CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #31

[Psychic Sleuth]

Why couldn't that be true??? He was up late the night before, he was exhausted from the days activities. And he was awake at 10:30 pm or so watching a movie and texting.

I haven't been to bed at all this past night. I am exhausted. I'm on the computer at WS. It's 7 am here and I haven't slept a wink. So why couldn't Dylan be exhausted and still be texting that late? Sometimes you get so over tired you can't sleep. It would sure explain why he was so hard to get up the next morning.

And I believe earlier we were talking about Mark not being able to tell if Dylan was playing a game or texting or whether it was all done on his iPod. It's my understanding LE got ahold of email records from Dylan that night which was why they knew about the 9:37 pm text. JMO

BBM

And here lies my confusion with the 9:37 text. If they found the text via email records it had to have been sent via the iPod not the cell phone. But now we see that Bender says the text was sent via cell phone. Which is it?

 

[rebeccaeee]

I am pages behind but as to a hitchhiking or walking away scenario I thought I read or maybe it was a comment somewhere that Dylan's scent was not found on that road? After all these weeks of news stories and interviews and Facebook I can't recall where I heard or saw this. Does anyone else remember this?

Yes- I recall fairly clearly that dogs followed A scent (not Dylan's) to the corner of 500/501 and could not follow from there. I think this was associated with the lake searches early on and the scent was never attributed to Dylan, if I recall. Of course, the corner of 500/501 is still miles down the road from MR's house and would have passed lots of homes and a few businesses. I have always thought anyone traveling that route would have been seen by someone else that AM.

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

Bender already told another reporter that all activity on the phone stopped on Sunday evening.

According to that reporter. The problem is we are seeing all kinds of conflicting statements and who knows which ones are correct. Either Bender is forgetting what he already said or the reporters are misquoting him.

 

[asyousay]

BBM

And here lies my confusion with the 9:37 text. If they found the text via email records it had to have been sent via the iPod not the cell phone. But now we see that Bender says the text was sent via cell phone. Which is it?

And if it was via the phone then why is it not showing up on Elaine's phone records she has of Dylan's phone for that period of time.

 

[jjenny]

According to that reporter. The problem is we are seeing all kinds of conflicting statements and who knows which ones are correct. Either Bender is forgetting what he already said or the reporters are misquoting him.

I think Bender is forgetting what he already said. The same situation as with lie detector test. We have an article with quote from LE saying both parents took lie detector tests. Then later on LE was saying they don't release information about who took lie detector tests ( or something to that effect).

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

And if it was via the phone then why is it not showing up on Elaine's phone records she has of Dylan's phone for that period of time.

I personally think it was sent via the iPod and LE found it when they took the iPod from MR's home. And this is why it was not mentioned early on. The iPod would most likely sent texts through an email account. When I get texts from my Grandson on his iPod they show as coming from the email account he set up to be able to text from the iPod.

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

The only thing we can discuss here is information from LE and MSM. So when those start conflicting what do you do? I'm lost. I have no idea what is fact and what is not any more.

 

[WesternMD]

Light another candle for DYLAN. It's cold and dark out there.

 

[jjenny]

I personally think it was sent via the iPod and LE found it when they took the iPod from MR's home. And this is why it was not mentioned early on. The iPod would most likely sent texts through an email account. When I get texts from my Grandson on his iPod they show as coming from the email account he set up to be able to text from the iPod.

It could be, but that reporter tweeted that Dylan used his cell until 9:37 pm and not at all after that.

 

[IHAVENOCLUE]

Anyone have any short tweet length questions for MB?

Yes.... Where is Dylan? lease:

 

[TxJan1971]

Yes- I recall fairly clearly that dogs followed A scent (not Dylan's) to the corner of 500/501 and could not follow from there. I think this was associated with the lake searches early on and the scent was never attributed to Dylan, if I recall. Of course, the corner of 500/501 is still miles down the road from MR's house and would have passed lots of homes and a few businesses. I have always thought anyone traveling that route would have been seen by someone else that AM.

That statement about scent can be found on the Official FMDR Facebook page in the Timeline.

 

[SCHMAE]

I think it's folly to assume ER gave 100 % of her phone records over to the public to view . If there was anything odd or out of sorts with everything else I could see her or her at the advice of LE , keeping that portion off or out. Also at some point everyone's phone bill cuts off and the rest goes to next month's bill. So if she had an 8 pm text, who's to say the later texts are not on the next month's billing statement and were not available. By the time the next months' bill comes out she knows and LE knows "THIS txt is important" and we won't share it . Couldn't that be ? Either that she or LE chose to not show it or that it wasn't on that month's bill? Especially when you throw in all of the ping, hold, dead, signal issues?

 

[IHAVENOCLUE]

Just my two bobs worth about the backpack - Dylan was staying for 6 days I believe? From the airport security camera grab his backpack wasn't stuffed right to the top with gear - if anything it's hanging rather floppily and half empty looking around his hips from what I can see. IMO he probably packed very lightly - maybe only a change or two of clothes. He wouldn't have needed to take his own toiletries to stay with dad, so I would guess he had maybe one or two pairs of shorts, a couple of t-shirts, socks and a hoodie - and that might be being generous. I see that he would just pick up his backpack, throw in his phone and charger and head out, without even thinking of unpacking anything. By the sounds of it wearing the same clothes he wore the day before.
We recently spent a week at the beach, and my 13 yo packed everything he wanted to take into the side pocket of his laptop bag! And yes the laptop was already in the bag.
My sons routinely wear their clothes to bed and then still the next day. Do I have anything to say about it? Sure, but there isn't really any way I can force them to change - they just laugh off my concerns. I'm pretty strict with them in a lot of other ways, but I pick my battles and what they choose to wear is not necessarily one of them.
I'm guessing Dylan wouldn't have seen the need to carry lots of clothing on a visit to his dad's, or expected his dad to be too worried if he wore the same clothes for more than a day.

:moo:

All good points...

but he was communicating with friends regarding girls... So he may have packed a few other clothes to look nice for the ladies.... YKWIM... :wink:

Just a thought...

 

[SCHMAE]

Whoever is asking questions to the twitter Melissa... could you ask if MR' s texts from all of sunday and monday been given to LE?

 

[nursebeeme]

So Dylan's phone's last activity was during the time MR and Dylan were watching "Adventureland".....

but didn't we hear that Dylan was still texting as MR went up to bed?

(I am assuming they watched "Adventureland" in its entirety.)

ETA.... To clarify... This looks like an inconsistency to me...

Last any type of electronic outgoing communication was 9:30 (approx.).... And this would be during the time of movie watching... About 8. - 10 p.m....

But MR ran upstairs to go to bed while DR was texting ..... So did they watch the movie completely? .... And if so.... Then the times are not adding up...

bbm.

no MR said "shortly after that" he went to bed.

 

[SCHMAE]

bbm.

no MR said "shortly after that" he went to bed.

Didn't he say he ' ran up to bed' or ' ran up the stairs' to bed?
Is that a funny thing to say ?

And Good Morning Nurse !

 

[DylansMom34]

Has anyone tweeted that reporter asking if when Dylan was texting on the couch, was he on his phone or on his ipod

 

[Babbi-Dan]

I had a thought...There is only one road in and out of the area and police are asking for any photos anyone might have that shows a vehicle. Here's my question...Did MR pass or see anyone on his way out to run errands? Anyone that would know he was no longer at his house?

 

[cfreyja23]

cfrey! Can you clarify something that I've seen batted around numerous times? If not, I understand. We've been wondering exactly what is LE's obligation to tell the truth to the public. Some of their statements seem ambiguous and others possibly seem to mislead. Could that be on purpose or is it just so confusing a case and maybe LE doesn't know what to say so they say something that might not even make sense ! LOL, like I just might have done. It seems sometimes when they speak it's not so much to the ' public' as it is to the ' perp'. So I know you can't speak for their intent but do you know how much dishonesty they can get away with in a public statement? TIA !~

Hi Schmae, I'd be happy to give my opinion about that, but to be fair to all the other Websleuthers, I have to clarify that my opinion wouldn't be any more valid than anyone else's here, I think. I don't practice criminal law, and though I interact with LE on a daily basis, it's not in missing persons/kidnapping cases. I will say that every LE agency has their own standard operating procedure on what information to share with the public and when. In high profile cases, LE may seek help from the FBI not only about the investigation, but about whether releasing information to the public may help apprehend the person responsible. I don't believe that any LE agency would deliberately release false information if it might alarm the public or impede their own investigation. Most often, they withhold information from the public if it might alert the perp or result in false confessions or tips. There are agencies that release zero info, a little info, and a lot of info. IMOO, in the first case, I think that's when LE either genuinely has zero info to share with the public, or doesn't need the public's help, or isn't worrying about public perception of the case. In the second instance, IMOO that happens when it could be stranger abduction or someone known to the victim, and LE wants to keep the public informed that they are actively working on the case. In the last case, IMOO this happens when evidence points to a stranger abduction and LE wants to enlist public help or to get tips from people who may know the perpetration (e.g., the Jessica Ridgeway case). In the second situation, I do think that LE may release some information to put pressure on a POI, but would balance that with not releasing information that may jeopardize a future trial or public perception. Again, I don't think they'd deliberately misinform the public, but certainly watch their words carefully and as a result may seem to be vague or misleading. If you did statement analysis on something an attorney says, it would look like deception, because we sometimes have a hard time speaking plainly. That's not a result of trying to mislead, but rather not committing to one statement when there are multiple possible ways to say the same thing.

 

[Eileen730]

Do they have Neighborhood watch there?