CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #36

[JustJeannie]

I am not sure MB ever understood what we were trying to ask her.
So I am not convinced at all that 9:37 pm message was on a cell phone.

I agree. As I recall, someone was asking her on twitter, which can make it difficult to get a clear message across because of the 140 character limit.

Just a suggestion, but if you have a twitter account, you can sign up for twitlonger, and it links to your twitter account. With twitlonger, you can write as long of a message as you want. When you send it, it goes out looking like a regular tweet, but shows only the first few words, then includes a link to your whole message. It makes it so much easier to explain things clearly.

I know a lot of posters here aren't very familiar with Twitter, so I just thought I'd suggest it for future reference. (And I know there are other similar systems out there. I am just mentioning this one since I have used it. I'm sure any of them are fine.)

 

[Eileen730]

I respect your beliefs and everyone's opinion who posts here. I sometimes only lurk here because it seems like I have to suit up and put on armor in order to post.

Why do I have to defend my opinion? Why do I have to defend myself if I ask for a link to support a fact? At times I don't feel like doing that so I just read and follow along.

We all feel that way Ranch!
Its not just you!

 

[Eileen730]

Seems like there must be search teams with dogs available who could have done this sooner. JMO

Exactly not just one woman with three dogs!

There has to be more out there.

Nothing is being done at all.

Just online bickering.

All JMO

 

[Confusion]

She confirmed it so its true?

Unless she or LE lied about it. I prefer to believe it's true. MOO

 

[Eileen730]

Unless she or LE lied about it. I prefer to believe it's true. MOO

Ok Id just like to hear LE say it.

All I ever saw LE say was Electronic communication.
Which I thought strange why not say Cell Phone?

This is why I do not think it was the phone but to each our own!

 

[Confusion]

Ok Id just like to hear LE say it.

All I ever saw LE say was Electronic communication.
Which I thought strange why not say Cell Phone?

This is why I do not think it was the phone but to each our own!

Maybe he used a non-electronic form of communication after that?

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

As i read her post she started it with IMO this is why LE......etc I read it differently than u thats all.
I do think it was the I pod that the text was sent from.

I wish we had ping info that might help some.

Thank you. And yes I said IMO! As in this is my opinion as to why LE might think that Dylan made it to the house. IMO the 9:37 was sent via the iPod not the cell phone.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

It doesn't really matter what "we" were trying to ask her. She confirmed that the message was sent, not received, at 9:37 pm on Sunday. She also confirmed that it was sent from Dylan's cell phone, and that LE isn't willing to discuss activity from any other electronic devices. Whatever the purpose of the question/s, she gave the answers that I needed. MOO

It seems pretty clear to me what she was trying to convey. I'm not asking for anyone to believe that the 9:37 PM text was absolutely sent via Dylan's cellphone vs the iPod.

That also means there is no confirmation that Mark has Wi-Fi and Dylan used his iPod to send the 9:37 PM text. MOO.

 

[Eileen730]

Sigh!
I believe he has Wi-Fi only because i think he has a lap top!

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Sigh!
I believe he has Wi-Fi only because i think he has a lap top!

I believe that he use's his hard wired desktop while at home and his laptop only when on the road. No need for Wi-Fi. MOO.

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

Everyone is entitled to believe what they wish about the 9:37 electronic device communication. I personally think it was sent via the iPod. I don't think MB was lying but possibly misunderstood and assumed since it was a text that it came from his cell phone. <modsnip>

 

[Eileen730]

Everyone is entitled to believe what they wish about the 9:37 electronic device communication. I personally think it was sent via the iPod. I don't think MB was lying but possibly misunderstood and assumed since it was a text that it came from his cell phone. Unfortunately we are not allowed to discuss anything regarding this except what had come from LE and MSM, so those that choose to believe it was the cell phone that's fine. I just don't.

I dont either I do think his phone was taken from him.

 

[ColdHands]

I missed this somehow:

The father of a missing Colorado teen came to Albuquerque Thursday for help.

http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico...ine/-/9153728/18459278/-/nr78w5z/-/index.html

Dated February 8. I knew that MR had met with them but I guess I was so distracted by the rest of the article I missed that he actually went to them for the first meeting. That's a 4 hour drive each way.

 

[YidArmyRach]

Going by the statements and behavior of the people who know Dylan, it's my belief that it was within his norm not to text or text back people at times. For example, if someone visited him or he was talking with someone, my belief is that it's not outside his norm not to text or text back, even with those he's closest to.

I totally agree with this.

I said on one of the very early threads that one of my sons has, on more than one occasion, made arrangements to get up very early the next day to go somewhere with his mates. He'll talk about it all day, then at night will set alarms, ask me to wake him up in case he sleep through his alarm and even get all his stuff ready before he goes to bed.

Then the alarm goes off, I wake him up .............. and he says "I can't be bothered now, I'm tired" and he'll turn over and go back to sleep. AND DOESN'T BOTHER LETTING HIS MATES KNOW!!

I can fully believe that that Dylan made those plans to meet R and intended to keep them - but after the delay and the flight and the lack of sleep the night before he traveled, he could well have still been tired, and not be so keen to get up at 5.30am after all.

 

[cluciano63]

Even if Dylan decided to sleep in, it does not explain why he would not resume communications once he did get up.

 

[Eileen730]

I totally agree with this.

I said on one of the very early threads that one of my sons has, on more than one occasion, made arrangements to get up very early the next day to go somewhere with his mates. He'll talk about it all day, then at night will set alarms, ask me to wake him up in case he sleep through his alarm and even get all his stuff ready before he goes to bed.

Then the alarm goes off, I wake him up .............. and he says "I can't be bothered now, I'm tired" and he'll turn over and go back to sleep. AND DOESN'T BOTHER LETTING HIS MATES KNOW!!

I can fully believe that that Dylan made those plans to meet R and intended to keep them - but after the delay and the flight and the lack of sleep the night before he traveled, he could well have still been tired, and not be so keen to get up at 5.30am after all.

But dont you agree he would have contacted his friend R when he got up cause R was waiting for him since 6 30 and had sent him a text message asking him where he was?

Now My kids would have been up and waiting and if they couldnt go there they would send a text message.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I totally agree with this.

I said on one of the very early threads that one of my sons has, on more than one occasion, made arrangements to get up very early the next day to go somewhere with his mates. He'll talk about it all day, then at night will set alarms, ask me to wake him up in case he sleep through his alarm and even get all his stuff ready before he goes to bed.

Then the alarm goes off, I wake him up .............. and he says "I can't be bothered now, I'm tired" and he'll turn over and go back to sleep. AND DOESN'T BOTHER LETTING HIS MATES KNOW!!

I can fully believe that that Dylan made those plans to meet R and intended to keep them - but after the delay and the flight and the lack of sleep the night before he traveled, he could well have still been tired, and not be so keen to get up at 5.30am after all.

Well said. I think that a young 13 yr old boy who hasn't seen his mates/friends in quite awhile would maybe promise to get up early and then when reality hits "drag his butt" a bit. MOO.

 

[YidArmyRach]

But dont you agree he would have contacted his friend R when he got up cause R was waiting for him since 6 30 and had sent him a text message asking him where he was?

Now My kids would have been up and waiting and if they couldnt go there they would send a text message.

Obviously i can only go by my son .... his answer would be "well they know I'm not there, so no point telling them that".

And if they had of sent him a text him to ask where he was, he'd ignore it as he wouldn't want to explain that he couldn't be bothered to get up. He'd meet up later when they'd have forgotten about being let down!

 

[tamild]

Obviously i can only go by my son .... his answer would be "well they know I'm not there, so no point telling them that".

And if they had of sent him a text him to ask where he was, he'd ignore it as he wouldn't want to explain that he couldn't be bothered to get up. He'd meet up later when they'd have forgotten about being let down!

I couldn't help but laugh about this, because mine are the same way :floorlaugh:

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Even if Dylan decided to sleep in, it does not explain why he would not resume communications once he did get up.

Your right, being asleep only covers the time that your asleep. But it does cover some of time where there is no communication. Other explanations can be used for when he did get up.

A dead and inoperative cell phone that had all of his contact numbers in it.

A landline phone was maybe available but not having memorized his friends numbers he didn't utilize it.

An iPod, but was Wi-FI avaible to use it?

A desktop and or laptop commuter. Password protected or taken with Mark when he left.

MOO.