Monday, February 11, 2013

Mark Redwine: Statement Analysis by Kaaryn Gough and Peter Hyatt

Here is more analysis of the words of Mark Redwine, father of missing 13 year old, Dylan Redwine.  Statement Analysis is in bold type, with emphasis in the quotes added.

As we continue to look deeper into this case, a very sad picture is emerging. 

Dylan Redwine, according to his father's language, is not going to be found alive.  

Mark Redwine is deliberately attempting to conceal information on what happened between him and his son.

1)  "You know, Dylan wanted to throw in a few videos that he found in the $5 dollar bin, so we threw those in, which is one of the movies we would watch the night, you know, we were together."

a) "one of the movies"--indicates more than one movie was watched that night. This contradicts what he later reports as having watched one of the movies.
b) "we would watch"--not "we watched". "would watch" is a future intention, not what happened.

We look at the phrase "you know" as a habit of speech and ask, "What topics bring up this habit?"  The phrase, "you know" indicates an acute awareness of the interviewer (or audience) and we should seek to learn what topics cause it to be used, and what topics do not.  Here, we see the context of the videos and watching a movie.   He does not tell us that they watched a movie together.  We cannot conclude that they did.  

2) "You know…it wasn’t a whole lotta things that we needed. We went to McDonalds. I wanted to go to a sit-down restaurant. Sit down and talk to him. He wanted to go to McDonalds. He always wants to go to McDonalds. What 13 year old kid  doesn’t want to go to McDonalds? You know, wasn’t my first choice. We didn’t even eat it in McDonalds. We got it in the truck and went to the drive-thru and we’re eating it on our way home. So…"

a) Note the lengthy explanation leading up to the point where they went through the drive-thru. Recall that when a subject approaches a dangerous portion of the statement, he/she will slow down. This is done in both verbal and written statements.  They do this by adding information outside of telling "what happened". It's like he's putting on the breaks here as he approaches a danger zone.  The danger zone is a stressful part of the account and the subject slows down to avoid the stress of it. Here we are given extra details that appear to be needless.  "Needless" details are deemed to be "doubly important" to the work of analysis. 

b) "it"--he does not include what "it" is. He's trying to imply they got a meal, but he doesn't say it. "it" We cannot assume "it" is a meal.  Why is he unable to say what "it" is?

c) "We got it in the truck and went to the drive-thru..."--Note the order. First "we got it" then "went to the drive-thru". 

If they had gotten it already, then why did they need to go through the drive-thru? Doesn't make sense. One should wonder if "got it", means was hit or beaten.

d) "...and we're eating it on our way home". Two things: 

i) "we're" = we are--present tense. Unreliable.  He knows how to use past tense verbs, as we have seen.  We know that lying is stressful and people will go out of their way to avoid a direct lie.  Why is eating sensitive to him?  Our answer may be here: 

ii) "we're eating"--the use of ing on the end of the verb indicates this activity was in process when something else happened. Example: I was watching tv when the phone rang. What happened while they were eating and driving home?

We also see in the statement the introduction of body posture, twice, with "sit down"; indicating that for Mark Redwine, at this point in his statement, there is tension increasing.  

Note that he wanted to talk "to" Dylan.  This may be part of what escalated between him and Dylan.  This has the "sat down and talked to" feel to it of correction.  Correction itself is not unusual, but when it appears just before a child goes missing, it becomes a severely sensitive matter. 

Mark Redwine's lengthy explanation about McDonald's shows a needless slowing down of the pace of his account, and has indications of the increase in tension.  He does not commit to the things he would like us to believe, verbally, therefore, we cannot commit to those things for him. 

We conclude that the portion of his story about going to McDonald's preceded, or began, a very dangerous part of the account of what happened to Dylan Redwine.  


Vita said...

I posted simultaneous, under Mark Redwine deceptive.

Moving along his own said timeline. After Walmart, came McDonald's, not his plan. He to say he could not recall what time Dy arrived to the airport. 6:00pm, 6:20 ish, I don't remember. LE to offer that DY arrived at the airport 5:46pm.

Dy captured on Walmart camera 7:05. Dy, Mom said, Dy responded a text to her, this the last, that Dad had picked him up, text to her 7:06. The mixed bag time of Mark, he was late, he plays it as it was the plane came in late. He though uses the word " immediate" they went to Walmart. His planned. They leave the Walmart and then? his plan was to have a " Sit down" with Dylan. Sit down Restaurant.

11:42 of YT: McDonald's his exact said. No Food is mentioned.

MR: We went to McDonald's, I wanted to go to a sit down restaurant, sit down and talk to him, this was his plan. Dylan did not respond well to this. Why? this is my own thought, the " Sit Down" in a restaurant equated talking. As in He doing the talking, not Dylan. MR's despise of Elaine in the entry of this interview, he wanted to drink? he in his comfort zone? sit down restaurant. Liquid courage to get his point across. I believe that Dylan scared him. Dylan's ability to make choices at age 13, scared Mark. He Dylan to present his own truth of his father, to the court, was something he feared. This why the sit down, he would be the control, Dy the sponge. He wanted DY to hear him out, man to man?

Dy knowing the court activity of present being custody, he the reason. His dad is leaving out information here, it's not that difficult to figure out.

He wanted Dylan sat down, that he could " garner" information, and say his said, in public. Dy not able to react or retreat. I get it. Dy did chose McDonald's? it is on the shopping row, from the Walmart, I think Mark pissed off pulled into the McDonald's as an appeasement. That DY would not
conform to his plan, a " sit down". What 13 yr old doesn't want to go to McDonald's the flag.

His own said: We didn't even eat IN,..McDonald's, we got it in the truck, went to the the drive thru and were eating it on our way home, so.. * do not read into it, it is his statement.

His NOT said, we didn't eat inside, we went through the drive thru, ordered food, and ate the food on our way home. WE DIDN'T even EAT, We got it, in the truck, Went to the drive thru, we're eating it on our way home = anger, no food. He drove through alright, the parking lot and went TO the drive thru, not thru it, food wasn't purchased.

" Mark was pissed that Dy didn't want to have a sit down - the Atty meeting planned the following AM"
We got it in the truck, ate it on the way home, yes they did. He Mark to Dylan " lets get it straight, who's on first" verbal abusive speak on the 45 min drive - His intent of the sit down, was for him to gain advantages, and it was Dy that didn't comply. This didn't set the tone, the tone was already set, as he MR had his own plans designed. His Monday AM meeting with his Atty.

DY asking to see his friends to cherry Mark's cake, this at the same time, after leaving McDonald's he said, Dy asked him. I don't think DY asked him, I think it was of DY defending himself, I don't have to stay with you! I have friends who know I am here, he had made contact via texting with Ryan, I made it. When did MR take Dy's phone away is the question? February 11, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Sus said...

Durango Airport: 5:46 pm
Texts to Dylan Redwine's phone:
Ryan: 6:43 pm : I'm in pagosa coming
Dylan: can't come srry ill hang tommarow
Ryan: ok

7:05 pm: Walmart
Ryan: 7:09 pm: why
Dylan: idle

7:22pm: McDonald's drive-thru
Ryan : 7:45pm: did your dad say no

Dylan: 8:01pm: yea
Ryan : oh ok
Dylan: can I come over early like 6:30 early tomarrow
Ryan : yeah
Dylan: you better let me in
Ryan: I will
Ryan : I will be at my gmas
Dylan : I will call all day if you don't
Ryan: ok
Dylan: will you gma care or be up
Ryan: just come around to where the sliding door is were that room is and knocking it and I will wake up

These texts fit into the timeframe of right before McDonald's and driving home from McDonald's.

Mark Redwine said:
"Well, there was some discussion HE HAD WITH ME the night before about leaving with me so I could drop him off in the Bayfield are with one of his friends that HAD BEEN TRYING TO TEXT HIM or he had been communicating with."

From this point on, analysis of Mark Redwine's statements show Dylan was not alive.

Last text from Ryan at 9:27 pm
Ryan: call me when you get here too.

Sus said...

7:09 text from Dylan should say idk instead of idle. Autocorrect.

Anonymous said...

Good catch Peter about slowing down around McDonald's.
After reading your analysis, my sense is that his question "You know, what 13 year old kid doesn't want to go to McDonald's?" my sense is that this account about McDonald's is fictional and did not happen. Perhaps they had planned to go there but I feel they never made it there.
I had watched the video and caught where Mark says "we got the movie we "would" watch that night, and I also felt that movie watching did not happen.
I have repeated this in a couple threads and I'm sure it's becoming redundant, but I am very struck by the way Mark Redwine seems to be imitating emotions/themes from the movie "Mask"--I feel he "relates" (delusionally) to either the boyfriend of the mother or the mother herself in Mask. There are too many similarities I see from watching the video interview of Mark.
I think Mark Redwine may be delusional. My sense is he may have a narcissistic personality disorder and may have blocked his crime against Dylan out of his head.
I do feel there is much leakage in his interviews. I feel he may have planned an attack on Dylan, carried it out somewhat quickly after picking up Dylan from the airport and then blocked the wrongdoing from his consciousness. And again, I do feel he is delusional and may be "living through" the movie Mask.

Anonymous said...

there was some discussion HE HAD WITH ME (ie he told me...) the night before about leaving (...he was leaving)

Could this be considered an embedded statement?

Dylan told his dad he was going to leave his house and cut their visit short and instead stay with friends the remainder of the time? This pissed his dad off?

Mel said...

How did you know what the text of the 9:27 pm message was from his friend Ryan? I thought the police haven't released that info. Did you read it in an article somewhere? Thanks.

Sus said...

Durango Herald 12/15/12 An article called "A Boy's Life".

Ryan Nava released his text conversation he was having with Dylan. The 9:27 text was in there...just Ryan's ...he doesn't say he heard back from Dylan.

The texts Ryan sent Dylan all through the next day beginning at 6:37, I believe, with no answer, are also in the article.

Pak31 said...

Just a question for who ever wants to answer. The movie that Dylan and his father supposedly watched Sunday night was Adventureland. I looked it up and it's an R rated movie and it's not appropriate for children. Has to do with intimate relationships. Does anyone find it odd for a dad and his 13 year old son to watch a movie like this together? Who would let their 13 year old watch this?Could be a lie but if they did, it's odd. Anyone have an opinion.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

So, according to Mark's words, Dylan not want to go to a sit-down restaurant and he refused to "even" go in and eat ("We didn't even eat in McDonald's..."). Why does Mark say "...we got it in the truck..."? Where else would you get your food if you ordered in the drive-thru?

Also, his statement is out of sequence here. He places actually going to the drive-thru after "we got it in the truck...". Was there an argument or altercation in the truck on the McDonald's parking lot? An argument about eating inside versus going through the drive-thru? I'm picturing Mark trying to appease Dylan by going to McDonald's, but expecting to have his little sit down talk inside while they eat. It appears Mark was determined to have a sit down talk with Dylan regardless. Apparently Dylan had a different game plan, evidenced by Mark's sensitive comment that "We didn't even eat in...".

So, why no reference of Mark talking to Dylan, while they ate on the way home. You know, that 45 minute drive Mark told us about? The same 45 minute drive with spotty cell phone service, meaning Dylan would not have been able to text all the time and avoid Mark. Why was the sit-down talk so pressing around 7:30, but not from 7:45 to around 10:30 (when Mark supposedly went up to bed)? Why didn't Mark have the all-important sit down when they got home, as opposed to watching a movie?

The McDonald's disagreement/argument, plus taking the food to go, plus Dylan's open and repeated texting, tell us Dylan and Mark weren't getting along. So, what magically changed by the time they got home 8:15-8:30, that Dylan was willing to sit and watch a movie, someplace he didn't want to be and with somebody he didn't want to be with? A more believable scenario would have had Dylan immediately going straight to his room and texting friends or "going to bed". I'd be surprised if Dylan made it conscious/alive to Mark's house. Just my opinions.

drdebo said...

reads like a horror movie....

Christy said...

Pak31- The movie Adventureland stars Kristen Stewart, Jesse Eisenberg & Ryan Reynolds.("In the summer of 1987, a college grad takes a 'nowhere' job at his local amusement park")-
No, I don't think it's such an odd choice for Dylan, but I doubt they watched it - or watched it all the way through.

Sandra Welch said...

The 'sit down', with Dylan: I can't help but feel that Redwine, after two failed marriages may have been in some form of debt. At least two houses, one for the second ex, and his cabin. Travel expenses, child support and alimony all add up. Maybe that was what Redwine wanted to talk to Dylan about. It was not made clear how old all four of the boys are, but Dylan appears to be the only one young enough to still be on child support. Perhaps that meeting with the lawyer the next morning, (all ready scheduled) was in reference to child support and alimony. Many divorces, the spouse with the children stay in the primary residence. After the children are of age of majority, then often the home is sold. If Redwine sought custody of Dylan, then the home could be sold. A major expense off of Redwines shoulders. When the appointment was scheduled with the lawyer, it was done before Dylan arrived.
This case reeks of likeness to John Skelton, in Michigan. His sons disappeared over Thanksgiving holidays too. If you take the time to listen to Skelton's interviews with news reporters, every thing is someone elses fault.
Redwine has two ex wives. Dylan's mother commented on Dr. Phil, "I know you. I was married to you for a long time." Something went wrong somewhere in both marriages. I can not help but wonder if Redwines self focused behavior had alot to do with the divorces.
He was offered a second polygraph test. Meaning, he has had at least one before then. So, knowing the procedures are the same, he would have known that the questions "Do you feel well enough to take this test?" and "Have you taken any drugs or consumed alcohol?" would have come up. He knew this in advance. He knew he could not take the test if he had drugs or alcohol in his system, so he drank half a bottle of Jim Beam. He could have accomplished two major goals, if he had taken and passed the polygraph exam. First, he could have cleared his own name. Second, he could have cleared up his exwifes questions about his involvement in Dylan's disappearance. He doesn't want to clear the air. As long as he doesn't answer the questions, he is still holding his ex wife hostage. Leaving her wondering, worrying, and hoping. Just like John Skelton.