CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #34

[dlc]

So if they don't, what does that mean?

ETA: My comment was in response to Ranch's comment to the following post (I still don't know how to double-quote):

Originally Posted by absentia
often the extended family shows a presence of support or even acts as spokesperson.

quote=RANCH;8839767]So if they don't, what does that mean?[/quote]

Me
It could mean a lot of things, but I'd be hard pressed to find one that was good, or had positive connotations. IMO.

 

[dlc]

Considering the family who is renting his other home is being harassed and their property is being trespassed on, AND they have nothing to do with anything whatsoever, would you stand up and be a spokesperson for MR? JMO

Link, please?

TIA.

 

[BeginnersLuck]

I am not an aggressive person in general, and I tend to live by the "you can catch more flies with honey" motto, but I would have gotten LE to go with me and physically track him down, as soon as I got to town if he was not answering my questions about my baby.

It would be nice if it worked that way in the real world. Unfortunately, once a child reaches the teen years, LE typically will take a report and consider them a runaway. There are thousands and thousands of teens that take off all the time and 99.9% (just my estimate) turn up hours or days later.

LE wouldn't have the resources to extensively search for every teen right away. Now, if there was a sign of foul play, they would treat it much differently.

 

[The Cheese]

BBM. Did anyone watch the video posted last thread (so sorry I can't remember who posted it) where Dylan's friends spoke to the hitchhiking at the end? They very specifically stated they only knew of ONE incident in which Dylan hitchhiked, and that was the time they were all together, walking home from the library.

ETA: They also both agreed Dylan would have called for a ride.

I could hear the one friend say it was one time, but there's so much wind and noise, I can't hear what the other friend said. What did the other friend say? Thanks.

 

[TxLady2]

I'm going to take it as a general or overall feeling that you have and not anything specific to what Mark said in the interview. In my personal life, I'm only able to catch people in their lies by the details that don't fit with the facts. But that's just how I do it.

Me, too. Not throwing this at AZgrandma, but if you (general you) know that a person has a propensity to lie sometimes, then it would be natural to have the tendency to not believe anything they said. You would find yourself doubting them when they were actually telling the truth. In short, you just can't trust them. You end up doubting them no matter what they say. If they tell you the sun is shining, you look out the window to see if it's raining. It's just human nature.

I have a brother who likes to exaggerate things, and flat out lies occasionally. He does not lie to hurt anyone, he just likes to tell a good story and make it a better one by embellishing a little. I've tried to imagine if he was placed in this kind of situation, and the more I thought about it, I realize that he would probably not veer from the truth if it's something this serious. He would tell the truth no matter what. I'm not saying this is what Mark is doing, just that liars don't lie with everything they say, sometimes they tell the truth, it's just hard to distinguish the difference.

No reflection on AZg at all, just saying that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

 

[SCHMAE]

Yes, some games that are built in or downloaded can be played offline. He would not need internet access to play them. To initially download a game you would need access, but once downloaded you wouldn't.

Ok so 9:37 being the last text outgoing does not mean the phone broke, died, ceased to exist at 9:38. MR could indeed be right that DR was playing games much later than 9:37 that required no signal, therefore no pings ! Is that right ? tks a lot

 

[dlc]

I suppose afterwards it's only natural for folks to also expect - no demand - the ex-husband to put aside all of the public rants, accusations, hostile messages, organized mobs, and years-old angst and bitterness, and appear with his ex-wife on national television. What could possibly go wrong?

Could you please provide links for the "public rants," "hostile messages," and "organized mobs?"

TIA

 

[cluciano63]

The link won't work for me. Is the article saying that a friend of MR's says that he told her that ER and CR have sent mean messages to him?

Thanks.

I can't open that link today either, but I read it last night and this person, TM, says these texts happened but did not say she saw them, or how she knows this.

 

[jjenny]

Ok so 9:37 being the last text outgoing does not mean the phone broke, died, ceased to exist at 9:38. MR could indeed be right that DR was playing games much later than 9:37 that required no signal, therefore no pings ! Is that right ? tks a lot

If the phone is on then it should be pinging. That is my understanding of the cell phone. Even if you don't do anything on it, if it's on, it will be pinging.

 

[dlc]

would it matter?

It matters because it continues to be alleged that ER "blew up/used a vinegary tone/was mean/accused MR" and so on "right off the bat/immediately/from the get go," and this is simply not true, as has been documented innumerable times.


IMO.

 

[Kamille]

A couple of weeks before Phil came into the discussion I posted that they should do something like talk to him, but I added OFF CAMERA. I don't see anything good coming from a sit down circus like what appears to be coming here. I used the words a horror show and I'll stick to that . I do still wish Dr Phil or someone of his ......... caliber .... would speak with them but not for public viewing. I think it would be great to have a way for them to get this point for right now ' the past is the past and we'll speak about nothing except the day Dylan came to MR's ' I think ER deserves to hear his side of thngs IN PRIVATE for her to decide whether or not she likes, trusts, believes.
But a mud slinging match on tv while the baby is missing...it's not cool....it's not productive....it's not going to help a thing. JMO

I agree with you that I'm not sure getting together with Dr Phil to air their grievances on television is such a great idea. However I do believe that LE should have requested months ago that they all get together with an LE appointed mediator to discuss this situation, before information, evidence and public opinion were all over the internet.

I think that ER and CR should have been given the opportunity to meet with MR in person, face to face, while a mediator goes over the questions that both of them have regarding the circumstances of those approx 24 hours before ER received the first text that her son was missing. They needed a professional interviewer to ensure that MR would answer their questions...eye to eye...in a succint manner rather than allowing him to talk in circles and not really answer anything at all. ER and CR probably know this man better than anyone considering the length of time they were married and living as a family and I think if he could have convinced them at the beginning that he had absolutely nothing to do with this, everything would have taken on a different shape.

And if that interview had gone south and erupted into an arguing match, so be it. I'm sure LE would have gleemed important information from that too. Perhaps that's what was needed from the start. MR's accountability to the mother of their child. Face to face, eye to eye.

MOO

 

[BeginnersLuck]

If the phone is on then it should be pinging. That is my understanding of the cell phone. Even if you don't do anything on it, if it's on, it will be pinging.

This should be correct, as long as there is a tower to ping off of????

Confusion I think has some experience and can probably give a better opinion.

Wouldn't it be nice to know what LE has found out about the cell pings for both MR and DR's phones.

 

[SuperMom1995]

Because he is being accused. He is saying he doesn't know where Dylan is and he is further clarifying that he had no involvement with his disappearance.

It is not a direct way (or reliable denial) of saying he was not involved. I have read that even killers don't like to lie as it causes internal stress so they tend to answer important questions indirectly and leaving out true details so that a lot of people think they are answering the question truthfully when in fact they're not. Example Question and Answer:

Question:

Did you kill Amy?

Direct answer (reliable denial):

I did not kill my daughter Amy.

Indirect answer:

I would never harm that child.

And before you say people talk differently, no matter how you talk there are certain ways the most uneducated or illiterate person can make a direct statement when they know they are not guilty.

 

[Kamille]

IMO, it's hard to answer why a teenager would or wouldn't do something. Their minds work much different that an adults. I would be interested in hearing more from Dylan's friends.

So far, his friends have stated that they think someone abducted him while he was out walking or hitchhiking. That was early on when this was stated. It would just be nice to hear more about Dylan's habits and personality from them.

When you think about the position that these teen boys were in, you can well imagine why they said some of the things they said IMO.

They were just hanging around with each other that day, with no idea of why Dylan didn't show up, but they obviously were not too concerned about it. His father had already shot down one planned visit so why not another?

So when MR showed up to ask them if Dylan was with them, because he knew they were trying to get together and he wasn't at home or with his only other known friend in Vallecito, what were these boys supposed to think? I'm sure they tried in all ways they could to help figure out where he might be. And I'm sure the last thing they thought was that Dylan's father had done something to him. They are teenage boys, and I'm sure they are well aware of "stranger danger".

The last thing they were going to say to MR was "I don't know where he is, what did you do to him?" It seems more reasonable to me that they were going to come up with ideas and wild speculation with regards to how he disappeared right from the couch of his father's house.

MOO

 

[masootz]

This should be correct, as long as there is a tower to ping off of????

Confusion I think has some experience and can probably give a better opinion.

Wouldn't it be nice to know what LE has found out about the cell pings for both MR and DR's phones.

yes, a powered on phone will attempt to reach a tower to communicate. if it is successful the tower will record the times it communicated with the phone. if a phone is out of reach of a tower it will still attempt to communicate but there won't be any indication on the service provider side (since the tower won't see it). a ping is simply a phone's way of saying "hey i'm here" to the tower so any held information (texts, voicemails) can be pushed down and so the tower can communicate upstream that any calls to that number should be routed through it. (this is a simplified explanation but it hits the important points).

 

[Kamille]

So of course I fell asleep thinking of this case and how to sift through the mess. A couple of ideas or questions: Has there been any mention of MR's demeanor on the morning errands? The receptionist at the lawyer's office and / or the person he turned in his work records to? It would be interesting to know if that was normal routine MR they faced that morning. I'm not sure the reception at lawyer's office would know but it sounds like he's been there a lot over the last few months, so possibly so. Whoever he gives his work records to is probably someone he sees frequently.

Next, would there be any benefit from us making a ' chart' for lack of a better word where we put together 3 piles . Pile A , everything we KNOW for fact. Pile B, everything we DO NOT know. Pile C , everything that we think but is thus far speculative. Then we could cross reference these 3 piles/ columns and see if any shiny needle sticks out of the hay stack. There is probably a more organized method, maybe even a TERM for what I'm thinking, but I'm just throwing this out there.

BBM

I wonder if they asked any of these people, or if they have video surveillence, to see what he was wearing. Did MR change his clothes that morning before running those errands?

:waitasec:

 

[BeginnersLuck]

It is not a direct way (or reliable denial) of saying he was not involved. I have read that even killers don't like to lie as it causes internal stress so they tend to answer important questions indirectly and leaving out true details so that a lot of people think they are answering the question truthfully when in fact they're not. Example Question and Answer:

Question:

Did you kill Amy?

Direct answer (reliable denial):

I did not kill my daughter Amy.

Indirect answer:

I would never harm that child.

And before you say people talk differently, no matter how you talk there are certain ways the most uneducated or illiterate person can make a direct statement when they know they are not guilty.

I've read statement and behavioral analysis done on the parents in several high profile missing child cases. In those cases later it was determined the children were abducted by a sick perp and very sick things were done to these children. But, because of the statement analysis a bunch of the GP jumped on the band wagon and were accusing the parents. How sad this was! What it boiled down to was a matter of being nevous, stressed and in shock. I will never read or believe any statement or behavior analysis again.
I've filed people that do this type of thing in missing persons cases, in the same category as psychics, but that is just my opinion.

 

[ColdHands]

BBM

I wonder if they asked any of these people, or if they have video surveillence, to see what he was wearing. Did MR change his clothes that morning before running those errands?

:waitasec:

Good question. I've been wondering if there was anyway to show that MR made it back to the house Sunday night.

 

[Kamille]

Ok so 9:37 being the last text outgoing does not mean the phone broke, died, ceased to exist at 9:38. MR could indeed be right that DR was playing games much later than 9:37 that required no signal, therefore no pings ! Is that right ? tks a lot

I think we'd have to know whether Dylan's little flip phone with no GPS capabilities had any game functions.

I wish they would at least release a description of the phone (colour, make, model) and maybe the same for the fishing rod, so that locals would know what they are looking for when they are out and about.

MOO

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

Me, too. Not throwing this at AZgrandma, but if you (general you) know that a person has a propensity to lie sometimes, then it would be natural to have the tendency to not believe anything they said. You would find yourself doubting them when they were actually telling the truth. In short, you just can't trust them. You end up doubting them no matter what they say. If they tell you the sun is shining, you look out the window to see if it's raining. It's just human nature.

I have a brother who likes to exaggerate things, and flat out lies occasionally. He does not lie to hurt anyone, he just likes to tell a good story and make it a better one by embellishing a little. I've tried to imagine if he was placed in this kind of situation, and the more I thought about it, I realize that he would probably not veer from the truth if it's something this serious. He would tell the truth no matter what. I'm not saying this is what Mark is doing, just that liars don't lie with everything they say, sometimes they tell the truth, it's just hard to distinguish the difference.

No reflection on AZg at all, just saying that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

I have to chime in here and say that from my personal experience being married to a liar for 22 years this is not the case. After a while you start to notice patterns when the person is lying. I could almost tell immediately if he was lying or telling the truth when I would ask a question. If he was telling the truth he would generally give a direct short answer to the question. If he was lying he tended to go way over board in giving a detailed answer and would go off in other directions that had nothing to do with the question I asked. Yes, it was quite obvious over time. I never knew when I asked a question whether the response was going to be the truth or a lie. I determined that based on his response and how it was worded, and I didn't assume that everything coming out of his mouth was a lie. Because it wasn't. He lied a lot but not always. I can still tell to this day when he's lying. It's just so obvious when you really know him. And he knows I can tell. He laughs now when he tells me something and immediately I say 'that's a lie'. I might not know what the truth is, but I know the story he is giving is not completely factual. It just becomes so obvious over time.

I don't think these traits change in a person. I've talked to my husband's girlfriends prior to me and they say the same exact things. He's 56 years old and when it comes to lying and manipulating he hasn't changed from his teenage years. It's something he learned in childhood and he will always be a liar and manipulator. He will never change. That I do know for sure.

And his current girlfriend called me recently crying about all the lies he's told her and how manipulative he is. It will never end and if anything it's gotten worse. It's who he is and you can't change it.

And after reading this most will say wow what a horrible person he is. But the funny thing is, everybody adores him! He's the life of the party and everyone's friend. He would do anything for his friends and he's basically a good hearted person. He's not physically violent in the least. He just has issues. Issues that have been deeply ingrained in him since childhood. His Mom lied to him all of his life and he learned how to manipulate people as a young child to get what he wanted. He was quite poor and he learned that this was how he could get things he wanted in life. Sad but true. And most casual friends have no idea who he truly is.