CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #47

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
NC Analyzer said:
It would be more than a child last seen at that location. This is all very 4th amendment. My suggestion is googling your rights as far as search and seizure laws. MR has the same rights and a judge is charged with protecting them.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are saying. A child is missing, LE had determined at that point that running away was less of a theory. That child was last seen (as reported by MR and confirmed by LE) at MR's home. MR is not known to have revoked consent. A missing child from that location is probable cause by itself.
 
well, the search warrant ensures that MR doesn't revoke consent

IMO
 
azgrandma said:
LOL I'm sorry to laugh at this Bayou, I'm not laughing at you at all. But IIRC it started out talking about MR's search and the need for a warrant, then the discussion morphed to permission to take things and whether or not a warrant would be needed in regards to ER's home being searched and items taken from there. It wasn't certain as to whether or not LE got a warrant for her house. Then it took on it's own life. :what:
Click to expand...

Yes, lol! :great: And that is what we do these days with no news I guess. So many questions it boggles my mind. Maybe it's just me, lol.
 
Bayou Mistress said:
Not sure what you are saying. A child is missing, LE had determined at that point that running away was less of a theory. That child was last seen (as reported by MR and confirmed by LE) at MR's home. MR is not known to have revoked consent. A missing child from that location is probable cause by itself.
Click to expand...

No, that would not be probable cause. LE would have to prove to a judge why they believe a crime has been committed.
Between a missing Dylan and the case becoming a criminal investigation, there was something that allowed LE to provide a judge with probable cause. Not speculation, but actual evidence, hearsay or direct information. It could be something so simple as one officer's own observations, but there had to be something of substance to convince a judge that LE wasn't on a fishing expedition. The judge has a duty to protect MR's constitutional rights.
 
NC Analyzer said:
No, that would not be probable cause. LE would have to prove to a judge why they believe a crime has been committed.
Between a missing Dylan and the case becoming a criminal investigation, there was something that allowed LE to provide a judge with probable cause. Not speculation, but actual evidence, hearsay or direct information. It could be something so simple as one officer's own observations, but there had to be something of substance to convince a judge that LE wasn't on a fishing expedition. The judge has a duty to protect MR's constitutional rights.
Click to expand...

We may just have to agree to disagree. But the standard for a judge to sign off on a search warrant is very little. Basically, LE believes a crime occurred there since a child is missing from that location. You suggested earlier that I google, and I suggest the same to you so that you can determine the standard of probable cause. "The totality of the circumstances" is the test for judges/magistrates. I stand by a missing child from that location, with runaway as a less likely theory, is enough by itself.
 
Bayou Mistress said:
We may just have to agree to disagree. But the standard for a judge to sign off on a search warrant is very little. Basically, LE believes a crime occurred there since a child is missing from that location. You suggested earlier that I google, and I suggest the same to you so that you can determine the standard of probable cause. "The totality of the circumstances" is the test for judges/magistrates. I stand by a missing child from that location, with runaway as a less likely theory, is enough by itself.
Click to expand...

I don't believe Google will assist me much. I have a Pre-Law degree. And a legal reference library in my own home. :floorlaugh:

ETA: If you believe the standard for a judge to sign off on a search warrant is "very little" we definitely have to agree to disagree!
 
Random thoughts and ideas I've been pondering

- Suppose Dylan's 9:37 text said "help"? Brittany Kilgore was abducted by a man and while in his car being taken to the house where she was murdered, she sent a text to a friend saying just that - "help".

- Suppose on Monday morning MR suggested to Dylan that they go fishing for a bit before he took him to R's gma's house? He said he left the house at 7:30, and left Dylan in the home. Suppose he's lying about both the time and leaving Dylan there?

Investigators learned that Mark has said he last saw Dylan at around 7:30 AM Monday, November 19, 2012 at his home

Mark's and Dylan's interactions and activities within the community on November 18th and 19th, as well as tips related to persons, locations and sightings remain under investigation.

http://www.pinerivertimes.com/news.asp?artid=1149

- Suppose Dylan made a landline call on Monday morning? I can't find a statement from LE that would rule that out, and

Mark's and Dylan's interactions and activities within the community on November 18th and 19th, as well as tips related to persons, locations and sightings remain under investigation.

http://www.pinerivertimes.com/news.asp?artid=1149

A deceased child doesn't interact and participate in activities.
 
NC Analyzer said:
I don't believe Google will assist me much. I have a Pre-Law degree. And a legal reference library in my own home. :floorlaugh:

ETA: If you believe the standard for a judge to sign off on a search warrant is "very little" we definitely have to agree to disagree!
Click to expand...

A missing child is a BIG thing.
 
A little clarification here. I will copy these "rule posts" and put them in the first or second posts of the thread for reference.

Information that came out on the Dr. Phil show may be discussed, but not the edited, rumored portions. What this means is that "history" that was brought up, may be discussed as long as it is linked to Dr. Phil.

We are not going back to visit old "he said/she said" stuff that happened around the time of the divorce. But... if it was brought up on Dr. Phil, where everybody had a chance to refute the charge or defend themselves, then it will be allowed with the Dr. Phil link.

Scanner thread info regarding searches may be linked up with brief comments about the info that the poster thinks is important.

Salem
 
Bayou Mistress said:
We may just have to agree to disagree. But the standard for a judge to sign off on a search warrant is very little. Basically, LE believes a crime occurred there since a child is missing from that location. You suggested earlier that I google, and I suggest the same to you so that you can determine the standard of probable cause. "The totality of the circumstances" is the test for judges/magistrates. I stand by a missing child from that location, with runaway as a less likely theory, is enough by itself.
Click to expand...

I remember when they executed the search warrant that it was stated that it was because it was the last place Dylan was seen, and that MR was not a suspect or POI. In the initial search, they thought he had run away and were looking for things like clothes, phone, him hiding in a closet(?), or anything that might give them some idea where he went. Once they determined that it wasn't a case of running away, being lost or injured close by, etc., they got a search warrant to look for evidence of a crime, possibly proof that he had been there, fingerprints and other forensic evidence. I don't have any links, it's all MOO.
 
Confusion said:
I remember when they executed the search warrant that it was stated that it was because it was the last place Dylan was seen, and that MR was not a suspect or POI. In the initial search, they thought he had run away and were looking for things like clothes, phone, him hiding in a closet(?), or anything that might give them some idea where he went. Once they determined that it wasn't a case of running away, being lost or injured close by, etc., they got a search warrant to look for evidence of a crime, possibly proof that he had been there, fingerprints and other forensic evidence. I don't have any links, it's all MOO.
Click to expand...

In order to obtain the search warrant, they would have to already have the evidence, or probable cause, to show a judge.
They have evidence of some kind...one way or another. Probable cause isn't the standard used to convict in a criminal trial, but it isn't something that equates to "very little" either. They had/have "something".
 
The Cheese said:
Random thoughts and ideas I've been pondering

- Suppose Dylan's 9:37 text said "help"? Brittany Kilgore was abducted by a man and while in his car being taken to the house where she was murdered, she sent a text to a friend saying just that - "help".

- Suppose on Monday morning MR suggested to Dylan that they go fishing for a bit before he took him to R's gma's house? He said he left the house at 7:30, and left Dylan in the home. Suppose he's lying about both the time and leaving Dylan there?

Investigators learned that Mark has said he last saw Dylan at around 7:30 AM Monday, November 19, 2012 at his home

Mark's and Dylan's interactions and activities within the community on November 18th and 19th, as well as tips related to persons, locations and sightings remain under investigation.

http://www.pinerivertimes.com/news.asp?artid=1149

- Suppose Dylan made a landline call on Monday morning? I can't find a statement from LE that would rule that out, and

Mark's and Dylan's interactions and activities within the community on November 18th and 19th, as well as tips related to persons, locations and sightings remain under investigation.

http://www.pinerivertimes.com/news.asp?artid=1149

A deceased child doesn't interact and participate in activities.
Click to expand...

Interesting thoughts re: the 9:37 text. Would certainly help make a case against someone, wouldn't it?

I am fairly certain LE discussed, at some point, how all communication from Dylan stopped at a specific time but I'm having a devil of a time trying to find the link. Anyone else? I think this was early on and it was quoted by LE in an article....I'll keep looking.

Also interesting re: AM fishing (a better time to fish, right?) but how could they do this and still place Mark, alone, at the attorney's office in the AM? And why would Mark lie about this activity to LE?


ETA: “There’s a combination of factors,” Bender said. “There’s been the passage of time without any sightings; Dylan was not a visitor but had friends here; he has a history of staying in contact with his family and friends; and there’s been nothing on his cellphone record since he was reported missing.”
http://www.durangoherald.com/articl...612/Dylan-Redwine-did-not-run-away-police-say

Alas, this just references cell phone activity.
 
NC Analyzer said:
In order to obtain the search warrant, they would have to already have the evidence, or probable cause, to show a judge.
They have evidence of some kind...one way or another. Probable cause isn't the standard used to convict in a criminal trial, but it isn't something that equates to "very little" either. They had/have "something".
Click to expand...

you win. LOL, they have something big. Dylan is missing. Missing from the location where a search warrant was obtained. Can we give that a rest yet?
 
Bayou Mistress said:
you win. LOL, they have something big. Dylan is missing. Missing from the location where a search warrant was obtained. Can we give that a rest yet?
Click to expand...

Not a contest to win or lose. Merely trying to educate and inform. :seeya:
 
mixologist74 said:
I have my own opinions about the Irwin case, so I'm going to leave that one stand.

If cadaver dogs had hit at the home, why were there no reports? There were reports of the ones at the lake.
Click to expand...

Just thinking about the dogs, I can't find anything about dogs at the house. I went over the news footage of the search warrant that was 10 days after and I still didn't see any dogs.

I think they were concentrated at the lake because of the scent the dogs got.

I could be wrong. But, if that's state land behind the house, I think that would be a good spring start IMO.
 
jlentine said:
Just thinking about the dogs, I can't find anything about dogs at the house. I went over the news footage of the search warrant that was 10 days after and I still didn't see any dogs.

I think they were concentrated at the lake because of the scent the dogs got.

I could be wrong. But, if that's state land behind the house, I think that would be a good spring start IMO.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with this thought and have wondered myself, many, many times if that has been attempted to date and if not, why not. That would be one of the first things I would do if I had a group with HRD dogs. Start from MR's property and work in a radius.
 
jlentine said:
Just thinking about the dogs, I can't find anything about dogs at the house. I went over the news footage of the search warrant that was 10 days after and I still didn't see any dogs.

I think they were concentrated at the lake because of the scent the dogs got.

I could be wrong. But, if that's state land behind the house, I think that would be a good spring start IMO.
Click to expand...

It would be nice to know where exactly the scent dogs started and ended, and where that kind of ground they did cover. I wonder if someone can come up with a map of this? It would sure make it easier to pinpoint areas where Dylan could have gone that the dogs did not go.
 
jlentine said:
I'm thinking we are on the same page Carolyn. I live right across the street from state land and I can walk miles in there without a light just following deer trails that I know. My eyes adjusted after a few minutes and there wasn't any moonlight. I did close to 5 miles one night when I got stuck in there.
Click to expand...

I live in the woods, too, and once the leaves are off the trees, I frequently walk around the forest at night, quite often without a headlamp or a flashlight. Of course, I know the area well, so that knowledge makes up for a certain lack of light. And, with the moon at half full that night, particularly if the moon was pretty high overhead at the time someone was in the woods behind MR's house, he could see pretty well, I imagine.

Walking at night in the forest, even in an area I know well, though, is slower than pacing through during the day. If someone went back in those woods on the night Dylan disappeared, I wouldn't think he would go too far--a mile, perhpas two at the outside--specially if carrying Dylan. Still a lot of territory to cover in a search.
 
rebeccaeee said:
Interesting thoughts re: the 9:37 text. Would certainly help make a case against someone, wouldn't it?

I am fairly certain LE discussed, at some point, how all communication from Dylan stopped at a specific time but I'm having a devil of a time trying to find the link. Anyone else? I think this was early on and it was quoted by LE in an article....I'll keep looking.
Click to expand...

Okay, it's been a while and I'm probably wrong about this, but I thought the last text from Dillon at 9:37 was quoted somewhere as being a simple "OK". That always struck me as something that might not have come from Dillon, even though it came from Dillon's phone. Or was that the last text before the 9:37 text?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 198 more.
Total: 3,828 (members: 199, guests: 3,629)

Online statistics

Members online
199
Guests online
3,629
Total visitors
3,828
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,812
Messages
17,959,268
Members
228,610
Latest member
Melissawilkinson44
Back
Top