Friday, March 1, 2013
Mark Redwine Behavioral Analysis
Dylan hasn't been seen since.
When a child goes missing, Behavioral Analysis kicks in, immediately, observing the behaviors of the parents.
The first thing noticed is the reaction.
I. Crying Out To and For the Missing Child
If you are walking in a mall, holding your child's hand, and your child wanders off, your reaction will be to both look, and if not successful, call out to your child. This is natural, and it is "the expected." Only Cindy Anthony claims that the "expected" is not known. It is known. We know how parents of missing children behave: they attempt to find them.
If a parent went to the mall and the child went missing, we would not expect the parent to continue shopping, get in the car, and drive home, take a nap, and, eventually, call the police. The delay would speak volumes.
Casey Anthony waited 31 days to report Caylee missing, has often been reported. It is not true. She was not "waiting" to make a report. She likely had no intention of making a report but was forced into it by her parents, who later obviously regretted doing so. At the time, Cindy Anthony thought by calling the police she would force Casey to give Caylee to her.
When a parent does not cry out to or for the child, it is similar to losing a child in the mall, but continuing to shop, drive home, and take a nap.
When a child goes missing, police have the expectation, quite naturally, that the parent (s) will go before the camera and speak to the child, and to the child's kidnapper.
When a parent refuses, it is the same as the parent losing the child in the mall, but continuing to shop, just the same. The parent does not want the child found.
Justin DiPietro refused to cry out to Ayla because he knew she was dead, having been responsible for her death. When he did finally speak out, he indicated to us that Ayla was dead.
Sergio Celis, with his wife Becky, also refused, for 5 days, to call out to missing 7 year old Isabel, and only did so under pressure from media. When they spoke, they indicated guilty knowledge of Isabel's death.
When Casey Anthony was pushed into speaking out, we knew that Caylee was dead.
Mark Redwine did not speak out and did not cooperate with the search. When he decided to speak out, we knew just why he had been silent.
Parents of missing children could not be more upset than they are, yet they polygraph. They polygraph quickly because they know that as upset as they are, they will not grow more upset when asked, "Did you cause the disappearance?" By clearing themselves, they cause investigators to focus in areas where success is more likely.
Parents fail polygraphs because they lie.
Justin DiPietro failed his polygraph.
Billie Jean Dunn failed her polygraph, as did Shawn Adkins.
Some refuse to take the polygraph. This is part of behavioral analysis.
Balking at the polygraph is an indication of guilt in Behavioral Analysis.
Failing a polygraph is obvious.
Attempting to "beat" a polygraph is an indication of guilt in Behavioral Analysis.
Mark Redwine agreed to take a polygraph, only to sabotage it by drinking alcohol, so he could then blame the polygrapher about not feeling "good" enough to take the test.
He said, "we're going to take it" even though he was alone. This was a verbal indication that he was not going to take the polygraph. There was no "we" in his taking of a polygraph and pronouns do not lie, nor make mistakes: deception indicated.
II. The Past Tense Reference
When a parent of a missing child references, even once, the child in the past tense, it can indicate belief or knowledge that the child is dead. This has been highlighted in cases recently, as going against the Solomonic wisdom of a natural parental instinct.
We recently saw this erroneously applied when a psychotherapist appeared on the Nancy Grace Show and said that the parent used "the present tense verb" in describing the missing child "proving" that the parent had nothing to do with it. (She was wrong). The deceptive parent will speak in the present tense while attempting to deceive, but 'slip up' by accident. Casey Anthony said, "Caylee loved the park. Caylee loves the park", correcting herself. The psychotherapist on the NG Show misread the principle and actually played into the hands of the deceiver.
Did the police give the parent reason to believe the child is dead?
Does circumstances rob the parent of natural denial, leading the parent into believing the child is dead?
How early in the case did the parent slip into past tense language?
When the police have given no indication that the child is dead, and it is early in the search, a single slip into past tense language can indicate belief or knowledge, from the parent, who is expected to have natural denial, instinctively, giving hope, that the child is dead.
We have seen this in cases where the parent was suspected in killing the child:
a. Billie Jean Dunn
b. Sergio Celis
c. Susan Smith
d. Casey Anthony
e. Deborah Bradley (Baby Lisa)
III. The Statements
Once a parent is identified as having knowledge or belief that the child is dead, and there are no circumstances leading the parent in this manner, and the parent has been indicated for deception, we then move on to the language employed in deception, for a basis of what has happened to the child.
For example, Justin DiPietro used the phrase "floating out there", possibly indicating that Baby Ayla was dumped in water.
Mark Redwine used phrases such as "beaten up" and "digging" to cause us also to wonder why he is employing such phrases.
This is where the work is done.
"In my heart, I know she's close" said Casey Anthony. True enough, she was less than a half-mile from the home, dumped where Casey had previously buried pets.
Where is Dylan Redwine?
Statement Analysis is now being done on the statements of Mark Redwine, in order to gain insight into where Dylan may be.
Stay tuned for more analysis...
We will also help Elaine Redwine keep Dylan's name in the public eye, and listen carefully to any descriptions Mark Redwine has given.