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

[Kimster]

Can you help me out a bit, I thought Ransom was an occasional visitor, sort of seasonal. Does she have more inside information on the dealings with the search for Dylan? If so, it would be interesting and I'd like to hear that input as well, TIA.

Ransom is not on my list of verified posters. We don't verify locals though. Let's not get into sleuthing her/him on accident please. :hug:

 

[azgrandma]

Ransom is not on my list of verified posters. We don't verify locals though. Let's not get into sleuthing her/him on accident please. :hug:

Thank you, I just thought that since someone asked what Ransom would think about it perhaps she/he was an expert in SARs or a long time resident that could give us info like a local.

 

[Money Girl]

Ransom joined in the original search for Dylan and has indicated he/she will be back if LE requests another search team. You may want to review some of Ransom's previous posts. I found the information valuable, especially since I am not located in that area.

 

[Money Girl]

I found this article about the Vallecito Lake History to be interesting. Toward the end, it mentions originally settlers in the area who owned ranches on the land where the reservoir is now located. Just wondered if any family cemeteries that might have been there could be causing the dogs to "hit" on the lake.

http://dino3535.wordpress.com/bayfield-vallecito-lake-history/

 

[dlc]

I was just thinking and maybe you could answer this one, find out from your man a little. But I was wondering how delicately would the investigation into a LE officer would be handled? I imagine there are a lot of "claims" made against officers of wrong doing, you know vengeful complaints. My question is pretty much this, is the word of someone else enough to get a SW to investigate or would there have to be other evidence to back up an allegation in order to get a SW?

Sorry, I haven't been on very much, so I'm confused. What does this mean? What man? Someone connected with the investigation?

Help!

Thanks.

 

[Kimster]

Thank you, I just thought that since someone asked what Ransom would think about it perhaps she/he was an expert in SARs or a long time resident that could give us info like a local.

Gotcha. I just don't want it to go any further. (I need an "it's kewl" smilie. How about :flashback

 

[Marilynilpa]

Sheriff’s investigators, 12 Upper Pine Fire responders, and a County Road and Bridge backhoe were at Middle Mountain Campground on the back side of Vallecito reservoir Tuesday in the ongoing search for Dylan Redwine.

http://www.pinerivertimes.com/news.asp?artid=1162

 

[Seajay]

I am one of the people who would like them to find what is causing the dogs to hit. Not out of some gruesome curiosity. And certainly not because I hope they find Dylan. Whoever is in the lake deserves to be found. The family deserves to know where their loved one is. Because I have followed Dylan's disappearance, I have grown to almost feel like I personally know the family. I've ached for their pain. Whoever is in the lake could just as well have a loving family hurting every bit as much.

I'd actually prefer no bodies being found in the lake at all. That means no one has to know the pain of a loved one being gone for good. I know it was discussed early on, but I don't remember what the end result was but we did talk about any other missing people in the area who disappeared, and who might be in the lake. I think at the time, we couldn't find anyone.

So I'd prefer that the dogs are hitting on ancient remains from an old burial ground. And that there are no fresh bodies in there. I don't think the dogs are wrong, I just don't know of anyone else it could be if it's not Dylan and I certainly don't want it to be Dylan. I would rather he is still alive somewhere. IMO, MOO.

 

[Redhead72]

Catching up here, and am curious about these statements:

Original statement from Ten-96:
Additionally, I strongly suspect that Officer Utter's proclivities came to light as a direct result of the investigation into Dylan's disappearance. Time will tell.

Response:

BBM, I am leaning that way myself. It's a very strong coincidence if not.

I'm really confused by the statements above, frankly. What coincidences are you referring to? That someone was busted for child , 5 months after a child in the area went missing? I don't see how that's a coincidence in any way, but maybe I'm missing something?

All JMO! And, I'm seriously trying to understand where you are coming from. There are SOs in every community, and from all walks of life.

There has never been any indication before or after that this deputy was a person of interest, a suspect, or had anything to do with DR's disappearance or investigation at all. I think it's a pretty far jump to say there is anything "coincidental" about his being busted and DR's case. But then, as I said - perhaps I'm missing something?

Again, all of the above is MOO! No offense intended.

 

[Redhead72]

There is some debate as to how long a body needs to be in a place for dogs to pick up a scent. I think it varies, but I am pretty sure it is not instant.

Just wanted to back you up on this assertion. There is definitely some "confusion" time as far as the time period between the actual death, and when a cadaver scent can be deposited - this was confirmed by sarx on a past thread here (iirc). I searched in vain for a while trying to find some indication of how long it would take for the scent to show up. The problem, of course, is that unless you had access to a fresh cadaver (meaning within minutes), and were able to expose articles to the body at various time periods, and then could see when the dog started picking up on the scent there is no way to really know. Even then, it depends on so many factors - what was the cause of death, what was the temperature in the room, etc...

Bottom line is - yes, there is a time period after death and before the scent is deposited. As near as anyone can tell that period of time varies. The studies I did run across in regard to accuracy of HRD hits only indicated very general times since death. The specific study I read all the way through only stated that the cadaver used was "less than 3 hours post-mortem", at that time even (3 hours) there are some cellular and organ structures that are still "working", but the dogs could pick up on the decomp scent.

I don't think the "focusing on places he could walk" can be tied with LE statements, and I would be careful not to place too much emphasis on what the reporter said - he didn't even get Mark's name correct, after all.

I would go back to the LE statement that DR "somehow" left the home. Also, keep in mind that if Dylan wasn't deceased, but merely incapacitated there would be no scent for the HRD dogs to have picked up on at all, either in the house or in the vehicles. I think the term "somehow" is key here, but that's MOO!

Again, all of the above is MOO! :cow:

 

[Redhead72]

The moment of death begins the process of decomposition. I'm no expert but I would expect within moments of death, the scent would be apparent to a dog trained to find it.

Please see the post I made directly above this. There is a period of time - the length of which varies dependent upon many factors - where there is a "confusion". This was attested to by our own Sarx, who commented either in this thread, or the last.

There is more information in the post I wrote above this one.

IOW - yes, decomp begins immediately after death, but the scent doesn't immediately appear.

In a little bit when I've caught up on the thread I will go and try to find sarx's post in regard to this fact.

 

[Bayou Mistress]

Please see the post I made directly above this. There is a period of time - the length of which varies dependent upon many factors - where there is a "confusion". This was attested to by our own Sarx, who commented either in this thread, or the last.

There is more information in the post I wrote above this one.

IOW - yes, decomp begins immediately after death, but the scent doesn't immediately appear.

In a little bit when I've caught up on the thread I will go and try to find sarx's post in regard to this fact.

It appears to depend on how (and on what) the dogs are trained. I agree to say there are variations in both training and detection and without a specific analysis of each dog's training it is impossible to say when a specific dog will alert. I don't need an expert to tell me this. No offense to Sarx. Brain cells deteriorate within minutes of death.

 

[Bayou Mistress]

Catching up here, and am curious about these statements:

Original statement from Ten-96:
Additionally, I strongly suspect that Officer Utter's proclivities came to light as a direct result of the investigation into Dylan's disappearance. Time will tell.

Response:


I'm really confused by the statements above, frankly. What coincidences are you referring to? That someone was busted for child , 5 months after a child in the area went missing? I don't see how that's a coincidence in any way, but maybe I'm missing something?

All JMO! And, I'm seriously trying to understand where you are coming from. There are SOs in every community, and from all walks of life.

There has never been any indication before or after that this deputy was a person of interest, a suspect, or had anything to do with DR's disappearance or investigation at all. I think it's a pretty far jump to say there is anything "coincidental" about his being busted and DR's case. But then, as I said - perhaps I'm missing something?

Again, all of the above is MOO! No offense intended.

I find it equally puzzling that some are convinced of MR's absolute guilt in harming Dylan with no concrete evidence including never being named a person of interest or a suspect. <modsnip> I am with Emma and Ten-96 on this. In such a small community, this accused Deputy raises my hinky meter for reasons that have all be outlined up thread. I am waiting and watching for more information on his crime and any possible link to Dylan.

 

[Redhead72]

But, doesn't it indicate the dogs were wrong yet again (as Bender said previously)? Are there any recommendations for fresh, highly trained dogs that could be brought in?

How would finding nothing indicate the dogs are wrong? There is a lot of wind and other issues that can make pinpointing the origin of the chemicals and gases difficult. It just means they can't find the source as of yet.

The dogs (numerous at this point - not all the same teams, etc...) are not going to keep hitting on the same areas repeatedly and /all/ be wrong. They just brought in "fresh highly trained dogs" with the new search team - from Illinois as it stated. If a dog was brought in at this point and didn't alert at these areas, then I would question the reliability of that particular dog and/or handler - not the other way around.

Bender never actually said the dogs were "wrong". He offered up an explanation/excuse of them hitting on an elk (a 700 lb. animal, btw), but yet that was also when he stated they had no intention of searching the lake again - as was pointed out so many times here, even just last week before we knew the search was actually going on at that exact moment with law enforcement involved. Obviously, LE didn't dismiss these hits as was implied by Bender's statements. I truly do think his statements were meant to ease the general public - can you imagine if he would have said; "We know he's in there, but we'll have to wait for Spring?" They would have been under so much scrutiny from the public - no matter how well they explained the reasons for waiting until Spring. No-one wants to imagine a little boy at the bottom of a lake all winter, and no-one would really understand why they would leave him there, if they knew it was true. Even here there has been confusion of why the divers couldn't do more.

With a general accuracy of well over 90% with using HRD dogs, these hits are not "wrong". SOMEONE's body is in the water, and has been all winter. It's just a matter of finding the body, and figuring out who it is (it could be Dylan, and it might not be). That's stated in the article itself.

Not meaning to be snarky or anything, honestly. I wish to understand more as to why you say that this would mean the dogs are wrong? Just because they can't find the source yet, doesn't mean they are wrong.

I hate to say this, but by this time (5 mos. later) and now with knowing that there is a power plant water feed (which is usually warm water in my experience), it is possible that the body (whomever it belongs to) is no longer intact (due to decomp). That could explain why there are hits in two main places - by the dam (a lighter scent) and back near the Eastern Shoreline. And if the body is no longer intact, it will make finding the body that much harder at the bottom of the reservoir. Smaller portions could remain hidden in the brush, and logs, and not be clearly identifiable.

I'm glad they used the ROV at the grate, but I wish they could use it to scan the bottom of the whole portion by the dam, and along the Eastern portion where the dogs keep hitting... I suppose that might not be feasible, but I sure do wish it was.

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

My prayers go out to Dylan's family members, and all those searching... What a tremendously emotional and exhausting situation this must be for all of them. It tears me up just reading about it all... I have this urge to go out there to the lake myself and search for him, but I wouldn't be able to do any good in that regard as I don't have a boat, no sonar, no ROV, and have never done Scuba diving - much less in very dangerous conditions... I just can't imagine what Elaine must be going through. She's so incredibly lucky to have such a good friend she can count on who is able to be right there, watching it all, and knowing exactly what's going on.

 

[Redhead72]

It appears to depend on how (and on what) the dogs are trained. I agree to say there are variations in both training and detection and without a specific analysis of each dog's training it is impossible to say when a specific dog will alert. I don't need an expert to tell me this. No offense to Sarx. Brain cells deteriorate within minutes of death.

I don't know why variations in training and detection on the dog's part would have any bearing on when a person's body begins to deposit a cadaver scent? We aren't talking about the dogs at all, really. We're talking about there being a period of time in which a deceased person could be in a spot, but yet not transfer cadaver scent.

The point that was being discussed is how long does a cadaver have to be in a certain place for the scent to be transferred - how long from the moment of death until the process of decomp has evolved to such a point that the cadaverine starts being exuded from the pores. No one has stated that decomp doesn't begin immediately once a person dies - that's a known scientific fact. What isn't a known scientific fact is how long it takes for the decomp to actually start depositing on clothes and other articles in contact with the cadaver - as in the earliest average time period. I highly doubt those type of studies have ever even been done considering that you would have to have everything set up before a person dies, and then start the experiments immediately upon death... I don't think there is any governmental agency in the world that would allow that - or that logistically they could do that. And, even then, as I said - it depends on the cause of death, environmental factors, etc...

That doesn't have anything to do with how a dog is trained. The scent is the same... And, it's either there, or it's not. Some dogs may be more sensitive than others I suppose, but it's not about that.

I mentioned the studies I did because it showed that the body the dogs were training on was < 3 hours deceased. And, that I searched for information that may indicate that there have been studies done with items exposed to a cadaver at various stages from the moment of death on. I couldn't find any such studies that definitively state for instance, that all bodies will exude cadaverine within 5 minutes of death, or at 15 minutes, or at 30 minutes post-mortem (again, that's all just an example).

What I do know is that someone who is an expert - sarx - has confirmed that there is a period of time in which there is some "confusion", and during which a person could be deceased, but the dogs would not hit on the spot a deceased individual had lain or fallen if the body was moved before cadaverine could be deposited.

 

[Redhead72]

Sorry to make so many comments in order... I'm here by myself at the moment!

I wanted to give some information in regard to the HRD dogs in regard to people's theory that there might be an ancient burial site under the lake. The likelihood of HRD dogs hitting on bones buried deep in the lake for over a century is virtually impossible. There are only a few dogs in the world who have been trained to detect Historical Human Remains. There is only one dog that has ever been tested, and confirmed as finding bone fragments that are over 175 years old - and that dog is in Australia. That dog was specifically trained since she was a puppy with known archaeological remains, and at old cemeteries. HHRD (Historical Human Remains Detection) is in its infancy as a science, and in regard to training, etc... It is a much more specific training than your "average" cadaver dogs.

The fact is, they don't even understand what the HHRD dogs are actually smelling as they are hitting on bone fragments and teeth, and not even some remnant of decomp fluids which have long since been erased by time, and other processes in the soil.

Also, please note that even among HRD dogs only some are trained to work in the water. It's a specialized training vs. using a dog on land. I have not been able to find an HHRD dog that has worked anywhere but on land, either.

So, for all of these dogs to be hitting on the lake, the likelihood of them hitting on some ancient burial ground covered by water for the last 70 years, and that would likely have been buried some 200+ years ago, is infinitesimal. It would truly be something so amazing that universities and archaeologists all across the world would be shocked about.

From reading the how's of what these HHRD dogs find these remains, they wouldn't be able to use these techniques in water at all. They have to actually have their noses at the ground to even smell whatever it is they are trying to detect (again, it's not decomp gases and fluids - it's something in the bones and teeth themselves).

For the HRD dogs to be hitting continually in this lake right now indicates there is fresh decomposition going on. There is truly no other explanation.

(Personally, I doubt the scent is coming from a tributary, but I do think the wind, and current may be preventing them from accurately pinpointing the source.)

Here are a couple links in regard to HHRD dogs. Again, these dogs are trained differently from "regular" HRD or cadaver dogs. They must be trained specifically to detect historical remains as the scent that HRD dogs usually hit on would no longer exist.

Migaloo the dog has a nose for archeology
http://www.news.com.au/national-new...e-for-archeology/story-fndo4ckr-1226463394595

K-9forensic.org FAQ page about the different classifications of search dogs:
http://www.k9forensic.org/faq.html

Historical Human Remains Detection Dog
Using dogs to help locate historical or archaeological graves is a new concept. This kind of searching requires the dog to be slow and methodical and keep its nose just above the surface of the ground, any fast moves and the dog can miss the grave. It takes many years of slow and patient training to develop the skills needed to do this work.
In archaeology, an HHRD trained canine with impeccable manners, slow and methodical search style, properly trained and certified, may be the Remote Sensing Tool of the future. ICF canine trainers are "writing the book" in this field. Certification standards are high insuring that the ICF certified canines are reliable, non-invasive tools to be used in modern archaeology.

Some of the above is MOO! Most comes from the research and articles I've read about HHRD dogs - two of which are linked above.
:cow:

 

[The Cheese]

How would finding nothing indicate the dogs are wrong? There is a lot of wind and other issues that can make pinpointing the origin of the chemicals and gases difficult. It just means they can't find the source as of yet.

The dogs (numerous at this point - not all the same teams, etc...) are not going to keep hitting on the same areas repeatedly and /all/ be wrong. They just brought in "fresh highly trained dogs" with the new search team - from Illinois as it stated. If a dog was brought in at this point and didn't alert at these areas, then I would question the reliability of that particular dog and/or handler - not the other way around.

Bender never actually said the dogs were "wrong". He offered up an explanation/excuse of them hitting on an elk (a 700 lb. animal, btw), but yet that was also when he stated they had no intention of searching the lake again - as was pointed out so many times here, even just last week before we knew the search was actually going on at that exact moment with law enforcement involved. Obviously, LE didn't dismiss these hits as was implied by Bender's statements. I truly do think his statements were meant to ease the general public - can you imagine if he would have said; "We know he's in there, but we'll have to wait for Spring?" They would have been under so much scrutiny from the public - no matter how well they explained the reasons for waiting until Spring. No-one wants to imagine a little boy at the bottom of a lake all winter, and no-one would really understand why they would leave him there, if they knew it was true. Even here there has been confusion of why the divers couldn't do more.

With a general accuracy of well over 90% with using HRD dogs, these hits are not "wrong". SOMEONE's body is in the water, and has been all winter. It's just a matter of finding the body, and figuring out who it is (it could be Dylan, and it might not be). That's stated in the article itself.

Not meaning to be snarky or anything, honestly. I wish to understand more as to why you say that this would mean the dogs are wrong? Just because they can't find the source yet, doesn't mean they are wrong.

I hate to say this, but by this time (5 mos. later) and now with knowing that there is a power plant water feed (which is usually warm water in my experience), it is possible that the body (whomever it belongs to) is no longer intact (due to decomp). That could explain why there are hits in two main places - by the dam (a lighter scent) and back near the Eastern Shoreline. And if the body is no longer intact, it will make finding the body that much harder at the bottom of the reservoir. Smaller portions could remain hidden in the brush, and logs, and not be clearly identifiable.

I'm glad they used the ROV at the grate, but I wish they could use it to scan the bottom of the whole portion by the dam, and along the Eastern portion where the dogs keep hitting... I suppose that might not be feasible, but I sure do wish it was.

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

My prayers go out to Dylan's family members, and all those searching... What a tremendously emotional and exhausting situation this must be for all of them. It tears me up just reading about it all... I have this urge to go out there to the lake myself and search for him, but I wouldn't be able to do any good in that regard as I don't have a boat, no sonar, no ROV, and have never done Scuba diving - much less in very dangerous conditions... I just can't imagine what Elaine must be going through. She's so incredibly lucky to have such a good friend she can count on who is able to be right there, watching it all, and knowing exactly what's going on.

BBM. Here are the articles being referred to I think. Pierce is the commander of the state police dive team.

Bender said the dogs had been wrong before, and Dylan remained officially at large.

http://durangoherald.com/article/20130227/NEWS01/130229657&template=mobileart

The dive team spent two days searching the area and is confident the dogs were wrong, Pierce said.

http://www.daily-times.com/ci_22071476/colorado-boy-still-missing-after-two-day-underwater

 

[*Lash*]

Catching up here, and am curious about these statements:

Original statement from Ten-96:
Additionally, I strongly suspect that Officer Utter's proclivities came to light as a direct result of the investigation into Dylan's disappearance. Time will tell.

Response:


I'm really confused by the statements above, frankly. What coincidences are you referring to? That someone was busted for child , 5 months after a child in the area went missing? I don't see how that's a coincidence in any way, but maybe I'm missing something?

All JMO! And, I'm seriously trying to understand where you are coming from. There are SOs in every community, and from all walks of life.

There has never been any indication before or after that this deputy was a person of interest, a suspect, or had anything to do with DR's disappearance or investigation at all. I think it's a pretty far jump to say there is anything "coincidental" about his being busted and DR's case. But then, as I said - perhaps I'm missing something?

Again, all of the above is MOO! No offense intended.

In my opinion - before we knew Dylan's family had started the new search last week, April 16th, some were seeing the recent arrest of Deputy Sutter on April 22nd and the LE coffer dam search as coincidental.

In my opinion, since we now know the search began before Sutter's arrest and LE was working in correlation with Dylan's family, that coincidence can be ruled out. LE was not out searching because of a tip related to Sutter's arrest. LE was assisting Dylan's family.

 

[Bayou Mistress]

It's my belief that HRD dogs were taken to MR's home and also were used in MR's vehicles. There is no link, it's my opinion based on investigative techniques. It's also my opinion that MR could not have moved a "deceased" Dylan without leaving a trace scent that dogs could have hit on. There are no reports of HRD hits in or around Mark's home or other property. While this doesn't preclude Dylan being disabled from a wound that left no outward/discoverable evidence, I tend to believe that whatever happened to Dylan did not happen at his father's home. If Dylan is in that reservoir, and that's a big IF, I still do not think that such a discovery points to his father without corroborating evidence.

I do not want Dylan to be in the water. No way, no how. Besides HRD dog alerts, there is no reason to think that he is. I'm hanging on to hope for this family.

 

[Redhead72]

BBM. Here are the articles being referred to I think. Pierce is the commander of the state police dive team.

Bender said the dogs had been wrong before, and Dylan remained officially at large.

http://durangoherald.com/article/20130227/NEWS01/130229657&template=mobileart

The dive team spent two days searching the area and is confident the dogs were wrong, Pierce said.

http://www.daily-times.com/ci_22071476/colorado-boy-still-missing-after-two-day-underwater

Like I said, Bender didn't say the dogs were wrong, absolutely wrong... he said "the dogs had been wrong before". That doesn't indicate a solid statement, it was an attempt to explain it all away when the first dive search was called off.

As for what Pierce stated, I wasn't referring to him, and neither was the person I replied to. However, I'd like to know the opinion of the LE HRD handlers and not the dive captain, frankly. Do you not think that he would want to take pressure off his dive team as well considering they couldn't find what the dogs hit on?

I still don't know how something that Bender and Pierce said all the way back in November has any bearing on this anymore.

Obviously their statements were misleading for some reason (to quell the public's murmuring of the search ending so quickly, to give someone who may know something false confidence, etc...). Just like their statements that they were done with the lake search when obviously they weren't - they were involved with the search this last week.

If they were convinced the dogs were wrong all of these times, then why would they have bothered working with the search team at all? Why would they have brought back the LE dogs again?

Regardless, these dogs can't all be wrong, and not with so many hits, either.

All MOO! :cow:

PS - Thanks for bringing forward the quotes though. I do appreciate that. I'm just remembering all of the other things Bender said over the winter - that they wouldn't be back (and now we know they went back 15 times), that it must be an elk (when the dogs wouldn't be hitting on that, and if it were a 700 lb. elk why couldn't they find that, etc...). I don't believe the LPCSO is straight-out lying, just that they are not being entirely open about what all is going at all.