CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #9

[catswhiskers]

The big deal ... he just picked his son up for his visit. Who can say whether or not they spent any quality time together that evening? This is really going round and round in circles.

 

[Sigh Sister]

You made smile, because that's how I 'roll' too! Having the capacity to procreate doesn't necessarily endow you with the propensity to parent, however. Context is everything. We need to ask: " Do the words match the behavior, and does the behavior match the words?"
ER has told us that MR didn't utilize his visitation regularly, the court found ER's petition compelling enough to change the long-standing custodial arrangement, older brother did not join Dylan on visit to MR, MR answered neither ER nor older son's texts early on, older son had restraining order against MR 3years ago (as a 17yo/18yo), MR met w/older son finally (with older step-brother) 3 days ago (see link below), and hasn't been in contact w/ older brother since. There is no "crying out" to Dylan, no paternal reasurrance proffered. Even the "he was my whole world" statement has my Mommy radar clanging, not only because of the tense, but because of the seeming insensitivity to MR's other two boys---who themselves are in pain and fear over the disappearance of their little brother.
In one of the latest articles (see link below), MR said of Dylan, "...he's a 13yo boy, and who knows what they think sometimes? " That statement prompted alarm bells too, as it has a derogatory quality to it that seems out of context....what grieving, frantic, and engaged parent is going to denigrate their missing child? Granted, it's subtle, but when you put all the niggling things together, the collective whole does nothing to assuage my impression that MR is not the devoted daddy that you and I would hope him to be.

http://www.gazette.com/articles/dylan-148038-son-redwine.html

According to this, MR had restraining order against CR.

http://durangoherald.com/article/20...NEWS01/121209881/Police-reveal-no-new-leads--


"Mark Redwine filed a restraining order against his son, Cory, and Elaine Redwine in July 2008. Elaine Redwine filed a restraining order against her ex-husband on the same date. Dylan was listed as a protected person in both orders. Both of the orders were dismissed in December 2008."

Or is there another restraining order you are referring to?

 

[TxLady2]

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Washington State
Posts: 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherEyes
Missing teen’s father says he’s surprised by allegations made by ex-wife in TV interview

http://kdvr.com/2012/12/03/dylan-red...ade-by-mother/

The headline says he denies it but the interview dosen't mention that he denied it?
Hey, info about the 2003 issue!

Quote:
The incident involved an argument between Mark Redwine and his neighbor after the neighbor’s kid broke either Cory or Dylan’s toy truck. The two argued on the neighbor’s property until Mark Redwine left the residence and the neighbor called the police.

Either there were some details left out or the neighbor was a troublemaker. Arguing, possibly yelling or cursing at one another is not letting one's temper get out of control, IMO. If there were blows exchanged, pushing or shoving, threats of bodily harm, or a weapon was involved.... yes, I can see calling the cops. But just arguing??? Cops don't usually arrest someone for a verbal disagreement. I guess the neighbor could have gone down and filed a complaint, but it sounds like if all the charges except one were dismissed, it couldn't have been much of a fight to start with.
Oh... was the neighbor male or female? Might make a difference. Men are not supposed to threaten women, but two men fighting, if they are about equal in size doesn't usually upset cops too much, as long as they don't kill one another. That's my experience anyway.
All MOO.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Last night I was thinking about this case and how hard it would be to prove that your loved one was in the home with you at a particular time.

My hubby and I went out to eat Saturday late evening. We returned to our home around 8:30-8:45 pm. We live in a very rural area with no cameras around. We had already talked with our children that morning so no calls came in and none made that night. We watch some tv and then went to bed. Then early Sunday morning my hubby goes into the office for a few hours to make sure he has a head start for Monday so he would be back early to go to a doctor's appointment.

Now if something had happened to me during the time he was gone Sunday morning (about 3 hours) there would absolutely be no way he could prove to LE that I ever arrived home with him the night before and was here Sunday morning...alive and well when he kissed me goodbye. I dont eat breakfast or drink coffee so there would be no breakfast dishes or coffee cup sitting there.

They would have the camera footage of us leaving Outback Saturday evening together but nothing after then.

When I thought about how this could happen it made me feel very uneasy and shows just how vulnerable a lot of people are. How do you prove something like this when it is absolutely the truth?

IMO

 

[Eileen730]

The big deal ... he just picked his son up for his visit. Who can say whether or not they spent any quality time together that evening? This is really going round and round in circles.

Dad said he went to bed!
Have You heard any interview from dad where he has said anything different?
I havent.

No Oh we watched a movie we had pizza and snacks
or sat around and watched tv.

I wondered if dad was home or went out.

JMO

sorry I dont think Dylan was there at all.

 

[princessk]

There are so many facts that we do not know. Such as....was the refrigerator full of food? Lots of food bought for Dylan? DNA being done on household items? We know this stuff has been addressed and are yes and no answers. Facts. However, LE is not releasing this information to us. Once again, all we can do is speculate without these simple answers. This tells me that LE is preserving their evidence/facts. We are not being told much of anything, so I think they are trying to prove their case, they just do not have enough yet.
I have said before, and i will say it again....LE is adamant that Dylan did NOT RUN AWAY!! This throws out every scenario of him leaving the house on his own!!! Unless LE is just really stupid, why would they say this unless they were sure. They sure aren't telling us anything else.
Unless Dylan left a note or communicated with someone that he planned to come back, there is no way LE could know what his intentions were if he left the home.
THINK ABOUT IT. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE

 

[Eileen730]

Either there were some details left out or the neighbor was a troublemaker. Arguing, possibly yelling or cursing at one another is not letting one's temper get out of control, IMO. If there were blows exchanged, pushing or shoving, threats of bodily harm, or a weapon was involved.... yes, I can see calling the cops. But just arguing??? Cops don't usually arrest someone for a verbal disagreement. I guess the neighbor could have gone down and filed a complaint, but it sounds like if all the charges except one were dismissed, it couldn't have been much of a fight to start with.
Oh... was the neighbor male or female? Might make a difference. Men are not supposed to threaten women, but two men fighting, if they are about equal in size doesn't usually upset cops too much, as long as they don't kill one another. That's my experience anyway.
All MOO.

I dont believe it was the neighbor that had the problem! JMO

 

[Ransom]

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1212/03/ng.01.html

 

[SCHMAE]

Last night I was thinking about this case and how hard it would be to prove that your loved one was in the home with you at a particular time.

My hubby and I went out to eat Saturday late evening. We returned to our home around 8:30-8:45 pm. We live in a very rural area with no cameras around. We had already talked with our children that morning so no calls came in and none made that night. We watch some tv and then went to bed. Then early Sunday morning my hubby goes into the office for a few hours to make sure he has a head start for Monday so he would be back early to go to a doctor's appointment.

Now if something had happened to me during the time he was gone Sunday morning (about 3 hours) there would absolutely be no way he could prove to LE that I ever arrived home with him the night before and was here Sunday morning...alive and well when he kissed me goodbye. I dont eat breakfast or drink coffee so there would be no breakfast dishes or coffee cup sitting there.

They would have the camera footage of us leaving Outback Saturday evening together but nothing after then.

When I thought about how this could happen it made me feel very uneasy and shows just how vulnerable a lot of people are. How do you prove something like this when it is absolutely the truth?

IMO

I was going to leave out this ridiculous story but you led me into it
THis is to demonstrate how true things can seem like LIES under the
right circumstance.
We are having some issues with an inlaw. Inlaw stayed with us for awhile. Inlaw got their own DVR box in an out building off of our FIOS acct to watch tv. Inlaw moved out with contentions we will say. I called FIOS to see about shutting off service to the dvr box but they said it must be mailed back to them. Ok! I call inlaw and say mail the dvr box back. An hour later, NO LIE, my own dvr box breaks, completely dies. I call FIOS, what to do , what to do. Fios says just use that inlaws dvr box, problem solved. YES problem solved! I go to outbuilding to retrieve dvr box and it's GONE. I call inlaw , where is dvr box ..... ? I fear the worst, pawned or what not. Inlaw says I've got it and I say bring it back, I need it mine broke. An hour later, mysteriously and suddenly , my DVR springs back to life. A miracle. But now it looks like I made the whole thing up to be a troublemaker see? Inlaw thought I was just being petty and why digging through out building looking for dvr box unless I was trying to accuse them of theft...which I was not. Anyway, sorry to be long, but this happened right about the first day or two I was following along here and I thought how easy it is for a true set of strange circumstances to look like a lie. I knew at the time this does not even SEEM true , but it is . I had a FIOS email confirming our call for proof but that does not prove the dvr actually quit. In any event, if the inlaw had turned up missing on that day.......oh boy would i have some ' splaining to do !

 

[oceanblueeyes]

There are so many facts that we do not know. Such as....was the refrigerator full of food? Lots of food bought for Dylan? DNA being done on household items? We know this stuff has been addressed and are yes and no answers. Facts. However, LE is not releasing this information to us. Once again, all we can do is speculate without these simple answers. This tells me that LE is preserving their evidence/facts. We are not being told much of anything, so I think they are trying to prove their case, they just do not have enough yet.
I have said before, and i will say it again....LE is adamant that Dylan did NOT RUN AWAY!! This throws out every scenario of him leaving the house on his own!!! Unless LE is just really stupid, why would they say this unless they were sure. They sure aren't telling us anything else.
Unless Dylan left a note or communicated with someone that he planned to come back, there is no way LE could know what his intentions were if he left the home.
THINK ABOUT IT. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE

Even though they ruled out a runaway it doesnt mean he couldnt have left on his own free will though to go somewhere and something happened to him once he left. They have just ruled out that he didnt leave the home with the intentions of running away, imo.

I dont think LE is stupid. When Sierra Lamar first went missing that LE also said there was a chance she had run away. They dismissed that theory after awhile based on commonsense like I imagine they have done in this case. They look at prior history of the child to see if they have run away before. They look at the time that has passed with no contact with friends or family. So I can certainly understand why LE in both cases ruled out runaway.

They still have not ruled out an abduction or a homicide or both.

IMO

 

[TxLady2]

I am sorry, but that is just not true. What if Dyan had pneumonia do you think she would have had to put him on a plane. She could appeal that ruling and told them she was in fear for her son's life and they would not have made her send him. Child support is court ordered and how many men do not pay it. Eventually they get in trouble, but in the mean time dylan's mom could have gotten that changed if there were grounds for her fears.

Exactly. And as I posted last night, if it is the child's choice not to go, the court cannot order them to. At least that's how it is here and may be the same in other states. Dylan was 13, he is old enough to make his own decisions about whether he wants to visit his dad. And it would seem to me that Dylan should have had a say in the matter.
I still believe that the mom did not have to put him on the plane, especially if she thought he was in any danger from his father. I would take a chance on being charged with contempt, before I would put my child in harm's way.
Come to think of it, maybe that's where this theory that Dad had to fight for visitation came from... maybe Mom did not want him to have these visits, and Dad was determined to see his son. I wonder if the judge talked to Dylan about what his choice was, and he told him that yes, he did want to see his dad, but Mom was still against it. Now she's just bitter because she didn't get her way. Just a thought, not really an opinion, so don't throw tomatoes.

 

[white rabbit]

If MR told the Walmart/McD's story to the LE on the first day, they could have checked the fridge for the groceries. Meat, milk, etc has dates on it. A receipt would have also proved his story. (or credit/bank card records)
They might HAVE confirmed it already, (first day) which is why they focused elsewhere initially.

I read in one of the interviews yesterday from MR that the police do not know how to handle the situation. I agree.

*I apologize for not knowing which interview, it's all moving very fast*

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1212/03/ng.01.html

"If he was out getting gas, there`s a receipt and a video. If he was out getting coffee at the local McDonalds, there`s a receipt and there`s video. If he`s out at the 24-hour Wal-Mart, there`s a receipt and video. So I`d like to see the four-hour timeline of where the dad was.

GRACE: With me is Dylan`s mother, Elaine Redwine, joining me from Durango. Elaine, it`s my understanding that the police have verified the dad went to those places.

REDWINE: I agree. There has -- they have verified where Mark had said he had went."

bbm...so they know that he went to walmart and mcdonald's...my question is, what can't you get at a walmart that warrants driving an hour into town the very next morning? he could've gotten anything from motor oil to an xbox that night...shampoo to frozen pizza. what isn't open on a sunday night that you can't get at walmart?

to name a few, the post office...bank...dmv...traffic court even. all of which have highly sophisticated surveillance. since LE is only asking for video between vallecito to durango, have they verified what errands he ran that morning? his divorce lawyer's office is in cortez, not durango. where did they meet? why couldn't a phone call have been made? but the errands stand out to me. what errands?

any thoughts?

 

[catswhiskers]

He had his son home for the first time in months - and by the sounds of it the boy was beat from his travel and no doubt from being up until 4am the day he was travelling - no wonder he crashed pretty quickly. And D was still too pooped to get up at 6:30am the next morning (who'd want to on holidays anyway?) IDK ... I am only going on the information I have seen, trying not to fill in blanks to suit my own version of events.
Something I do think is that DR must have been under a fair bit of emotional stress himself because of adults in his family - it can't have been much fun to listen to any of their sniping over the past years.

:moo:

 

[princessk]

Even though they ruled out a runaway it doesnt mean he couldnt have left on his own free will though to go somewhere and something happened to him once he left. They have just ruled out that he didnt leave the home with the intentions of running away, imo.

I dont think LE is stupid. When Sierra Lamar first went missing that LE also said there was a chance she had run away. They dismissed that theory after awhile based on commonsense like I imagine they have done in this case. They look at prior history of the child to see if they have run away before. They look at the time that has passed with no contact with friends or family. So I can certainly understand why LE in both cases ruled out runaway.

They still have not ruled out an abduction or a homicide or both.

IMO

How does LE know he did not have the intention of running away? Did Dylan tell someone he was leaving or where he was going?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I was going to leave out this ridiculous story but you led me into it
THis is to demonstrate how true things can seem like LIES under the
right circumstance.
We are having some issues with an inlaw. Inlaw stayed with us for awhile. Inlaw got their own DVR box in an out building off of our FIOS acct to watch tv. Inlaw moved out with contentions we will say. I called FIOS to see about shutting off service to the dvr box but they said it must be mailed back to them. Ok! I call inlaw and say mail the dvr box back. An hour later, NO LIE, my own dvr box breaks, completely dies. I call FIOS, what to do , what to do. Fios says just use that inlaws dvr box, problem solved. YES problem solved! I go to outbuilding to retrieve dvr box and it's GONE. I call inlaw , where is dvr box ..... ? I fear the worst, pawned or what not. Inlaw says I've got it and I say bring it back, I need it mine broke. An hour later, mysteriously and suddenly , my DVR springs back to life. A miracle. But now it looks like I made the whole thing up to be a troublemaker see? Inlaw thought I was just being petty and why digging through out building looking for dvr box unless I was trying to accuse them of theft...which I was not. Anyway, sorry to be long, but this happened right about the first day or two I was following along here and I thought how easy it is for a true set of strange circumstances to look like a lie. I knew at the time this does not even SEEM true , but it is . I had a FIOS email confirming our call for proof but that does not prove the dvr actually quit. In any event, if the inlaw had turned up missing on that day.......oh boy would i have some ' splaining to do !

Oh my SCHMAE that is some story. Glad your inlaw didnt turn up missing or you would probably be in a heap of trouble!:floorlaugh:

 

[Elley Mae]

I would love to hear from Elaine on the TV being left on at Mark's house, was this something that Dylan did at home. Did he leave the TV on after he left the house at home? I do not know anyone that does that, child or adult. Maybe I'm different. jmo

 

[princessk]

I really think LE know so much more than we do....they just don't have enough evidence..............or Dylan! So keeping quiet is in the best interest for Dylan to be found.

 

[Eileen730]

I think Dylan would have chose to stay home but went to keep peace and to see his old friends again. I dont think he was totally against it and i dont think mom was either.
Ya do what ya have to do and move on.
Kids when they turn into teens dont want parents company they just want to be with their friends He would have been fine I think if the plans didnt change.

I think things went downhill when he couldnt go to see them sunday evening!
Right when the cell died!

All JMO

 

[Ransom]

On Wednesday, the task force officially ruled out that he was a runaway because of the amount of time he has been gone — 11 days as of yesterday, and because he has not been in contact with any of his friends or his parents. Like most 13-year-olds, “he was a prolific texter,” Bender said.

http://www.pinerivertimes.com/news.asp?artid=1096
Note date is wrong ^^. Should be 12/1/2012

 

[Eileen730]

He had his son home for the first time in months - and by the sounds of it the boy was beat from his travel and no doubt from being up until 4am the day he was travelling - no wonder he crashed pretty quickly. And D was still too pooped to get up at 6:30am the next morning (who'd want to on holidays anyway?) IDK ... I am only going on the information I have seen, trying not to fill in blanks to suit my own version of events.
Something I do think is that DR must have been under a fair bit of emotional stress himself because of adults in his family - it can't have been much fun to listen to any of their sniping over the past years.

:moo:

The boy wanted to go to his friends house and dad said no.
As i see it he wasnt to tired to go see his friends he was tired hanging at dads.
Bored!