CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #46

[mixologist74]

That's the point I was trying to make too, Emma. There are so many questions unanswered.

 

[SCHMAE]

Pretty certain that once you're a RSO, it doesn't matter your age, you're classified. The records would be sealed, of course, but not the RSO label. I could be wrong about this, however.

I agree about checking out every RSO in the area. The lack of thoroughly checking out every RSO is how Shawn Hornbeck was gone so many years, and how Ben Ownby was abducted by the same guy. (I forget his name right now) Same goes for the guy looking at the rental...I hope he was thoroughly checked out as well.

I hope this is accurate ^^^. I had always assumed records sealed meant ZILCH , even a label like RSO unless you re offend as an adult. It would certainly be nice to know that LE can access those people and even talk to / question them if their records are 'sealed' and they had a sex crime conviction. Because let's face it adult RSO's began somewhere and a lot of times young people slip under the radar just due to age even though they may already be some pretty nasty characters.

Ok let's say you're 16 , commit a sex crime, get convicted, get records sealed and get NO RSO label. Do you automatically get one when you turn 21 or 18 even if you do NOT re offend? That must be the case, right?

 

[Bayou Mistress]

I hope this is accurate ^^^. I had always assumed records sealed meant ZILCH , even a label like RSO unless you re offend as an adult. It would certainly be nice to know that LE can access those people and even talk to / question them if their records are 'sealed' and they had a sex crime conviction. Because let's face it adult RSO's began somewhere and a lot of times young people slip under the radar just due to age even though they may already be some pretty nasty characters.

Ok let's say you're 16 , commit a sex crime, get convicted, get records sealed and get NO RSO label. Do you automatically get one when you turn 21 or 18 even if you do NOT re offend? That must be the case, right?

Sealed records are sealed from the public and from employee background searches. They are always available to law enforcement and criminal justice professionals with a valid reason to be looking. (I'm not an expert in the sense that I'm not going to get certified as such--but I am positive my statement is accurate.) A juvenile record of say, vandalism isn't going to appear on background investigations for employment, but will on other LE investigations. The only way to really get rid of something is to have it purged and then I wonder if it always goes all the way away.

 

[Emma Ems]

I hope this is accurate ^^^. I had always assumed records sealed meant ZILCH , even a label like RSO unless you re offend as an adult. It would certainly be nice to know that LE can access those people and even talk to / question them if their records are 'sealed' and they had a sex crime conviction. Because let's face it adult RSO's began somewhere and a lot of times young people slip under the radar just due to age even though they may already be some pretty nasty characters.

Ok let's say you're 16 , commit a sex crime, get convicted, get records sealed and get NO RSO label. Do you automatically get one when you turn 21 or 18 even if you do NOT re offend? That must be the case, right?

We may need to delve into this more. Logically speaking you would think that regardless of age that all violent sex offenders would have to register, isn't that the premise behind the whole registration process? Is it because SO are known to repeat their crimes and their sexual preference is not curable? I have never fully ever thought to consider why it has to public knowledge as to where a SO lives other than we need to know, but in thinking about it in depth it seems there could be many, many reasons why.

 

[Emma Ems]

The following persons (adults and juveniles) are required to register as sex offenders if they were:
Convicted on or after July 1, 1991 in Colorado or any other state or jurisdiction of an unlawful sexual offense, as defined in 18-3-411 (1), C.R.S., or enticement of a child, as described in 18-3-305, (generally considered to be any sex offense against children).

Released on or after July 1, 1991 from the department of corrections (DOC) having served a sentence for an unlawful sexual offense, as defined in 18-3-411(1) C.R.S., or enticement of a child, as described in 18-3-305,

On or after July 1, 1994, convicted of or received a deferred sentence in Colorado or any other state of an offense involving unlawful sexual behavior, and including criminal attempts, conspiracy, or solicitation, (generally considered to by ANY sex offense or other offense where the underlying factual basis includes sexual behavior.)

Required to register in another state or jurisdiction for a sex offense, or another state or jurisdiction of an offense which requires registration on CO.

Sex offenders must register under all names they have ever used.

http://www.familywatchdog.us/laws/colaws.asp


More information can be found there on the specific laws as well...

 

[asyousay]

When you add in all the coincidences of that day and Mark's behaviour since then I find it hard to believe anybody else is involved :cow:

Why refused to take another poly if innocent ?

Why are you not out there screaming from the roof tops that you just wan those son home safe and sound ?!

:cow:

 

[Bayou Mistress]

When you add in all the coincidences of that day and Mark's behaviour since then I find it hard to believe anybody else is involved :cow:

Why refused to take another poly if innocent ?

Why are you not out there screaming from the roof tops that you just wan those son home safe and sound ?!

:cow:

Parents of missing children should be given wide latitude in their feelings and actions in the first months, weeks, and even months of their child going missing. I extend this not just to ER but to MR as well.

A polygraph does not clear anyone even in the minds of LE. It's used often when investigators have a weak case to garner a confession. MR took one and it didn't lead to a confession as far as we know. Another poly for who? The public? The Polygraph examination has outlived it's usefulness in this case.

 

[azgrandma]

I didn't see it on the public page. Must have been in their private group?

I know I saw it on the FMDR page, but saw it too late. It was in the "post by others" section. If that helps.


Private group? Not going there, don't want to go there, have no clue what that means. fb has officially gotten too complicated for me. :floorlaugh: I'm going back to smoke signals!

 

[Emma Ems]

A polygraph does not clear anyone even in the minds of LE. It's used often when investigators have a weak case to garner a confession. MR took one and it didn't lead to a confession as far as we know. Another poly for who? The public? The Polygraph examination has outlived it's usefulness in this case.

This is just to validate what you have said about LDT not clearing anyone in the eye of LE.

Carl Probyn told The News Thursday night that he felt vindicated after being eyed as a suspect in the case and being racked by guilt for not being able to save Jaycee from the kidnappers.

"I was a suspect probably until [Wednesday], I'm sure. I took four lie detector tests," said Probyn. "I'm the winner now. For the last 18 years, they [the Garridos] were the winners."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...cee-lee-dugard-home-18-years-article-1.394901

At first police asked the same question. Knowing that the vast majority of kidnappings involve family members—only four of California's 240 reported kidnappings last year are confirmed stranger abductions—local authorities, together with the FBI, questioned all relatives. But it was Carl who was subjected to the closest scrutiny. "Did you ever wish Jaycee wasn't here?" police asked him during two lie-detector tests—which he passed—and while he was under hypnosis.

http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20111362,00.html

One article is from right after she was found, the other shortly after she went missing. In total he had taken 4 LDT, he passed the first two according the article in '91 yet they at some point in time gave him two more later on.

 

[mixologist74]

I know I saw it on the FMDR page, but saw it too late. It was in the "post by others" section. If that helps.


Private group? Not going there, don't want to go there, have no clue what that means. fb has officially gotten too complicated for me. :floorlaugh: I'm going back to smoke signals!

That was subtle. :floorlaugh:

Anyway...I missed it because I don't normally check the "other" posts. It's usually only people complaining or whining about something.

 

[mixologist74]

Parents of missing children should be given wide latitude in their feelings and actions in the first months, weeks, and even months of their child going missing. I extend this not just to ER but to MR as well.

A polygraph does not clear anyone even in the minds of LE. It's used often when investigators have a weak case to garner a confession. MR took one and it didn't lead to a confession as far as we know. Another poly for who? The public? The Polygraph examination has outlived it's usefulness in this case.

Add in parental guilt, and you've got either a fail or an inconclusive result. Say the examiner asks you this: "Did you have anything to do with your child's disappearance?", and you think "Oh crap, I didn't check on him/her before I went to bed, etc"...this is a great example of parental guilt/self-blame, and enough to fail.

 

[azgrandma]

So let's pretend LE comes out this morning and says MR is cleared of any involvement.
Where would we go next? Just for argument's sake and in the interest of that 10 % chance an RSO OR USO has gotten DR!

If LE came out and said that MR is absolutely cleared of any / all involvement. I would start looking at the next circle, those people in the immediate area and those (current and former) close to and associated with ER, CR & MR.

To further explain, IMO CR, ER and in this scenario MR are all cleared.

 

[Emma Ems]

This was the website I was using to look at cabin rentals to try to get an idea of the vacation traffic.

http://www.vrbo.com/vacation-rentals/usa/colorado/southwest/vallecito-lake

Like I said some are booked up for the holidays but I am unsure of where they are in terms of location from Mark's house. Some require you to call.

One thing I noted in some of the summer months, and was wondering in general, is that there are booked dates all over the board with let's say 3 available days in that month. So if one were to take a vacation to Vallecito and the only cabin rentals they could get were for like 3 days, but their vacation time was say 5, would they tent up for 2 days? Do you always have to register if you tent up or do you even have to use your 'real' name to register at a campground? Do stragglers often tent up on private property and go unnoticed because of the isolation and property sizes?

 

[FruitTingles]

Ok I am not really comfortable with LE saying they've 'checked' ' spoken' to all RSO's in the area. Spoken to? Wrote down an alibi? Or actually looked into that alibi and called around. Was the guy really at work, hospital, mom's house or did you just assume he was and didn't really call ?

I've been uncomfortable with this from the start. I personally don't feel we heard enough about them checking out the RSO's. We don't know what happened to Dylan so everything should be looked in to. JMO

:twocents:

 

[asyousay]

I've been uncomfortable with this from the start. I personally don't feel we heard enough about them checking out the RSO's. We don't know what happened to Dylan so everything should be looked in to. JMO

:twocents:

To be fair we don't know need to know the ins and outs . All we need to know is that LE have cleared them . Same way as they say Dylan did not run away . They are privy to info we don't have and don't need to have .. MOO

 

[catswhiskers]

Now if only Facebook had that rule about WS. :great:

Wouldn't that be something! Especially for those of us who keep all of our discussion here on our forum of choice.
Just browsing through our own TOS and Etiquette threads:

WS Bashing:
Threads and posts attacking WS Policies will not be allowed. Further, any member found to be bad mouthing the WS community at an outside location will have their membership blocked. If you do not care for this community, you really have no business here anyway.

 

[FruitTingles]

To be fair we don't know need to know the ins and outs . All we need to know is that LE have cleared them . Same way as they say Dylan did not run away . They are privy to info we don't have and don't need to have .. MOO

I never said we needed to know the ins and outs.

 

[FruitTingles]

Wouldn't that be something! Especially for those of us who keep all of our discussion here on our forum of choice.
Just browsing through our own TOS and Etiquette threads:

:floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:

 

[Money Girl]

Is there a copy of the report that MR made to the Marshalls Office available online?

 

[mijamawi]

To be fair we don't know need to know the ins and outs . All we need to know is that LE have cleared them . Same way as they say Dylan did not run away . They are privy to info we don't have and don't need to have .. MOO

Well LE also said MR is not a suspect so....