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

[AlexisFresca]

IIRC Elaine said on Tricia's show and Dr. Phil it was to his friend.. Now my mind is old so forgive me if I am wrong

Thanks. When I read the article that shared the texts between Ryan and Dylan, I remember though, that the contents of the 9:37 text were not disclosed. As a matter of fact, early on in the case they had his last text transmissions ending shortly after 8:00 p.m. iirc. When I read there was another text that wasn't sent at 9:37 I was very surprised by that. I wonder if he was texting someone for help but never had a chance to send it?

 

[fedfan4life]

I think that LE is leaving it open that someone could have physically removed Dylan from the home or Dylan left on his own and then something happen to him.

They didn't specify any time frame when they think that something happen so it's been left pretty much wide open in my opinion.

This statement does not preclude that Mark Redwine is the 'someone' in question. In fact, I would venture a guess that this is simply law enforcement's way of explaining the apparent lack of a crime scene in the house itself.

 

[Eileen730]

You think? This is a bit out there - but it sounds to me like they have independent confirmation of Dylan being at MR's house Sunday night and the time MR returned on Monday morning. Something more than just what MR is telling them. Maybe someone actually saw them come home Sunday night and then saw MR return Monday morning - but didn't see him leave that morning? He does have neighbors so it is possible?

I don't know - just speculating here.

Salem

You cant confirm a person was there by text messages or pings you dont really know whos fingers are on those keys!

Maybe there was a WE in the equation! As in We picked him up!

 

[fedfan4life]

You cant confirm a person was there by text messages or pings you dont really know whos fingers are on those keys!

Maybe there was a WE in the equation! As in We picked him up!

Technically true. But, I don't believe there has ever been a dispute as to whether it was actually Dylan himself texting w/Ryan (pls correct me if I am wrong). So, it stands to reason that if Mark and Dylan arrived @ the home @ approximately 8:00pm, and the texting in question was still in progress, then the pings would 'confirm' that Dylan did, in fact, arrive.

The only other possibilities are 1. that LE is lying or 2. there is an independent witness of which we are unaware (which is your speculation above).

 

[Deleted member 39678]

This statement does not preclude that Mark Redwine is the 'someone' in question. In fact, I would venture a guess that this is simply law enforcement's way of explaining the apparent lack of a crime scene in the house itself.

They also said that their seeking information and evidence that something happened to Dylan at the home. Since they don't specify a time that would include when Mark was at the home with Dylan and after he had left. MOO.

 

[Seajay]

You know, I am with you there on being pretty lost. I skimmed through a few things and it seems there are a lot of POV regarding juveniles having to register so maybe there is some safety clause somewhere that just wasn't posted on that particular site? Since maybe it's on a case by case review? I do think there are many instances where it's unfair for a juvenile to have to register, one scenario I read was about a 17 year old and 14 year old having voluntary sex, and parents pressing charges. In cases where someone lies about their age and then engages in sex with another, for example the girl who goes to a college party all dressed up she passes for 18 and tells a guy she is 18. Those are ones that really throw me for a loop and really make me think, is it fair. In violent and forced cases, yes. If a 17 year old engaged in sex with a 6 year old, yes definitely.

I get what you are saying and I agree. There was this case of Cassidy Goodman (I think) who was 15 years old who had consenual sex with another 15 year old. She got pregnant and didn't tell anyone. When the baby was born, she killed it. There was much discussion about bringing charges against the 15 year old father for statutory rape. Thing is, she would also have to be brought up on the same charges as he because she also had consenual sex with a minor, a boy the same again. It was insane. The DA finally decided not to go there. I had to wonder if this would have all been a problem had the 15 year old girl not murdered the baby. They just wanted to blame everyone involved in this case besides the 15 year old girl who committed the murder.

 

[Bayou Mistress]

I am a self-reported grammar nazi, and there is nothing in the Press Release which is poorly written. In fact, I would bet that each-and-every word within the communication was written with very deliberate intention.

then they learned that Mark said? Mark didn't just say it?

 

[Bayou Mistress]

Mark said I believe on DP that a samsung cell phone was taken by LE, so since Dylan's phone is missing, I presume this was MR's phone.

Yes, Mark's phone, but possibly a spare and not his primary phone.

 

[Allusonz]

BBM - I am so glad to see actual information. Having the mail carrier's story outstanding was an issue for me, and this definitely makes me feel like they are covering all bases. I did not have that feeling before so this is a change.

Yup they had to rule this sighting out due to any individuals alibi.

It would not just be for MR but any person suspected.

 

[ColdHands]

You cant confirm a person was there by text messages or pings you dont really know whos fingers are on those keys!

Maybe there was a WE in the equation! As in We picked him up!

Nothing in the press release precludes a third person. Maybe that's why the Walmart video has not been released? Maybe the third person is the "somehow" for Dylan's departure on Monday?

I would not be surprised if MR is guilty that he had an accomplice or an after the fact accomplice who helped with clean up.

 

[Dee10]

then they learned that Mark said? Mark didn't just say it?

That is the way I read it. It was written they way it was written on purpose for a reason IMO. Sounds like perhaps he said it in a press interview & I am willing to bet it is a different time then what he originally told LE, because of course they would have asked him in the beginning what time did you leave or when is the last time you saw Dylan.

 

[Dee10]

Yes, Mark's phone, but possibly a spare and not his primary phone.

Curious why you think LE may not have taken his primary phone but a spare instead? Would a spare even be activated?

 

[ColdHands]

Yes, Mark's phone, but possibly a spare and not his primary phone.

Possibilities:
Old inactivated phone
Work vs personal phones - some companies require this
A throwaway or second phone to limit tracking. Could be for nefarious purposes. Or some women I know with online dating profiles use a second phone in case a meetup does not go well and they don't want that person to contact them again.

Any other thoughts?

 

[Allusonz]

I don't see anything in the press release that I disagree with, but, the document is poorly written.

On this I would have to disagree, and I think that Dan Bender deserves a raise.

Although not alot of new info, he has placed everyone where they said they were to a certain time frame but not beyond that time frame.

He then adds in that Dylan has been confirmed to be at the house. Very difficult to confirm if one is sleeping. He as well confirmed MR arriving home.

 

[Emma Ems]

You know I am thinking about this and I have come to this conclusion: I would feel absolutely certain that LE was 100 per cent convinced that Mark did something to Dylan if they released something that stated this specifically: "After a considerable investigation we have come to the conclusion that Mark Redwine knows what happened to his son Dylan Redwine." The fact that they continue to skirt around naming him a POI has me convinced they are not 100 per cent certain that Mark is the guy, which is why they are leaving room for the "unknown" element. Isn't the whole issue of not naming him a suspect for legal purposes, as in, being sued if they are wrong?

 

[Salem]

Knock off the bickering over the "writing" of the press release. Let it go and move on.

Salem

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

That is the way I read it. It was written they way it was written on purpose for a reason IMO. Sounds like perhaps he said it in a press interview & I am willing to bet it is a different time then what he originally told LE, because of course they would have asked him in the beginning what time did you leave or when is the last time you saw Dylan.

I tend to agree that it was worded this way purposely. It does sound like this is something they 'learned that Mark said' outside of their interviews with him. If not, they would have worded it differently IMO.

 

[ColdHands]

Wow, good thing I don't rely on the Denver Post for news - could they have edited the press release any further?
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22826801/sw-colorado-searchers-say-leads-fizzle-14-year

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

You know I am thinking about this and I have come to this conclusion: I would feel absolutely certain that LE was 100 per cent convinced that Mark did something to Dylan if they released something that stated this specifically: "After a considerable investigation we have come to the conclusion that Mark Redwine knows what happened to his son Dylan Redwine." The fact that they continue to skirt around naming him a POI has me convinced they are not 100 per cent certain that Mark is the guy, which is why they are leaving room for the "unknown" element. Isn't the whole issue of not naming him a suspect for legal purposes, as in, being sued if they are wrong?

Well I think when they are 100% certain they tend to make an arrest rather than a press release.

 

[fedfan4life]

then they learned that Mark said? Mark didn't just say it?

Yes. It means that through their investigation, LE has determined xyz...

It's called validating or invalidating the information told to them.