CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #37

[jjenny]

I'm sure he'll add it into his next interview. :moo:

I bet you are right.
Looking forward to it.

 

[jjenny]

And it appears that he was not up and ready to go at 7:30 am (maybe his cell phone was dead and the alarm didn't go off) so his dad left without him ... and it's quite possible that Dylan was determined to meet with his friends, so he took matters into his own hands, grabbed all his stuff, walked the short distance to the highway and stuck out his thumb.

7:30 was already an hour too late. They should have left at 6:00 to make it to his friend's at 6:30.

 

[NC Analyzer]

I assume you mean stereotypical kidnappings? 115 per year? They're not all strangers.

Anyway, the 125 to 150 murders per year are by fathers and all other family members combined, so they're about equal. Fathers may be a bit less.

I agree that the numbers don't tell the whole story, and that the elements of the crime can give us some clues. Here, we have no elements.

You have to make up so much stuff to get to a murder-by-Mark theory. You have to make up that Mark was drinking, make up that Mark and Dylan had a fight, you have to make up a reason for the fight, make up that Mark took Dylan's phone, make up that Mark broke Dylan's phone, you have to make up that Mark was killing Dylan to get back at Elaine, and on and on and on.

(I don't mean you specifically by the way - it's a general you.)

Add to that that LE have said that Mark is not considered a suspect and you have to make up that Mark is "the unnamed suspect" or "the unnamed POI".

Add to that that LE haven't mentioned any evidence of what would statistically be a very violent crime, so you have to make up blood or brain tissue or decomp fluid.

Add to that that nobody's mentioned any signs of a fight at all, and you have to make neighbors hearing screams or yelling or cursing, scuff marks on the walls, a broken vase.

Add to that that Dylan's mom and other family members have stated that they don't think Mark killed Dylan.

Phew! I could go on, but there's the gist of it. There's just too darn much I'd have to make up, too many explanations I'd have to come up with, to go with the murder-by-Mark theory.

I don't "make up" anything. I'm very impartial when I examine any case. I've been an investigator for many years. There is a process of elimination. No matter what you (not you specifically) attempt to claim about this case, DAD has a giant red flag. Like it or not, it doesn't change anything. And YES, there are "elements". Perhaps you don't see them, but I'm pretty sure everyone in LE does. (again, not YOU specifically)

 

[otto]

And this visit in November was the FIRST court-ordered visit. And Dylan didn't really want to be there because he wanted to see his Grandma that has been diagnosed with cancer. The only thing he appeared excited about for this trip was to see his friends; which Mark said no to right off the bat.

And rightly so. If he's there to visit his dad, he should have made that the priority. To go to his dad's house so that he can be closer to friends and to think that he's going to use his dad to get closer to his friends is not acceptable.

Why would a well behaved, respectful child treat his dad like that ... like a ride from the airport, a place to sleep one night and a stop off on the way to friends?

 

[katydid23]

Was Dylan a well adjusted happy child, or was he a rebellious child that would become confrontational with his father if his father said that it was too late to visit friends? I'm reading that this well adjusted happy child was rebellious and angry at his father because he couldn't do what he wanted ... that doesn't make sense.

Dylan was about to turn 14. I think many 'well adjusted' boys go a bit nuts at that age.

Did you read about some of Marks past issues with anger management? He was the one with issues, not Dylan. But those issues were coming to a head because Elaine was about to remarry her first husband. Mark was very angry about that.

And there were ongoing court battles over custody and spousal support. Mark had just LOST a recent battle and not only lost his monetary support from Elaine, he was possibly going to have to pay some child support now.

Mark was the one who was likely confrontational, not Dylan. But D was now older and would probably stand up for himself more than previously.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Thank you for your informative post.

The main problem I have with scrutinizing a parent of a missing child and interpreting everything as though they are guilty is that I see this over and over again. Take any missing child and the first person that is discussed as guilty on forums is the parent.

I'm trying to see this without looking at the usual suspect ... trying to understand whether Dyan could have disappeared without the father murdering him on the night he arrived for a visit. Personally, I can't see any reason why the dad would murder his son at 8 or 9 that evening.

Personally I can't see any reason why any dad or mom would murder their child at any time of day or night yet its a solid fact that it happens time after time after time..

There is no "reason" that will justify killing a child, ever.. therefor the lack of understanding a "reason" does not affect the fact parents do kill their children.. and imo the possibility is great that its happened in this case.

 

[mck16]

And, to me what is very telling is that when Dylan's friends were ASKED about Dylan, they are quoted as saying that maybe he hitchhiked and got taken away. That came from their mouths, his friends, the ones who knew him best.

And also ER said that she lectured Dylan about hitchhiking before he came to his Dad's. Now why would she do that if she didn't think it could be a possibility?

 

[otto]

I don't "make up" anything. I'm very impartial when I examine any case. I've been an investigator for many years. There is a process of elimination. No matter what you (not you specifically) attempt to claim about this case, DAD has a giant red flag. Like it or not, it doesn't change anything. And YES, there are "elements". Perhaps you don't see them, but I'm pretty sure everyone in LE does. (again, not YOU specifically)

Why is hitch hiking eliminated?

 

[katydid23]

And rightly so. If he's there to visit his dad, he should have made that the priority. To go to his dad's house so that he can be closer to friends and to think that he's going to use his dad to get closer to his friends is not acceptable.

Why would a well behaved, respectful child treat his dad like that ... like a ride from the airport, a place to sleep one night and a stop off on the way to friends?

Mark has three older sons who have CHOSEN to have no contact with Mark. Why do you think that is?

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

Was Dylan a well adjusted happy child, or was he a rebellious child that would become confrontational with his father if his father said that it was too late to visit friends? I'm reading that this well adjusted happy child was rebellious and angry at his father because he couldn't do what he wanted ... that doesn't make sense.

This is just my speculation...but I doubt he had much respect for his Dad. The parents had gone through years of nasty custody/support battles and I'm sure Dylan was well aware of the battles. Dylan did not want to go on this visit. He wanted to spend Thanksgiving with his dying Grandmother. IMO he may have arrived with attitude. Teenagers can have attitude. I think he was only excited to see his friends.

 

[Seajay]

I assume you mean stereotypical kidnappings? 115 per year? They're not all strangers.

Anyway, the 125 to 150 murders per year are by fathers and all other family members combined, so they're about equal. Fathers may be a bit less.

I agree that the numbers don't tell the whole story, and that the elements of the crime can give us some clues. Here, we have no elements.

You have to make up so much stuff to get to a murder-by-Mark theory. You have to make up that Mark was drinking, make up that Mark and Dylan had a fight, you have to make up a reason for the fight, make up that Mark took Dylan's phone, make up that Mark broke Dylan's phone, you have to make up that Mark was killing Dylan to get back at Elaine, and on and on and on.

(I don't mean you specifically by the way - it's a general you.)

Add to that that LE have said that Mark is not considered a suspect and you have to make up that Mark is "the unnamed suspect" or "the unnamed POI".

Add to that that LE haven't mentioned any evidence of what would statistically be a very violent crime, so you have to make up blood or brain tissue or decomp fluid.

Add to that that nobody's mentioned any signs of a fight at all, and you have to make neighbors hearing screams or yelling or cursing, scuff marks on the walls, a broken vase.

Add to that that Dylan's mom and other family members have stated that they don't think Mark killed Dylan.

Phew! I could go on, but there's the gist of it. There's just too darn much I'd have to make up, too many explanations I'd have to come up with, to go with the murder-by-Mark theory.

This is THE POST OF THIS CASE!!! Thanking it is not enough! Too much has to be made up to make MR the murderer. There is no evidence of anything suggesting he did. No "smoking gun." Thanks The Cheese.

 

[SCHMAE]

That's where I've been in this case since the beginning. Hitchhiking does seem much more likely then a parent going off the rails and murdering his child. Then, leaving no evidence that such an event occurred. No evidence.

Right! I leaned heavily on the MR did it side but I cannot get past the fact that there's no shred of anything to point to him ( that we know of ) . If we are all avid crime followers / watchers then we gotta know its' just about IMPOSSIBLE to leave no evidence of anything.
Now whether or not LE has some evidence but not enough, we don't know.
That's a possibility too.

 

[otto]

And also ER said that she lectured Dylan about hitchhiking before he came to his Dad's. Now why would she do that if she didn't think it could be a possibility?

If mom lectured him about hitch hiking, then she knew perfectly well he was thumbing rides.

 

[jjenny]

Right! I leaned heavily on the MR did it side but I cannot get past the fact that there's no shred of anything to point to him ( that we know of ) . If we are all avid crime followers / watchers then we gotta know its' just about IMPOSSIBLE to leave no evidence of anything.
Now whether or not LE has some evidence but not enough, we don't know.
That's a possibility too.

There is not a shred of anything to point to anyone.
Somehow I don't think Dylan just vanished into thin air.

 

[Tennlyn]

And it appears that he was not up and ready to go at 7:30 am (maybe his cell phone was dead and the alarm didn't go off) so his dad left without him ... and it's quite possible that Dylan was determined to meet with his friends, so he took matters into his own hands, grabbed all his stuff, walked the short distance to the highway and stuck out his thumb.

Or maybe Dylan didn't wake up because he couldn't. :moo:

 

[ColdHands]

And rightly so. If he's there to visit his dad, he should have made that the priority. To go to his dad's house so that he can be closer to friends and to think that he's going to use his dad to get closer to his friends is not acceptable.

Why would a well behaved, respectful child treat his dad like that ... like a ride from the airport, a place to sleep one night and a stop off on the way to friends?

This made me laugh. Sorry, I just made 4 trips this evening shuttling well behaved respectful teenage boys around to various places, and I'm not done yet for the night.

Everything else you've posted so far matched what I've been thinking, but not this one. The friends would have been much more important than the dad IMO.

 

[NC Analyzer]

If mom lectured him about hitch hiking, then she knew perfectly well he was thumbing rides.

She DID NOT say she lectured him before this trip. She said she had talked to him about it in the past. <modsnip>

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Why is hitch hiking eliminated?

As far as I'm concerned it hasn't been. I think that it's a definite possibility.

 

[katydid23]

And it appears that he was not up and ready to go at 7:30 am (maybe his cell phone was dead and the alarm didn't go off) so his dad left without him ... and it's quite possible that Dylan was determined to meet with his friends, so he took matters into his own hands, grabbed all his stuff, walked the short distance to the highway and stuck out his thumb.

<modsnip>

Why did dad's various versions of that morning seem so inconsistent?

Why would Dylan go and hitch a ride without answering any of the texts from his friends he is meeting up with?

Why go out in the cold carrying all of your belongings, including a fishing pole, and try to hitch, when you had a ride arriving very soon?

And why didnt anyone see a 13 yr old hitching a ride with his backpack and his fishing pole?

 

[Lordeebee]

Why wasn't this the first place MR searched when he woke up from his nap?

It was his plan because his dad said he had an appt. in town at 7:30, so the only way he could go to his friends in the morning would be at 6:30.

Sure would have made more sense to let Dylan stay at R's house that night imo. Why was it "too late" to go to his friends house when they were already in town? Why not pick Dylan up the next day since MR had to go to town anyway? Then they could have done the shopping that MR said was so important because town was so far away. Why make such a fuss over getting those groceries right then, when they would be heading back to town to take Dylan to R's house? Just does not add up.