CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #49

[Bayou Mistress]

And remember -- when a poster says "we can agree to disagree" that means the conversation is over between those 2 (or 3 or however many) posters. OVER. DONE. FINISHED.

The rule is the poster that says "agree to disagree" first - gets the LAST WORD. It's done.

Salem

I'm guessing that it would be inappropriate to have that in a signature line? :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[scorekeeper]

From MR house you don't need to go over the dam per your map ^^^ correct.

Coming from Bayfield/Durango you would most likely go over the dam and back up the east side to MM. I say most likely because to go up the west side of Vallecito Res and across 501 then back down to MM is way, way, way around, but I guess someone might do that? I don't know why, but they could.

Right but someone asked how far from Mark's to this campground.

From the Vallecito dam to the campground is about 4.5 miles.

 

[The Cheese]

It's interesting they're searching the shore and a little bit into the water. They're not using boats, so I suppose just a far as their boots will allow them to wade into the water.

In November, it was mentioned several times that the divers were searching the shoreline too.

 

[ColdHands]

I think that closer to shore makes sense. I mean, I know float and currents and things like that, but it seems someone would need a boat to put someone out very far from shore IMO.

But that close to shore in wading depth water? Maybe they were checking to see if something was buried under water? Not just submerged but a hole dug or something? Very interesting.

But I hope they don't find him. My heart still holds hope for Dylan.

 

[scorekeeper]

It's interesting they're searching the shore and a little bit into the water. They're not using boats, so I suppose just a far as their boots will allow them to wade into the water.

In November, it was mentioned several times that the divers were searching the shoreline too.

I wonder how deep the area they are searching now was in November?

 

[rebeccaeee]

by this map, you do NOT have to go around and cross the dam to get to the campground.

http://goo.gl/maps/cVz0H

It's only 5.6 miles from the campground to Mark's house..

http://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/sanjuan/recarea/?recid=43060

Yep- I was going to post exactly that but saw your map and thought I'd share my link anyhow. Closer than I would have guessed.

 

[SCHMAE]

I'm guessing that it would be inappropriate to have that in a signature line? :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

:floorlaugh: Oh boy ! That got me chuckling. Thanks

 

[cluciano63]

http://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/sanjuan/recarea/?recid=43060

Yep- I was going to post exactly that but saw your map and thought I'd share my link anyhow. Closer than I would have guessed.

But still too far for Dylan to have walked, IMO, just for the heck of it, if this is the same place he offered up as a possible destination.

 

[The Cheese]

I wonder how deep the area they are searching now was in November?

It had been dry so the water was real low. They're not using boats, so must be wading in, so to boot top would be what? about 2 feet? I'm guessing it was completely dry there in November, maybe ankle high at most?

 

[The Cheese]

I wonder if they actually used the backhoe today.

I think we need a hot line to Bender. A red phone lol.

 

[Emma Ems]

I wonder if they actually used the backhoe today.

I think we need a hot line to Bender. A red phone lol.

Think of all the questions we could ask him if we did!!! LOL

 

[Ghostwheel]

Just generally searching stump removal doesn't show a backhoe as the primarily used machinery either. It seems excavator seems a more popular choice for that project. Using various sites and forums and still reading, but also think of the area around the stumps that would be torn up as well. Backhoe, IMO, seems drastic.

A backhoe and excavator are not too different for digging stumps. They both have a bucket to reach and dig, the backhoe is just attached to a front loader, so has wheels instead of tracks. While I agree that the backhoe stabilization legs can tear up the ground around it a bit, you can see everything where the stabilization legs need to go. And the tracks on an excavator would do as much damage. The backhoe makes more sense since you can dig up the stumps, then put them in the front loader and carry them away.

 

[Ghostwheel]

I have never been naive' enough not to realize there are "many" things that go on behind the closed doors of a courtroom of which the public has no awareness....which is a very good thing, because I witness it routinely. This cop is not connected to Dylan. It would be reflected...in the charges, in the bail amount and by the fact that he wouldn't be walking the street.

So, playing Devil's Advocate here, what IF they suspected he knew something, purposely didn't set the bail very high, and are keeping a watch on him, hoping he will lead them to clues? Not saying I believe this, but I do have an overactive imagination.....

 

[The Cheese]

Another question for the hot line - I'm really curious where they were going door to door and what they were asking people about. It seems they've already gone door to door so much. What more could they have to talk about? lol

 

[Ghostwheel]

The eighth amendment to the Constitution address's bail amounts.




On the top of the list is the seriousness of the crime that a person is charge with. If the government wish's to raise bail for more serious offenses, the defendant would need to be charged with that offense first. Merely suspecting someone of a more serious crime wouldn't be enough by itself to raise bail to a higher amount. MOO.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Eighth+Amendment

Just because the seriousness of the crime is the first one listed, that doesn't mean it is the most important. When I was working for an attorney, many moons ago, flight risk was just as important as the seriousness of the crime. A person who was charged with having child that was considered at risk to flee could have higher bail than someone charged with assault that was not considered at risk to flee. I think that ALL of those factors count to varying degrees depending on the charge, but not in any specific order of importance.

 

[Ghostwheel]

76% is high. And considering that there isn't a cure for this, that's pretty scary that only 24% will not progress in their desires. KWIM???

And those are only the ones arrested. How many go undetected, and what kind of percentages would there be if those were included....

 

[Emma Ems]

A backhoe and excavator are not too different for digging stumps. They both have a bucket to reach and dig, the backhoe is just attached to a front loader, so has wheels instead of tracks. While I agree that the backhoe stabilization legs can tear up the ground around it a bit, you can see everything where the stabilization legs need to go. And the tracks on an excavator would do as much damage. The backhoe makes more sense since you can dig up the stumps, then put them in the front loader and carry them away.

I don't even know what an excavator is, just what people seemed to prefer...I got the idea it was like sticking a needle in and pulling out the stump with it from one sites description. In regards to all heavy machinery-drastic. Since they only stated using a backhoe though, it was the only piece I addressed as drastic. IMO if I were LE and looking for evidence I think, as much work as it would be I would take the route least likely to damage any potential evidence that may be around, which would probably be the by hand route.

 

[Redhead72]

Wow, a lot has happened today! I guess they weren't done with the lake search after all. And, seeing as Bender didn't know what was up until the morning of the search I wonder how closely involved he is in the actual investigations - or do they just use him as a spokesperson when they have something to release? I wonder how much Bender himself is told about the inner workings of the investigation (like do the investigators share details with him, and invite his input - or do they just give him info. for him to craft into a public statement... maybe there are things they withhold from him so that when he's being interviewed by the media and such he doesn't accidentally spill the beans on things he isn't supposed to)?

Anyway, I find it very interesting that they were back out on the lake today, and actually coffered a portion and drained it. I wonder if they were able to find any indication of anything today...

The talk of removal of tree stumps is interesting to me as well. I wonder how much of the fill has shifted over the last 70 years? I think it's obvious that they didn't do stump removal prior to filling in the bottom of the reservoir. I don't think these are "spring sprouts" of trees, and not thin stumps either. This was old growth, thick forest they clear-cut for the reservoir...

Anyway, I'm just glad LE realizes that the lake hasn't been completely crossed off the list, or cleared - no matter what they said last year. Like I had proposed, I believe they downplayed the dogs' hits because most of the general public simply wouldn't understand a decision to call off a search due to conditions when there is a young boy missing. It's obvious that LE doesn't think it's an elk down there, imo -- they wouldn't bother with the expense and work to drain this part of the reservoir, and digging up tree stumps if they thought it were just an elk. [It still bugs me though how Bender stated it back then though - like people wouldn't realize that if they couldn't find this 700 lb. animal in the lake how could they be confident that a young boy's body wasn't down there??]

I really think someone needs to get into the deep end nearer to the dam though - the sooner the better. Mid-May is only a couple weeks away though. I think with the ROVs and 360 sonar they may have better luck.

Praying for Dylan's family - I can't imagine how heart-wrenching these searches must be for them... I'm sure they are probably happy that LE is still out there investigating and searching though.

As always, most of the above is MOO! :cow:

 

[Redhead72]

I don't even know what an excavator is, just what people seemed to prefer...I got the idea it was like sticking a needle in and pulling out the stump with it from one sites description. In regards to all heavy machinery-drastic. Since they only stated using a backhoe though, it was the only piece I addressed as drastic. IMO if I were LE and looking for evidence I think, as much work as it would be I would take the route least likely to damage any potential evidence that may be around, which would probably be the by hand route.

I'm confused a bit about the backhoe in regard to searching for evidence. However, I don't think it's possible to get those stumps out "by hand". If these are the leftovers from the forest they clear-cut when making the damn those stumps would be HUGE, and go down very deep in regard to the root balls and such. I've got a couple gigantic tall pines in my backyard, and we had one of those wind shears go through and actually pulled the tree up a bit (it now leans to one side). It pulled up ground a full 10 ft. in diameter all around the tree. AND, it's STILL absolutely safe according to the tree guy, and public service (they checked due to the wires running along the alley).

I don't know why they would be digging in the shoreline under the stumps though - unless they thought something were perhaps buried there. Even so, how would anything buried be under the stumps and the root areas? I would expect anything to be tangled in the brush and stumps at the bottom, and not underneath it...

Interesting to speculate on why they chose this method of searching - especially the coffering and the backhoe. What did they expect to find that caused them to make the decision to order in the equipment they did?

One more question - were these "new" dog hits, or the same hits from over the winter? Was anyone able to verify which dogs and which hits they were talking about?

 

[rosesfromangels]

I agree with all of you. They wouldn't be incurring the expense if they didn't have strong reason to believe the remains were there. Perhaps aside from the dogs, they have some new info?