CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #24

[kkdj]

they're not going to call anyone a suspect until they find DR. There is a timeline involved at least once anyone is charged and they need the body to make a good case. not sure if there's a deadline to charge someone once they're called a suspect, but it's doubtful they're gonna call a suspect without a body or other evidence. just for legal reasons, proceedings, etc.

This is what I have always thought too. Yet, in the Michelle Parker case they named and continue to name Dale smith the only suspect but have not charged him.

 

[cluciano63]

This is what I have always thought too. Yet, in the Michelle Parker case they named and continue to name Dale smith the only suspect but have not charged him.

I think it varies. LE has never named Terri Horman a suspect, as far as I know, but you won't find many who believe she isn't.

 

[mck16]

This is what I have always thought too. Yet, in the Michelle Parker case they named and continue to name Dale smith the only suspect but have not charged him.

Isn't the same true in the Haleigh Dunn case. They named Shawn a POI. Also in the Sierra Lamar case they arrested a person because of forensic evidense and they have no body. Also wasn't CA in jail when they found Caylee? jmo

 

[kkdj]

question...is it unusual (from your own or friends' experiences) for a spouse not to know what his or her ex's exact occupation is? whether amicable or estranged.

thanks in advance...

My daughters ex made it a point to change jobs frequently, sometimes doing contract work rather than be on a payroll, try to tell her and the courts he was unemployed, etc., to get out of CS. Didn't work. She hired PI's. Lots more to that story, but hopefully addressed your question.

 

[kkdj]

Isn't the same true in the Haleigh Dunn case. They named Shawn a POI. Also in the Sierra Lamar case they arrested a person because of forensic evidense and they have no body. Also wasn't CA in jail when they found Caylee? jmo

Yes yes and yes!

 

[nursebeeme]

I think it varies. LE has never named Terri Horman a suspect, as far as I know, but you won't find many who believe she isn't.

teri horman was named in recent civil documents by a judge as the prime suspect

there are updates on this on Kyron's forum

 

[Dee10]

teri horman was named in recent civil documents by a judge as the prime suspect

there are updates on this on Kyron's forum

"Prime" suspect, it doesn't get any more descriptive than that :floorlaugh:

 

[cluciano63]

teri horman was named in recent civil documents by a judge as the prime suspect

there are updates on this on Kyron's forum

Right but not by LE on the criminal end, as far as I know. In any case, look how long that took, to get her named even by a judge, two plus years. This case drags on like poor Stacey Peterson, IMO.

 

[kkdj]

When my son was about 4, he told me, "That's why kids have moms, to tell them when someone's lying and when they try but can't do it."

When my grandson was 7 one of his friends made fun of him for not having a dad. My grandson just said his friend didn't understand. His friend had a good dad that a kid would want. And that kids don't want the bad dads.

From the mouths of babes!

 

[Salem]

they're not going to call anyone a suspect until they find DR. There is a timeline involved at least once anyone is charged and they need the body to make a good case. not sure if there's a deadline to charge someone once they're called a suspect, but it's doubtful they're gonna call a suspect without a body or other evidence. just for legal reasons, proceedings, etc.

My understanding is that the timeline does begin to run until an arrest is made. LE often will call someone a suspect well before any arrest is made.

Salem

 

[NC Analyzer]

My understanding is that the timeline does begin to run until an arrest is made. LE often will call someone a suspect well before any arrest is made.

Salem

?? There is no timeline before an arrest is made.

AFTER an arrest is made, procedural timelines come into play. But not before an arrest.

 

[Veidt]

Wow, all of these assumptions about custody feel really wild to me. I'm sure I could go and on about my own experience and that of people I know - and in all those cases you'd have very different experiences, even among siblings with the same parents. Not everyone is the same. I know many douchebag parents who don't care to see their children and sometimes use the work excuse but I also know many who genuinely have to be away in order to support their kids to begin with.

It's not odd to me that MR would enforce his visitation rights, Dylan had time off school for Thanksgiving and lived away. When they lived in the same town it would have been easier for MR to see Dylan when his job allowed him enough time. Seeing his kid infrequently is not the same as never seeing his kid or refusing to do so IMO. (By the way, it's not true that the parent who doesn't have custody always gets holidays, in my case, it was only weekends although that was loosely enforced and I would have been allowed to visit that parent whenever if it was convenient.) I do think that MR and Dylan's relationship was kind of distant but I don't know what to make of it... for all I know he could be trying to at least do his duty as a parent, kwim? IMO more important than how often he saw his son would be how they got along when they were together and whether he was just trying to fight his ex wife or if he really wanted Dylan there.:twocents:

 

[NC Analyzer]

Wow, all of these assumptions about custody feel really wild to me. I'm sure I could go and on about my own experience and that of people I know - and in all those cases you'd have very different experiences, even among siblings with the same parents. Not everyone is the same. I know many douchebag parents who don't care to see their children and sometimes use the work excuse but I also know many who genuinely have to be away in order to support their kids to begin with.

It's not odd to me that MR would enforce his visitation rights, Dylan had time off school for Thanksgiving and lived away. When they lived in the same town it would have been easier for MR to see Dylan when his job allowed him enough time. Seeing his kid infrequently is not the same as never seeing his kid or refusing to do so IMO. (By the way, it's not true that the parent who doesn't have custody always gets holidays, in my case, it was only weekends although that was loosely enforced and I would have been allowed to visit that parent whenever if it was convenient.) I do think that MR and Dylan's relationship was kind of distant but I don't know what to make of it... for all I know he could be trying to at least do his duty as a parent, kwim? IMO more important than how often he saw his son would be how they got along when they were together and whether he was just trying to fight his ex wife or if he really wanted Dylan there.:twocents:

BBM: I don't think anyone ever said that...and in my post, I specifically said every other holiday is FOC standard visitation.

 

[mmmagique]

I was on the Find Dylan Redwine FB page, and the person running it mentions that "hundreds of thousands" are following the page every day. Perhaps the family thinks that they can get just as much exposure through the FB page as MSM? Plus, It's a lot easier to post something on FB, than it is to get the media interested in a case, and to make appearances to talk about the case.

ETA: One thing I have noticed in many cases, is that as long as a case is getting attention from somewhere, people directly involved considered the case to be getting a lot of attention. So the family sees that this huge number of people have viewed the page, from so many different locations, and they feel like the case is getting the exposure it needs.

Yesterday they pointed out a page that had a lot more "likes" than they did, and basically asked what they were doing wrong that they didn't have that many. Facebook is nice to help get the word out (somewhat) and for prayers and support, but they need more than FB (imo)

 

[asyousay]

I think it is normal to NOT have a press conference when you consider that most cases do not get any media attention. I bet there are more cases on NCMEC where LE never had a press conference than cases where they did. However, when you consider in Dylan's case, that the local and national media were interested in the case when it happened (so there was a demand for information) and the circumstances of the case, it is unusual that LE has never held one.

That is the thing with this case is people were interested and i am amazed that the family have not tried to do more media to get the message out there.


The only reason why i do not think you would do is if the crime is closer to home and there is going to be no sightings anywhere else in the country .


If it is a abduction then getting Dylan's story out there and his poster is a must and yet it is seemingly just going to fade away this story .


The facebook page is all well and good but its not as good as national media and because he is a sweet kid and looks cute people will take more notice IMO and want to reach out and help . So take advantage of that and get on radio and tv so . Tell your story to whoever will listen .

 

[mmmagique]

Right but not by LE on the criminal end, as far as I know. In any case, look how long that took, to get her named even by a judge, two plus years. This case drags on like poor Stacey Peterson, IMO.

Well heck, didn't her attorney call her the "defacto suspect" or some such a couple of years ago?

 

[cluciano63]

That is the thing with this case is people were interested and i am amazed that the family have not tried to do more media to get the message out there.


The only reason why i do not think you would do is if the crime is closer to home and there is going to be no sightings anywhere else in the country .


If it is a abduction then getting Dylan's story out there and his poster is a must and yet it is seemingly just going to fade away this story .


The facebook page is all well and good but its not as good as national media and because he is a sweet kid and looks cute people will take more notice IMO and want to reach out and help . So take advantage of that and get on radio and tv so . Tell your story to whoever will listen .

Also, for the most part, you need to be looking up Dylan, or missing children, to come across the FB page, in which case you probably already are aware and are just looking for news. Whereas a child's face on the TV screen or a local news website , IMO, is more likely to command attention from people who may not be aware.

 

[cluciano63]

Well heck, didn't her attorney call her the "defacto suspect" or some such a couple of years ago?

Yes, but that is still not the same as LE saying it, as her lawyer was using it to her advantage, not to her disadvantage. He wanted to avoid her having to speak out against herself.

 

[Seajay]

What if Mark had full custody of Dylan and Elaine only got visitation once in awhile because she had moved away and wanted to take him from all his friends and everything he knew?

Would it be fair for Mark and Dylan to say that because he has his friends in town and he has spent most of his holidays with Mark that Elaine isn't entitled to any??? And that if she was awarded alternate holidays for visitation that it would be extremely selfish and inconsiderate of her to want to spend time with her son??? Would we be saying that she's a douchbag because she actually went to court and showed an interest in having time with her child and that Mark was the wronged parent because he didn't have his child for a holiday when he had so many others??? And what if Elaine had a time demanding job as to why Mark got primary custody to begin with, is she being heartless and selfish because she traveled a lot for her job and couldn't see Dylan as often as she would have liked??

There is nothing that proves Mark did not see his child when they lived in town. We have the mother's word to go on as to how often they saw each other, but that's all relative, isn't it? If she sees the kid every day and Mark sees him every other weekend, and part of the time on holidays, then that's not near as often as she had him, but that doesn't mean it wasn't often by visitation standards for most parents.

Fairness is every other weekend, and every other holiday. But because ELAINE moved away, MARK could not do that. He lost every other weekend. Now he's not even suppose to be allowed to see his child every other holiday because it's considered "selfish" and "inconsiderate" to whatever plans he had BEFORE ELAINE moved? And that's Mark's fault??? How??? JMO

 

[Linda7NJ]

What if Mark had full custody of Dylan and Elaine only got visitation once in awhile because she had moved away and wanted to take him from all his friends and everything he knew?

Would it be fair for Mark and Dylan to say that because he has his friends in town and he has spent most of his holidays with Mark that Elaine isn't entitled to any??? And that if she was awarded alternate holidays for visitation that it would be extremely selfish and inconsiderate of her to want to spend time with her son??? Would we be saying that she's a douchbag because she actually went to court and showed an interest in having time with her child and that Mark was the wronged parent because he didn't have his child for a holiday when he had so many others??? And what if Elaine had a time demanding job as to why Mark got primary custody to begin with, is she being heartless and selfish because she traveled a lot for her job and couldn't see Dylan as often as she would have liked??

There is nothing that proves Mark did not see his child when they lived in town. We have the mother's word to go on as to how often they saw each other, but that's all relative, isn't it? If she sees the kid every day and Mark sees him every other weekend, and part of the time on holidays, then that's not near as often as she had him, but that doesn't mean it wasn't often by visitation standards for most parents.

Fairness is every other weekend, and every other holiday. But because ELAINE moved away, MARK could not do that. He lost every other weekend. Now he's not even suppose to be allowed to see his child every other holiday because it's considered "selfish" and "inconsiderate" to whatever plans he had BEFORE ELAINE moved? And that's Mark's fault??? How??? JMO

Because I feel he didn't bother to take full advantage of his parental rights until she moved. That's my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk