Monday, March 4, 2013

Elaine Redwine on Crime Wire Tuesday 7PM EST


Crime Wire: Host Peter Hyatt Talks to Mother of Missing

 Dylan Redwine

Crime Wire, Dennis Griffin,Peter Hyatt,ImaginePublicity

You can hear Crime Wire Investigates Tuesdays at 7 p.m. Eastern.

Please visit our Crime Wire Website for more discussion in the Forum section.

Together we can make a difference.

To LISTEN LIVE or to the Podcast:   CLICK HERE

Peter Hyatt, Crime Wire, Dylan Redwine, Elaine Redwine
13 year old Dylan Redwine has been missing from Vallecito, Colorado since spending the Thanksgiving holiday with his father, Mark Redwine. It’s reported that Dylan’s family life was tumultuous and his mother and father had not spoken in several years.
As often happens in cases of missing children from broken homes, there tends to be blame cast on one parent or another. Mark and Elaine Redwine appeared on the Dr. Phil Show and faced each other for the first time in years. It wasn’t a happy reunion. In spite of the fact that their 13 year old son is missing, family drama is played out on national television when Dr. Phil offered Mark Redwine the opportunity to take a polygraph and clear his name. Mark Redwine had quite a few difficulties and stopped the polygraph.
dylan-redwine
“I do believe that Mark had something to do with Dylan’s disappearance. I do believe he knows more,” Elaine Redwine said.
Elaine and Mark Redwine came face-to-face for the first time since their son went missing. She and other family members believe Mark Redwine knows more than he is letting on and that he is not doing anything to help find Dylan….Our Colorado News.
Peter Hyatt and Statement Analyst and Private Investigator Kaaryn Gough will talk to Dylan Redwine’s mother, Elaine, and try to answer some of the questions surrounding her missing son.
  • Did Mark Redwine have anything to do with his son’s disappearance?
  • Is Mark Redwine being deceptive according to statement analysis?
  • Why does Elaine Redwine believe her ex-husband knows where Dylan is?
  • What does statement analysis say is deceptive in Mark Redwine’s conversations?
  • What is going on in the family dynamic that may be hindering the investigation?
To read details about missing Dylan Redwine, the investigation, and the analysis of those close to the case, refer to Peter Hyatt’s site, Statement Analysis.

Crime Wire: Host Peter Hyatt Talks to Mother of Missing

 Dylan Redwine

34 comments:

john said...

I'm looking forward to this.

Peter,

While you'r talking to E/R will you also be listening to what language she use's,and what will happen if your find her being deceptive in her choice of word's and or statements.?

Intrigued.

Thank's

VLW said...

I'm in!

Hobnob said...

me too

MeagIn Manhattan said...

Hi Peter ~ I am really looking forward to the show tonight!!!

Most Sincerely,
Meag

Sus said...

OT
Hobs and John,
Maybe you could send your Batman our way. We need him here.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/04/17179754-batman-drops-off-suspect-at-police-station-vanishes-into-night?lite&ocid=usc

john said...

Sus.

He is a star isn't he..lol

BostonLady said...

I'm going to try to zip home from the office so I can take part in the discussion and hear Peter LIVE!!

john said...

OT.This is disgraceful.

Woman Dies After Nurse Refuses To Perform CPR

An elderly woman is dead after nurses, citing policy, refuse a 911 operator's urgent pleas for someone to perform CPR.6:09pm UK, Monday 04 March 2013

Video: 911 Operator's Urgent CPR Pleas

By Sky News US Team, in New York
A California retirement home has defended one of its nurses who refused pleas by a 911 operator to perform CPR on an elderly woman who later died, saying the nurse was following policy.

"Is there anybody that's willing to help this lady and not let her die," dispatcher Tracey Halvorson says on a 911 tape released by the Bakersfield Fire Department.

"Not at this time," said the nurse, who didn't give her full name and said facility policy prevented her from giving the woman medical help.

At the beginning of the Tuesday morning call, the nurse asked for paramedics to come and help the 87-year-old woman who had collapsed in the home's dining room and was barely breathing.

Ms Halvorson pleads for the nurse to perform CPR, and after several refusals she starts pleading for her to find a resident, or a gardener, or anyone not employed by the home to get on the phone, take her instructions and help the woman.

"Can we flag someone down in the street and get them to help this lady?" she says on the call. "Can we flag a stranger down? I bet a stranger would help her."

The woman was later declared dead at Mercy Southwest Hospital, officials said.

The executive director of Glenwood Gardens, Jeffrey Toomer, defended the nurse's actions, saying she did indeed follow policy.

He said in a statement: "In the event of a health emergency at this independent living community our practise is to immediately call emergency medical personnel for assistance and to wait with the individual needing attention until such personnel arrives.

"That is the protocol we followed."

Mr Toomer offered condolences to the woman's family and said a "thorough internal review" of the incident would be conducted.

He told KGET-TV that residents of the home's independent living community are informed of the policy and agree to it when they move in. He said the policy does not apply at the adjacent assisted living and skilled nursing facilities.http://news.sky.com/story/1059967/woman-dies-after-nurse-refuses-to-perform-cpr

Anonymous said...

OT: Jodi Arias trial live now

http://www.cayleedaily.com/2013/03/watch-the-jodi-arias-trial-live-here-%E2%80%93-jodi-testifies-takes-the-stand-updates/

Layla said...

That is great you are having her on the show!
I have been looking at the 39 min interview of Mark (I know I mentioned this on other thread and Karyn has looked at it also and gained and shared lots of insight.)
I am going to look at it further but for now this is what I notice:

Mark switches at around 3 min. from using 100 percent past tense to using the present tense WHEN HE BEGINS TALKING ABOUT HIS EFFORTS TO COMMUNICATE WITH DYLAN IN GENERAL AS A FATHER WHO DOES NOT LIVE WITH DYLAN including texting, etc. He speaks of his efforts to communicate in present tense. It seems another marker which marks this change from past to present is a criticism of Dylan's ENVIRONMENT as not being conducive to Mark effectively communicating with Dylan.
What is implied in Mark's speech is that Mark enters the "present" when thinking and speaking about "attempting to communicate" with Dylan. He also enters the "present" when speaking of a change in Dylan's environment (he reverts briefly to past tense to explain that "Dylan's environment WAS NOT conducive" (to effective communication between him and Dylan).
Flowing right along with the present tense, Mark refers to actions that (we assume occurred in the past however he speaks of them in the present) involve "keeping tabs on Dylan" using such phrases as "I monitor him" "I pop in on him" "it is just me and him". He also points out that "other people are not popping in and out of his life"--"it is just me and him".
These ideas circle back around to the ideas he introduced at the very beginning of the interview when he speaks of his and Dylan's close bond and criticizes Elaine for working and not bonding enough with Dylan. He also introduces this as THE PROBLEM between him and Elaine--that Mark bonded more with Dylan while Elaine did not. (This is all what is going on in his mind--I do not agree with it as I feel he is an abuser.)
So, I don't know what this means, but I feel it is important. Mark switches into present tense
1) when speaking of his efforts to communicate through phone with Dylan 2) when there is an implied change in Dylan's "environment" from his mother's house (since he is obviously no longer there) and continues flowing along in the present when he is talking about his efforts "to monitor" Dylan at times when he leaves the father's house to see friends, etc.
My opinion is that this train of thought indicates some kind of premeditation.
If you listen to his speech he tells us THE PROBLEM in his marriage was he bonded more with Dylan and this was problematic for Elaine.
The next problem was "his environment" was not conducive to effective communications (the continuing bond between Mark and Dylan).
According to Mark's speech, the PRESENT is a time when this barrier has been removed, Dylan is no longer in that environment and Mark describes a scenario where he "monitors" Dylan, "keeping tabs" on him, "I (Mark) likes to know where he is--that's important to me".
Sorry this might be useless jibberish, but the change from PAST to PRESENT really jumped out at me.

Hobnob said...

The staff followed the rules which were agreed to by the residents DNR means what it says. If they did commence CPR and she survived they would promptly be sued by the woman or her family for breaching the DNR.
The were in a no win situation, they have problems because they didn't try to CPR and they would have had problems if they had.
they would have made her confortable until the paramedics arrived.

Many may not agree with what was done, i do.
It was her wishes and the home followed them. If she or her family had wanted her to be revived they would have chosen another facility.
She was 87 which is a good age, we don't know what health issues she had and if CPR would have been a viable and kind option or if her health was such that DNR was the kindest option.

With my mom after her first stroke i did a DNR for hr, her health to begin with was dire, decades of smoking caused all sorts of issues. I knew if they did CPR and she survived she would be a cabbage in a shell reliant on someone for everything, no dignity no nothing. I knew she wasn't coming out of hospital alive, as her carer i would never have been able to cope being raspberry rippled myself. When they called to say she had had a 2nd stroke i reiterated the DNR on the phone and directly to the doctor as soon as i got there. We made sure she was comfy, calls had gone out to the rellies so they would hopefully get a chance to say bye before she died. We were lucky, she hung on so all could say their farewells, we reminiced, laughed got tossed off the ward for laughing by a snotty nurse, it was made clear that A) this is how our family deals with death (nurses and undertaker) and B) the other patients with her loved hearing the tales of her escapades. As her time came closer we moved her to a side ward and talked to her till she died. the snotty nurse asked to be allowed to say bye and we said yes please do, you helped look after her (when others might have said no)

Sometimes we have to be cruel to be kind, we don't want to lose our loved ones and will often fight , even through the courts to keep them alive at all costs when the kindest thing and most humane is to let them slip away.

I have made it known that should i become incapacitated there is a DNR in place.

Hobnob said...

No you can't have our Batman, he stayed out past his playtime and is now grounded for the day and has lost his tights privileges.

Pam said...

It makes sense in a sick way. If MR is the only person that knows where Dylan is (present time) he will speak in the present about "keeping tabs" on Dylan. If MR killed Dylan and hid his body, it would be important for MR to know where Dylan is.

Sarah said...

I live in Melbourne Australia and have been following Dylans case from the beginning. I'm trying to work out what time this will be on in my time. I really would like to listen. My heart went out to Elaine on Dr Phil. Thanks. I am posting this at 8.10am Tues 5th. Thanks. Time zones confuse me.

Apple said...

Sarah,
You are 16 hours ahead of Peter's time zone. It would be 11am Wednesday for you. I think :)

Anonymous said...

This man is an alcoholic and is incapable of answering pointed questions. There is mention the mother may be, too.

An issue of her working comes up. Then the father questions her ability to be a good mother if she thinks he would have harmed their son. It seems as if he is angry because she isn't his "mother."

She has avoided him at all costs it seems as he didn't even know where she worked. Was he stalking? Did he know where they lived?

Then he does the same when the child is missing by blocking her calls. It's like he has the game piece now and it's his turn to use it to his advantage.

A lot of petty squabbling that has involved the police over the years in their rocky marriage. He says she drinks. Everyone knows he does.

He always,always lies! (If this is true could he ever pass a polygraph?)

I see no reason for the postal woman to lie. I think this child is alive and is either with someone whom he has convinced the mother is a bad person and should shelter the boy or someone the brother has made arrangements with to keep his brother from the non-stop squabbling and a justice system that isn't benefiting a pre-teen.

They know each others games and play them accordingly.

If it is someone known to the father then more than likely it is a woman with a son that lives in another state he met while on the road or a family member that doesn't like his ex.

If it was an attorney for either party then that would explain a timed siting by the postal worker when he could have been walking much earlier in the day.

If it was the kncukleheaded judge that ordered the visitation in spite of the boy's wishes, then perhaps checking state and federal orphanges would be a good start.Might explain the double trouble and the Hispanic influence.

Sarah said...

Apple, thank you. I will definately be listening. Dylan has touched my life.

Hobnob said...

Anon March 4, 2013 at 4:18 PM
Your comments don't explain his usage of past tense when relating to Dylan, his use of distancing words such as THAT. The fact cadaver dogs were going nuts by the lake, his refusal to take a poly given that he knows he is the suspect in the homicide of Dylan.

Nothing he has said or done indicates Dylan is alive.
His own words tell us Dylan stopped talking when he uses words such as indicated rarther than said or replied.

I suspect if they searched his vehicle with dogs and luminol they would find traces of blood.
Given he is an alcoholic, there is no way he could foresnsically clean his vehicle or his clothes. If Dylan made it home then there will be traces in the house, blood gets everywhere and can never be fully cleaned up.
If, as i suspect, mark used his fists then there will be blood high on the walls and even the ceiling.
The first strike is always free, the subsequent ones are the ones that cause the spray.

Mark is an abuser, he always has been and always will be, he thinks with his fists and when in a drunken rage he will instinctively lash out first and regret it later.

He tells us he spent almost an hour trying to wake Dylan, this isn't the natural sleep of a teenager, they will react and respond and maybe go back to sleep.
We know Dylan didn't want to be anywhre nearmark, he had gone so far as to arrange to meet his friend the night he arrived.
Refusing to wake up given what we know is not the truth.
If anything he would have been packed and ready to go as soon as he heard mark up and about, Dylan wanted out the house and fast, even to texting and making sure 6:30 am was ok and he would keep calling till they let him in. I will go so far as to say Dylan didn't wake up as he was dead, mark probably tried some form of CPR before realising it was way too late and then having to move his body.
If Dylan made it to the house and died there at some point cadaverine is produced in sufficient quantities to be detected by a trained dog after approx 90 mins (depending on environmental conditions)in which case they will react in the house and the vehicle used to remove him. it will also taint anything that came into contact with his body such as clothes, tools etc. If he didn't make it home and die in the truck there may be no cadaverine (depending on distance to travel and getting organised to dump his body), there may however be blood and other bodily fluids.

The lake is sensitive to mark as is the fishing pole, does mark have a favorite fishing spot or place he likes to park up at? does he have access to a watercraft? Dylan will have left traces of himself wherever he went by however means, everywhere we go we take something away with us and leave something of ourselves behind.

Mark has nothing to lose, it is game over for him, my concern is that he will self harm just to make sure Elaine never gets Dylan's remains back. The location of Dylan is the only thing he has left to control and hold power over Elaine, if Dylan is found he has nothing over her, as long as he isn't, then, he will use the knowledge to torture Elaine.

Layla said...

I fear the worst for Dylan, but if I could ask Mark one question it would be does he have any type of survivalist interests such as stockpiling food or other items such as that.

I watched through the whole 39 min interview and here are some points I think worth mentioning found in Mark's speech:

1) Mark feels he bonded with Dylan more than Elaine and feels this was problematic to Elaine.

2) Mark feels that Dylan's ENVIRONMENT was not conducive to communicating with Dylan (once father was not living at home).

3) Mark emphasizes his present-tense "monitoring" of Dylan's whereabouts and also who he is with. ( He also mentions his difficulties "monitoring" the media).

4) Mark minimizes the significance of Dylan's missing backpack.

5) Mark sentimentalizes both "driving far for Dylan" and "going with Dylan to places (baseball stadiums) that are THE MOST DIFFICULT to get to.

6) Mark speaks, I feel, an inordinate amount of time, about "feeding Dylan". ie. "the pizza he "woofs down", McDonald's versus sit-down (they ate in the truck), supplies bought for Dylan's stay (goes into a lot of detail about the dynamics of getting supplies/food since house is rural), snacks, Thanksgiving dinner plans (although he was asked about that), mentions "clearing table".

7) Marks brings up "communication" again towards the end when the reporter asks him what he would like to say to Dylan. It is phrased as a kind of reprimand--he tells Dylan to "communicate" with someone.

8) Heavy emphasis from Mark on the dynamics of communicating with Dylan (mostly if not entirely negative) and reflections on Dylan communicating with others. Heavy emphasis on "the tabs" he keeps on Dylan--monitoring his whereabouts and who he is with.

Jen said...

Hi Anon 4:18

I'm not sure if I understand the last part of your comment when you talk about the attorneys, the judge, orphanages, double trouble and the 'Hispanic influence?

Are you saying that the attorneys or judge may have kid-napped Dylan and put him in an orphanage? Please remember that Dylan was 13 when he went 'missing' and would be 14 now. If he was ANYWHERE alive, it would be very hard to contain him for long against his will.

Statement Analysis has shown Mark Redwine to be deceptively withholding information and guilty knowledge of Dylan's death. He is probably the best example of a 'guilty parent' in a missing child case since the likes of Casey Anthony or Justin DiPeitro. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but jumping to judges and attorneys as possible captors is going a long way to ignore the more likely scenario that MR is behind this. MR has spoken of Dylan in the past tense and even revealed that he "prays" to Dylan. MR is NOT engaged in the search for Dylan and has not addressed the supposed kidnappers at any point (even when prompted by the reporter, he speaks indirectly in and in general terms what he 'would say', revealing his knowledge that no kidnapper exists)

In his 2hrs on the Dr Phil show MR did not mention Dylan's kidnappers or what Dylan may be going thru..rather he concentrated on Elaine and making accusations toward her. When he was on the hot seat with no conflict to hide behind, and faced having to answer for his own actions on the polygraph...he self-destructed. He has tons of excuses for why he can't participate in, or contribute to the search for Dylan (all someone else's fault). Plus, he twice refused the opportunity to publicly clear his name, which would place the focus back on Dylan (which he claims to be his only concern). MR's words and behavior indicate alcoholism, control, abuse and guilt. All of this, along with the cadaver dog hits at the lake AND the fact that MR was the last known person to be with Dylan, makes it hard to consider any other possibility than him being responsible for Dylan's demise.

Layla said...

How do you listen to the show live? Do you just click where it says to click above and that brings you to being able to listen to the show live?

sella35 said...

@Layla, I think you need to register first, then you click the link

Hobnob said...

The show is on toomorow night (tues)

click on the link to listen in, there will be a chatroom open wehere we can ask and answer questions and have general chitchat etc after the show. You don't need to register to listen in or see what is said in the chatroom though if you wish to comment in the chatroom you will need to register, Most of the regs use their blog name to sign in with as it helps knowing who is whom.

Layla said...

Oh OK thank you sella and Hobnob for the info--I did get confused and thought it was tonight. I appreciate the info bc I definitely do want to listen in tomorrow. Thanks!

SALurker said...

Layla March 4, 2013 at 5:44 PM

"I fear the worst for Dylan, but if I could ask Mark one question it would be does he have any type of survivalist interests such as stockpiling food or other items such as that."

Hi Layla.

I am curious why you wrote the above in your comment??? I'm trying to follow your train of thought.

I find it helpful reading others insights - as it compliments the SA process.

brosnanfan said...

I still think, based on how I interpreted MR's statement on Dr. Phil, that he definitely had everything to do with his son's disappearance.

I think he and Dylan had an argument, in which Dylan stood up to his dad. Bullies can't stand that. I think the argument got physical and MR either killed or seriously injured Dylan. He then laid him on the couch (the basis of MR saying Dylan wouldn't wake up or get up off the couch), found Dylan's fishing pole, wrapped him up in some way, and took him to that reservoir (I don't remember the name now). He could have weighted the body down. Then, either from a bridge or a boat, dumped Dylan in the water (he mentions "struggling"...could this have been struggling with Dylan's body, or dealing with a barely alive but struggling Dylan while trying to dump him in the water), and threw the fishing pole in for good measure.

He could always say that the boy went fishing and fell in.

Lemon said...

I hope for courage and strength for Elaine Redwine. The show will not be easy for her, I admire her commitment to justice for Dylan. I am looking forward to hearing her, as well as Peter and Karen. Like Boston, I'm hoping I can make the chat as well.

To Elaine, we all very much want justice for Dylan, and soon.

Sincerely,
Lemon

Apple said...

Lemon,
Thank you for saying that. Dylan's mom needs answers and she has many people who support her and want Dylan brought home.

susana said...

I am mystified by the comment about the Hispanic influence and also about the question for MR about stockpiling. Relevance?


Jen said...

Hi Susana-

I think the survivalist/stockpiling question is in reference to whether MR could possibly have a stocked bunker or something like that where he could stash Dylan (If I'm wrong I apologize for assuming)

As far as the 'Hispanic influence', orphanages, etc...I'm in the same boat as you??? I wondered if they were possibly confusing some of the Celis case details (which is why I posted an answer with a good bit of detail on this case)or have I totally missed one of Mark's statements where something to do with 'Hispanic influence' was mentioned?

Anon please clarify- it would be great if you can post a link

Layla said...

Hi SA lurker and Susanna--Jen answered your questions right about the stockpiling of food, etc.

This is a question that began gnawing at me while listening to Mark's 39 min interview. It just arose spontaneously in my mind, and I would also be curious to know if Mark knows or is close to someone with survivalist type interests.
I do fear the worst for Dylan, however 2 things have me wondering about the possobility of kidnapping
1). Mark's history of kidnapping (albeit for very short periods of time) children from both of his marriages. 2). Mark's "psychological profile" that emerges: He is someone who is willing to "work" to control (the court battles, his emphasis on "driving far, getting to difficult places that are complicated to get to with Dylan) ; extreme possessiveness towards Dylan; heavy emphasis on the act of monitoring where Dylan is, who he is with, what he is doing; jealousy towards Dylan's friendships; heavy emphasis on failed attempts to communicate with Dylan which is
blamed on his ENVIRONMENT.
It is enough to make me wonder.

ChickenLittle said...

Thank you Layla. I was thinking in those lines after reading what you wrote. But I didn't want to assume.

Sadly, that would be the case scenario for Dylan.

Although I feel it's highly unlikely. I don't see MR as a criminal mastermind able to pull the wool over LE's eyes.

I think LE wants to find Dylan before any arrests are made.

Lemon said...

Mark Redwine, where is Dylan?

Anonymous said...

Hi mates, how is all, and what you desire to say on the topic of this post, in my
view its actually awesome in favor of me.

My web page ... http://www.derechodelaseguridad.com/