CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #43

[Deleted member 39678]

And yet we have some confusion about how a good defense attorney operates!

I'm not confused about how a good defense attorney operates. I think that I've made my point clear.

 

[nikb]

This is correct as far as I know. Here is the link to the only Facebook that I believe is allowed to be linked on this thread.

https://www.facebook.com/FindMissingDylanRedwine

If I read the rules correctly I think we can also link to MSM Facebook pages about the case, with similar limitations in terms of discussing. I hope I got that right.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

If I read the rules correctly I think we can also link to MSM Facebook pages about the case, with similar limitations in terms of discussing. I hope I got that right.

Thanks for bringing that up nikb because your right. But in the case of MSM Facebook I think that you can copy/paste within the 10% rule.

 

[mijamawi]

I'll join you in being confused. I found the texts in the Parking Lot and I don't think we can bring those comments "upstairs," but I also found two of the texts on an MSM Facebook page for 9News. I'm not sure if there are others somewhere or these are the only two that were released.

I hope this is ok to post. I read over the Social Media rules several times and it looks like it should be ok since it's an MSM site. Here's their page:

https://www.facebook.com/#!/ilike9news?filter=2

If you're in the "posts by others" view and you scroll down to January 2013, specifically January 22, you should be able to see them.

Good grief, I just spent forever scrolling through all that. I did find them. They were posted by someone else, though on the news channel's FB. Shoot, if all we have to do is post some stuff on an MSM's FB to be able to talk about it here, then I'm all for that. I don't think that's the case though. I'm sure a few hundred of y'all will correct me if I'm wrong about that.

 

[Kamille]

Just catching up and wanted to make a couple of points.

IMO if MR had said anything to his Family Law attorney on Nov 19th that might incriminate him in Dylan's disappearance or had asked for any advice, that attorney would have recommended that he get a Criminal Defense attorney pronto. A Family Law attorney is not going to touch that IMO. Since MR did not get one and didn't "consult" with one until much later, probably on the advice of his Family Law attorney after the heat started to come down on him in social media at least, I'm of the opinion that he did not say anything to his Family Law attorney on Nov 19th. I'm sure he complained to him later, hence the "consultation" with a defense attorney.

I also believe that the point of the visit to that attorney that day was to get his income information to his attorney and to file papers to likely have that child support either reduced or overturned altogether. And I believe he hadn't made a payment yet and his attorney advised that he needed to make the payments until they could return to court.

MOO

 

[katydid23]

How about the actual crime? Wouldn't your father want to know all of the details so that he could possibly find a mistake made by police in their investigation and get his client off?

Of course he wanted to know all the details of the actual crime. And he relied upon the police reports and depositions of the parties involved for all of that info.

If he thought his client was guilty then attacking the credibility of the investigation was his primary focus.

But he would never want his client to say the words " I did the crime' because then he would be restricted in what his client could say on the stand.

 

[nikb]

Good grief, I just spent forever scrolling through all that. I did find them. They were posted by someone else, though on the news channel's FB. Shoot, if all we have to do is post some stuff on an MSM's FB to be able to talk about it here, then I'm all for that. I don't think that's the case though. I'm sure a few hundred of y'all will correct me if I'm wrong about that.

I know, sorry for the scrolling! I couldn't figure out how to go straight to January.

BBM ohh oops I didn't catch that and thought they were posted by 9News. Thanks for pointing that out. I think either way we can't really discuss it here, but I'm not sure about directing people to where to find it. Kimster or any mods who might be around, can we still point to this the way we can with comments on news stories or the FMDR page? Or is this off limits completely? Thanks!

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Of course he wanted to know all the details of the actual crime. And he relied upon the police reports and depositions of the parties involved for all of that info.

If he thought his client was guilty then attacking the credibility of the investigation was his primary focus.

But he would never want his client to say the words " I did the crime' because then he would be restricted in what his client could say on the stand.

I would imagine that he wouldn't have his client on the stand at all if he knew that he was guilty. That never seems to work well for the defendant.

Wouldn't he still what to know the facts from his client even if those facts incriminated him?

 

[Kamille]

Or another possible scenario is that Mark passed the fully qualified LE polygraph and Police decided that since Mark is the most likely suspect to lie to him about the results.

Why would LE lie about the results? To put some pressure on the most obvious suspect of course, in order to get a confession.

Well, what about the inconclusive statement about Marks polygraph?
After a failed attempt at getting a confession from Mark. LE decides to soften the polygraph results to an "inconclusive."

MOO.

If MR passed the LE administered polygraph test I think we would be looking at a much different investigation.

He likely failed on some questions and was inconclusive or actually passed on others. They would want to get him to take another one to hone in on the areas in which he failed. They probably did take him for someone who was a little "slow on the uptake" for lack of a better phrase and gave him a story about how the results were probably messed up because of the technician and that they could bring in the best of the best, an FBI technician to make sure that the results were accurate.

But MR is no fool. He now knows that he can't beat the polygraph so he will not be taking another one...period. Doesn't matter to him who's going to be administering it.

MOO

 

[SmoothOperator]

Or another possible scenario is that Mark passed the fully qualified LE polygraph and Police decided that since Mark is the most likely suspect to lie to him about the results.

Why would LE lie about the results? To put some pressure on the most obvious suspect of course, in order to get a confession.

Well, what about the inconclusive statement about Marks polygraph?
After a failed attempt at getting a confession from Mark. LE decides to soften the polygraph results to an "inconclusive."

MOO.

Sure, if that's what you find to be plausible that's your opinion.. My opinion is that the above is not at all accurate and that it is what it is...

the man failed his polygraph and was told that he failed and the man has since that point in time refused to take part in any polygraph, period..I believe no one told the man his result was inconclusive, unless ya want to count that someone being Mark Redwine, himself coming up with "softening" his result from a flat failed to the much better sounding result of inconclusive.

jmo, tho.

 

[cluciano63]

Once again, we only have MR 's statement about being told the test was inconclusive, with no verification, as in almost everything about this case.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

If MR passed the LE administered polygraph test I think we would be looking at a much different investigation.

He likely failed on some questions and was inconclusive or actually passed on others. They would want to get him to take another one to hone in on the areas in which he failed. They probably did take him for someone who was a little "slow on the uptake" for lack of a better phrase and gave him a story about how the results were probably messed up because of the technician and that they could bring in the best of the best, an FBI technician to make sure that the results were accurate.

But MR is no fool. He now knows that he can't beat the polygraph so he will not be taking another one...period. Doesn't matter to him who's going to be administering it.

MOO

I think that it doesn't matter if Mark passed or failed or was deemed inconclusive on his Qualified LE polygraph test because I don't feel that the test is reliable.

I'm sure that LE looks at it the same way. They know that it's not good enough to bring into court but it does have a useful purpose in investigating crimes.

And one of those purposes is to intimidate suspects into revealing information that can convict someone of a crime.

MOO.

 

[SmoothOperator]

I would like to know who that was also. This quote by Mark is interesting.

Does this mean that Mark believes that polygraphs are unreliable like I do, or does he mean that he doesn't trust the people giving the tests?

It's hard to tell what Mark really means most of the time. MOO.

JMO but if the issue here with Mark not following through on any polygraph, the one of most importance being the one LE offered/suggested after his fail result..but so, too did he fail to follow through on the one offered him by DP administered by retired FBI polygrapher who literally trained federal officers in polygraphy..well MOO is that if the issue had been similar to yours in just not at all trusting in the process, period then Mark Redwine would have long since said so instead of using the tactic of promising to take the LDT and once again failing to follow through in doing so..jmo, tho.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Once again, we only have MR 's statement about being told the test was inconclusive, with no verification, as in almost everything about this case.

Your right. We have no verification from LE that Mark failed, passed, or was considered inconclusive in the qualified LE polygraph test that was administered to him. MOO.

 

[Annie1004]

But wouldn't LE know something was hinky if Mark did not pass the first polygraph? I know it's not admissible in court, but it is a tool LE uses in its investigations. The fact Mark wouldn't take the DP polygraph has got to make LE even more suspicious of him.

From what I can tell, Mark has still not "lawyered up." This is such a perplexing case: It is as if DR vanished into thin air. FBI, CBI, etc. appear to be stumped for viable clues, but then again, they could be withholding information waiting for one more piece to make sense.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

JMO but if the issue here with Mark not following through on any polygraph, the one of most importance being the one LE offered/suggested after his fail result..but so, too did he fail to follow through on the one offered him by DP administered by retired FBI polygrapher who literally trained federal officers in polygraphy..well MOO is that if the issue had been similar to yours in just not at all trusting in the process, period then Mark Redwine would have long since said so instead of using the tactic of promising to take the LDT and once again failing to follow through in doing so..jmo, tho.

Your long drawn out sentence has me a bit confused but I think that your saying that Mark should have just refused to take Dr Phil's polygrapher's test and said that he doesn't believe in polygraphs.

If I have this wrong let me know.

 

[Salem]

O/T - when will nurse be back with us?

Probably not until the JA trial is over.

But.... she does still check in here and there.

Salem

 

[Salem]

Where is the info coming from that LE asked MR to take another poly? I haven't seen this yet and I don't remember it from Dr.Phil? What did I miss?

Salem

 

[Deleted member 39678]

But wouldn't LE know something was hinky if Mark did not pass the first polygraph? I know it's not admissible in court, but it is a tool LE uses in its investigations. The fact Mark wouldn't take the DP polygraph has got to make LE even more suspicious of him.

From what I can tell, Mark has still not "lawyered up." This is such a perplexing case: It is as if DR vanished into thin air. FBI, CBI, etc. appear to be stumped for viable clues, but then again, they could be withholding information waiting for one more piece to make sense.

I'm sure that LE would look just as hard at Mark if he passed his qualified LE polygraph test because they know that the test is unreliable and there are other reasons to look at him as being a suspect. MOO.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Where is the info coming from that LE asked MR to take another poly? I haven't seen this yet and I don't remember it from Dr.Phil? What did I miss?

Salem

I never heard that LE asked him to take another polygraph.