucial anyway. Again, MOO

The press originally said what HE originally told them. Then he retells the story and it is much 'softer' and kinder.

Why didnt he originally tell them he left at 7:30, and when he returned at 11:30, TO GIVE DYLAN A RIDE, he was gone.

But in the original version, he left at 7:30 to do errands, and when he came back at 11:30, ' HE NOTICED' Dylan was gone.

Very different account, imo.

 

[catswhiskers]

It only takes an extra word here or there on WS to embellish the truth as well - it happens all the time in these threads. Some of us have commented on various "facts" from MSM being gently distorted from one poster to the next - as happens in a game of chinese whispers (or is it called telephones in the USA?). An extra adjective popped in a sentence can totally change it's meaning to a new reader. The extended (and repeated) discussions about DR being "tech savvy" illustrate this - that one comment from his mother led to references being made here about him never being without a phone in his hand, his avid computer use etc. A reportedly very drunk MR years ago now means he is referred to as an alcoholic. The same drunken episode also involved him taking a swing at someone, so he now has an extensive history of violence and abuse.

azgrandma if you could comment about your knowledge of physical violence (or lack of) that could help some of us move on from that at least.

It's all so frustrating isn't it?? If LE doesn't make some progress soon ... gawd knows what will happen here. The phone, fishing pole, polygraph, he said/she said discussions are making me dizzy ullhair:

:moo:

 

[Confusion]

The press originally said what HE originally told them. Then he retells the story and it is much 'softer' and kinder.

Why didnt he originally tell them he left at 7:30, and when he returned at 11:30, TO GIVE DYLAN A RIDE, he was gone.

But in the original version, he left at 7:30 to do errands, and when he came back at 11:30, ' HE NOTICED' Dylan was gone.

Very different account, imo.

Why does he need to as long as he told LE that? I told you, I'm not interested in discussing MR. I don't care about him, and I'm not going to assume he killed his son because he didn't tell the press that he was planning to give DR a ride. I'm also not going to get dragged into some debate over the experiences in my life just because they don't follow a book the participants most likely didn't read...nothing to do with this post, but I'm not writing another one just to say I'm not going to talk about it. :waitasec:

 

[katydid23]

Another thing that i wanted to address, is the notion that those of us who express our suspicions, concerning MR, should feel guilty if he is found totally innocent.

And I have thought about that a lot. Should I feel guilty for discussing my doubts about his story and my feeling of hinkiness. And I have to say that NO, I do not feel bad about doing so, even if I end up being wrong. And the reason is that he brought on much of this suspicion and doubt himself. It is not just the fact that he is the father and the last to see his kid.

I remember when Micki from La, went missing on her bicycle. And some of us were suspicious AT FIRST of her friend Brently. He was the last to see her before she went missing, and we had some doubts. But after looking at his background, and seeing no shadiness, and no temper issues or arrests, and after hearing his story stay consistent over time, our suspicions fell away.

I don't think there is anything wrong with questioning and speculating about possible suspects if there are valid concerns. So if I am wrong, then so be it. But I will not apologize for having my suspicions, because they are based upon valid concerns. They are not baseless because he has a solid history of volatility and domestic violence.JMO

 

[StJohn]

I don't think ER had to reveal anything at the end. She could have said "no, I didn't tell your producers anything." If LE asked her not to talk about the polygraph, which I think is a very real possibility, then she should have just stuck to her guns in the beginning.

There's an old saying about how telling the truth is easier than lying because then you don't need to keep your story straight.

And Monday morning quarterbacking is much easier as well. Wonder how well any of us would "perform" under the pressure cooker of having a missing child & no experience dealing with media questions & scrutiny. What possible motive could Elaine have for lying on Nancy Grace? About anything, especially the polygraphs?