Well ain't that a surprise.
According to media reports, LE hasn't called MR a suspect (or have they, unbeknownst to the public?).
If LE hasn't accused MR of a crime, why then, the need for a defense attorney's advice regarding "accusations" - unless he's planning on bringing a libel suit? If LE hasn't accused and/or charged him with a crime, who cares what the public may think?
ETA: Furthermore - why would a father of a recently missing child be concerned with a possible libel suit? IMO, I think he was consulting an attorney because of the recent forensic search of his home & vehicles.
BBM
Most people would have contacted an attorney long before he did, it makes more sense than going through everything he has without one. Several people here mentioned days ago that they were surprised he hadn't contacted one yet because they would have. MOO because I'm too lazy to look up links.
IMO, it sounds as if MR may be adding to/adjusting his timeline, after meeting with investigators & hearing their questions.
I haven't heard/read anything he's said that shows that. Originally he wasn't talking to the press and we only got information from other people (who weren't there) or speculation by media and WS members. Just because we didn't know that something had happened, it doesn't mean that he hadn't already told it to LE.
Original story: Dad left at 7:30 to do errands, son was out like a light, Dad returns at 11:30 and 'notices' son is missing along with fishing pole.
Version 2.o: Dad had to leave for errands, but first he nudged his boy gently awake, to promise him he would be back to give him a ride to his friends house later, and his son acknowledged everything he said, and then when he came home and found he was gone, he began texting him, and waited for a reply, all afternoon.
Same as above. Most of what we heard originally had come from the "family" friend, not from MR or LE.
I know - right?
And in his media appearances, he makes it a point to come across as oh so soft spoken & oh so gentle - all the while his ex-wife is describing him as something different.
Let's see - who's version will I tend to believe? Based on my expereince, I think I'll go with ER's description.
BBM
That's the problem here; I always take comments a woman makes about her ex-husband with a grain of salt. Even if he does have a bad temper, that doesn't mean he can't be soft spoken when he's not having a tantrum.
And he is trying to deal with the added weight of knowing that some people think he had something to do with his son's disappearance because he was the last one to see him. He has contacted a criminal-defense attorney to help him with that.
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22108222
Again I must ask: why would a father of a missing child contact a criminal defense attorney because his ex-wife had made a statement to the media that she felt her ex may be involved in her son's disappearance?
I call BS on why he claims he contacted a criminal defense attorney.
IMO, it probably has more to do with the recent "official interview" with LE and with the questions that were probably asked during the course of that official interview.
BBM
I really don't know what difference it makes why he contacted one. Most people would, and it in no way means that a person is guilty if they do. If it were because of the search and interview, wouldn't he have been more likely to contact one
before they were done rather than after?
I'm not sure anymore where the report came from that Mom had to bring items of his from CS with her. It was stated at the time it was because Dad had nothing of Dylan's to use for a scent.
I also wondered, I remember a post that after Dad called Mom and told her Dylan was missing, she called the Sheriffs office and jumped in the car and made the trip to Vallecito. I wonder if she was told at that time to bring something of Dylan's for scent. A lot was made of her having to bring something with her. I wonder when that request was made. So early on, why would the police ask her to do that instead of just getting something for Dad?
It's never made sense to me that she brought scent items with her. She has said that (as I understood it by her phrasing) that she found out he was missing and was on the road, with CR, by 5:30; and it sounded like she called LE on her way. That would mean she knew immediately that she needed to bring something with - before talking to LE. If she hadn't packed something of his beforehand, it would have meant driving all the way home to get something and then driving back. I'm sure we would have heard about that if it had happened.
I do wonder if anyone else ever saw the cereal bowl and other things mentioned. I don't know how most guys are, but I know that MOST of them I know would have put away things laying on the couch, and washed (or at least rinsed) the bowl and spoon. I would probably have left them. :blushing:
