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

[katydid23]

I'm curious too. If he did, then why and why didn't he use his phone? I think you sum it up nicely with, "we just don't know." Sigh.

Maybe his dad took his phone away from him?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I'm curious too. If he did, then why and why didn't he use his phone? I think you sum it up nicely with, "we just don't know." Sigh.

It's all of those questions that are keeping me on the fence.

 

[mijamawi]

Maybe his dad took his phone away from him?

That's totally possible. If that's the case and the 9:37 text was to someone indicating just that, then I would think that would be enough to really put the screws to MR from LE, especially since he said he texted Dylan the next day while running errands.

 

[mijamawi]

It's all of those questions that are keeping me on the fence.

Same here. :fence:

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Of course. We have a password but it is written on a stickynote so if anyone comes over and needs to log on with a computer or ipad, they can do so. I would assume that MR would have given Dylan the password so he could play games or go on Facebook etc.

BBM

Mark is not a very nice man, so why would he do that?

 

[Tennlyn]

How about the HRD dog alerts at the lake? Do you have an opinion whether further searches of the lake are justified based on that? Or is it as a waste of resources to search the lake with sophisticated ROV's and sonar?

I have great faith in dogs. :moo:

 

[katydid23]

Wow. That's a lot. I just checked and I'm picking up nine signals and all of them are password protected.

I just checked mine and there are 14 signals listed. All but one have the security lock signal. But that one is only one or two bars.

Last week I was doing errands and I wanted to peek in on the Arias trial. So I pulled over in a shopping ctr pking lot with my laptop and I clicked on the bars and I had Starbucks, ToGos and McDonalds, all available to use. :smile:

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I have great faith in dogs. :moo:

So do I. I've done enough research on HRD dogs to know their limitations. But when you have multiple dogs from separate groups telling us that there's something there, it's hard to ignore.

It needs to be checked out for sure.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I just checked mine and there are 14 signals listed. All but one have the security lock signal. But that one is only one or two bars.

Last week I was doing errands and I wanted to peek in on the Arias trial. So I pulled over in a shopping ctr pking lot with my laptop and I clicked on the bars and I had Starbucks, ToGos and McDonalds, all available to use. :smile:

I think that it's getting to be a rarity for a household Wi-Fi to be unprotected. The establishments that you mentioned as having Wi-Fi available do it to attract customers.

 

[katydid23]

BBM

Mark is not a very nice man, so why would he do that?

I think he would do that for his own selfish reasons. I think he would want Dylan to hang around his house instead of going off to visit friends. You have to give a 13 yr old computer access to keep his attention, imo.

 

[Dee10]

That's totally possible. If that's the case and the 9:37 text was to someone indicating just that, then I would think that would be enough to really put the screws to MR from LE, especially since he said he texted Dylan the next day while running errands.

I am not so sure about that, even if Dylan texted someone saying "my Dad took my phone away", Mark could say a whole whack of different excuses like "I took it away for an hour." You're absolutely right, he has dug himself in about texting Dylan the next day. Not much that I can see for LE to do except document each & every inconsistency and build a case, layer by layer. LE does it all the time as there usually is no smoking gun, video, etc. I did find it interesting in the longest news release to date, there was no mention of not calling him a suspect or that he is co-operating. This is totally my speculation; Mark isn't or he is hedging LE & if that is true we may see LE soon saying a little bit more or maybe I should say "hanging him out there a little more." Going by other cases, that's really the only way they can is to slowly tighten the screws to someone these days.:twocents:

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I think he would do that for his own selfish reasons. I think he would want Dylan to hang around his house instead of going off to visit friends. You have to give a 13 yr old computer access to keep his attention, imo.

I'm not sure if I understand your point.

If your saying that anything Mark does for Dylan that is good or positive is only because Mark wants to control Dylan and keep him close then how could Mark ever do anything good or positive for Dylan?

It would automatically be perceived to be controlling or selfish right?. Sounds like a no win situation to me. MOO.

 

[TxLady2]

And jumping off of your post Coldhands, did Mark stay at his house after Dylan went missing and until LE executed the search warrant days later? In some situations the last place someone who is missing was seen is consider to be a crime scene and police keep it sealed until a search warrant is obtained.

Did that happen in this case? Did Mark leave the house on his own or did LE ask him to leave? Or did LE allow him to stay at a potential crime scene?

I don't think they call it a crime scene unless there is some indication that a crime took place. If they had found something that indicated a struggle or an injury (blood), then they might have taped it off and asked for a SW right away. Since there were obviously no signs of foul play they may have thought he just walked off somewhere, which is not a crime. I've never seen them put up crime tape at a home for just a missing person, unless there are signs of foul play and they want to preserve evidence.

Something occurred to me awhile back but I didn't post it right then and didn't think of it again until now. I wonder if LE looked Mark over for defensive wounds on him anywhere... face, hands, arms, legs, back, etc.
Dylan was almost 14 then, he would definitely have fought back, that's human nature. So unless he did something that killed him instantaneously, I can't see him strangling/choking him or even hitting him without getting a few kicks and scratches on himself. It's pretty hard to subdue someone and be choking them at the same time.

I realize he's a lot bigger than Dylan, but that might also have been in Dylan's favor, he might have been able to duck under his arm or wiggle out of his grasp, and I am certain he could outrun him. So aside from shooting him or stabbing him or hitting him in the head with a heavy object, I cannot picture him being able to kill him without getting some scratches and bruises himself in the process. Most detectives are trained to look the person over during the first interview, it's pretty standard.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I don't think they call it a crime scene unless there is some indication that a crime took place. If they had found something that indicated a struggle or an injury (blood), then they might have taped it off and asked for a SW right away. Since there were obviously no signs of foul play they may have thought he just walked off somewhere, which is not a crime. I've never seen them put up crime tape at a home for just a missing person, unless there are signs of foul play and they want to preserve evidence.

Something occurred to me awhile back but I didn't post it right then and didn't think of it again until now. I wonder if LE looked Mark over for defensive wounds on him anywhere... face, hands, arms, legs, back, etc.
Dylan was almost 14 then, he would definitely have fought back, that's human nature. So unless he did something that killed him instantaneously, I can't see him strangling/choking him or even hitting him without getting a few kicks and scratches on himself. It's pretty hard to subdue someone and be choking them at the same time.

I realize he's a lot bigger than Dylan, but that might also have been in Dylan's favor, he might have been able to duck under his arm or wiggle out of his grasp, and I am certain he could outrun him. So aside from shooting him or stabbing him or hitting him in the head with a heavy object, I cannot picture him being able to kill him without getting some scratches and bruises himself in the process. Most detectives are trained to look the person over during the first interview, it's pretty standard.

So your saying that legally before police can say that an area or home is a crime scene there has to be visual evidence of a crime? They can't collect any evidence and test it so it has to be what they can see right?

Why couldn't they say that Mark's house is a possible crime scene and ask for a search warrant based on the situation and not anything else using probable cause?

I always thought that police try to preserve all possible crime scenes and after getting a search warrant let CSI see if there is any evidence to be found.

That didn't happen here for some reason.

 

[TxLady2]

For myself, I am comfortable making the assumption Mark has Wifi based on:

He has a laptop + computer
Spotty reception, all the more to have it
Dylan told HIM where the good spots are, he would have know that if no wifi
He seems to be no slouch at texting
He has satellite for cable What would wifi cost $30-$40?
He has two trucks, a rental house, travel trailer, oh yeah & a college fund for Dylan

He is not poor in anyway, shape or form, so I would be shocked if he doesn't have wifi YKWIM

How do you know he has a laptop? I thought it was said he had a desktop computer.
Satellite and cable are two different things, cable is underground, satellite receives signals through the air. We have two dishes, side by side, one for the t.v. and one for the internet.
We also have a desktop and my son has a laptop which are connected through a router, not a wireless one. We do not have wi-fi.
He could also have internet through the phone company, maybe that's why he has the land line. Our phone company offers internet service but they don't come all the way to our house. They also use underground cables.
In fact, wi fi may not even be available where Mark lives, being so far out of town. We can't get it here at all, so it's not necessary to have it for a laptop.

 

[NC Analyzer]

How do you know he has a laptop? I thought it was said he had a desktop computer.
Satellite and cable are two different things, cable is underground, satellite receives signals through the air. We have two dishes, side by side, one for the t.v. and one for the internet.
We also have a desktop and my son has a laptop which are connected through a router, not a wireless one. We do not have wi-fi.
He could also have internet through the phone company, maybe that's why he has the land line. Our phone company offers internet service but they don't come all the way to our house. They also use underground cables.
In fact, wi fi may not even be available where Mark lives, being so far out of town. We can't get it here at all, so it's not necessary to have it for a laptop.

If you have satellite internet and a router, you have wireless internet.

 

[TxLady2]

So your saying that legally before police can say that an area or home is a crime scene there has to be visual evidence of a crime? They can't collect any evidence and test it so it has to be what they can see right?

Why couldn't they say that Mark's house is a possible crime scene and ask for a search warrant based on the situation and not anything else using probable cause?

I always thought that police try to preserve all possible crime scenes and after getting a search warrant let CSI see if there is any evidence to be found.

That didn't happen here for some reason.

No.. I'm saying that if it doesn't appear to be any foul play, they won't tape it off and call it a crime scene, if there was no appearance of a crime there.

They can't collect evidence for tests without a search warrant. No judge is going to sign a SW unless there is some indication that one is needed, and it has to be pretty specific what they're looking for. IOW, they would have to tell the judge that they found some drops of blood, or there were signs of a struggle, or some other signs that something out of the ordinary happened.

Since Mark gave them permission to search the first time, they probably allowed him to stay inside while they were looking around. If there had been any evidence to collect, they would have asked for the SW right then, because otherwise a defense attorney would have had it thrown out. Not much gets admitted into evidence without that SW.

I'm not sure why they waited so long to get the SW to do the full search, maybe the DA was just reluctant to go to the judge without a valid reason. Could be also that Mark himself gave them a reason to do the search. IDK.
But most LE do everything by the book, and collecting evidence without that SW is a big No-No.

 

[TxLady2]

If you have satellite internet and a router, you have wireless internet.

I don't think so, the router is just to connect the two computers like in a network, it's not wi-fi, or at least that's what the tech that installed it told us.

 

[NC Analyzer]

I don't think so, the router is just to connect the two computers like in a network, it's not wi-fi, or at least that's what the tech that installed it told us.

The two computers that are "connected" = wireless.
I'm sure someone else can explain this to you. I'm not professing to be an expert, but you have wireless service. If you have a smart phone and give it your password, (assuming you have password protection) the phone will operate, thus wi-fi.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

No.. I'm saying that if it doesn't appear to be any foul play, they won't tape it off and call it a crime scene, if there was no appearance of a crime there.

They can't collect evidence for tests without a search warrant. No judge is going to sign a SW unless there is some indication that one is needed, and it has to be pretty specific what they're looking for. IOW, they would have to tell the judge that they found some drops of blood, or there were signs of a struggle, or some other signs that something out of the ordinary happened.

Since Mark gave them permission to search the first time, they probably allowed him to stay inside while they were looking around. If there had been any evidence to collect, they would have asked for the SW right then, because otherwise a defense attorney would have had it thrown out. Not much gets admitted into evidence without that SW.

I'm not sure why they waited so long to get the SW to do the full search, maybe the DA was just reluctant to go to the judge without a valid reason. Could be also that Mark himself gave them a reason to do the search. IDK.
But most LE do everything by the book, and collecting evidence without that SW is a big No-No.

If Mark's house was secured by police from when Dylan went missing until the search warrant was executed I would have no problem with the delay in the search. But so far it looks like Mark stayed at the house until the search warrant was executed. Why?

I don't think that he could have done a good job of erasing forensic evidence but he could have gotten rid of some evidence. Why did LE allow this?

If they thought that Mark's house was a crime scene it should have been sealed until a search warrant was obtained. MOO.