Update: Additional Analysis by Analyst, Karayn Gough
Did Dylan Redwine leave his father's home while alive?
Mark Redwine did not go public in the early days following Dylan's disappearance.
He did not call out to his son.
He did not attempt to negotiate with any kidnappers.
He did not seek to convince Dylan to come home.
He has finally spoken out and we can know the reason why he was silent for so long. He is withholding information about what took place between himself and his son prior to him leaving the home.
Statement Analysis
Statement Analysis is the scientific process by which truth and deception are discerned in language.
For those new here, there are many articles which explain the process to which statements are subjected for analysis. In this case, we will focus upon a few principles.
1. The reason why. "So, since, therefore, because, to..." and so on, as it shows a need to explain why, rather than simply report what happened.
2. The leaving of a place. "Left." When the word "left" is used as a connecting verb between places, it indicates missing information. The subject, himself, is back at the place of "leaving" or "departing" in his mind, even while attempting to move the statement forward. This is a very strong indicator that the subject is thinking of what happened at the point of leaving, but is deliberately withholding the information.
As transcribed by a commentator, Statement Analysis is in bold type. Please see previous analysis, particularly about the regret Mark Redwine expressed while Dylan was laying on the couch.
Reporter: OK. So, thank you so much for speaking with me on camera, Mark.
Mark: You're welcome.
Mark: You're welcome.
R: What's it been like?
M: Well, it's been a tough time for all of us. I know it's been difficult on me and I can only imagine how it's been for his mom and his brother and his family over in the Colorado Springs area. And we're doing everything we can to try and find Dylan and keep the focus on finding Dylan. And you know, I've been working with the investigators and to make sure all the bases are being covered on that end. And that's pretty much where I'm at with that. I mean I'm doing everything I know how to do.
Follow the pronouns.
1. "It's been a tough time on all of us", without telling who "us" is. He is estranged from his ex wife and later described himself as being alone.
2. "I know" is weak, as it is needless. "I know its been difficult on me" Notice the change of language from "tough time" for "us" to "difficult" not for me, but "on" me.
3. Note: "we're doing everything..." as he is alone.
4. Note the word "with" between people indicates distance. He and investigators are distant. There is no "we" between them.
5. Note that he is doing what he "can" and states his purpose:
"to make sure all the bases are covered"
Why would he feel the investigators are not covering all the bases?
R: I want to get this subject out of the way first. There's a lot of suspicion out there, even when Elaine went on ABC news...
M: Right.
R: She was... can you address that?
Innocent people generally do not accept possible or potential guilt. When confronted with it, there is no "peace" between the thought that the innocent person is responsible and the accuser. It is expected that here he will say "I did not cause Dylan's disappearance" or something similar:
M: Um, well I can only imagine being the mother and the frustration of hearing about your son going missing. And you know, I can only think that has to do with lashing out and trying to find who is accountable for this in this situation. I've been working closely with the investigators to do what needed to be done because you know, he was last seen at my house. And there's rumors going around that he's been spotted by people. You know, our concern is that something has happened to the point now where we just want to keep in the public's eye, you know Dylan's face, keep the focus on Dylan. And you know, don't worry about me and everything's going to be alright on my end. But I know this is a troubling time for Elaine and my son Cory, I spoke with him last night and I'm surprised we were able to hook up today because one of the things we're trying to do is unite together. And I have my oldest son from the Phoenix area here and of course my brother is here. And we're trying to unite as a family and stay focused on what's important here. And you know everybody wants to focus on me but the focus isn't me right now. The focus is finding Dylan and that's where I'm at.
Note that he makes peace with the suspicion. This is not expected.
Note that he can only "imagine" but then changes to he can only "think".
Note the word "with" between people indicating distance. He uses it again here with the investigators. He knows that there is distance between them and himself.
The topic of "unite" is very sensitive. It is not only repeated but it is "unite together", which is needless. Note the word "because" in this matter as highly sensitive and in need of explanation.
The "focus on me" is a very sensitive topic to him.
It is here that we do not find him making a reliable denial.
R: Why do you think people want to focus on you?
M: Well, because I think that's a natural part of the process and because you know, he was last seen with me and he was with me the night before. And you know, I saw him in the morning before I left to go run my errands. You know, that's the logical place to start. And so, it doesn't at all surprise me, you know that they searched my home yesterday because quite frankly, I was expecting that to happen a week ago. So, you know my opinion is that we're all a week late and in where were at with this. So my focus is what do we need to be doing now to keep searching for Dylan and bring him home.
Please carefully note the use of the word "with" between himself and Dylan. This is not only a signal of distancing language, but the context should be noted:
it is when Dylan was last seen.
Q. By whom was Dylan last seen?
A. By Mark Redwine
R: Do you have anything directly to say to Dylan?
M: Dylan, my prayers are with you and I love you very much. He was the light of my life and he meant everything to me. And I just want him home just like everybody else does. And that's why we've got to keep searching for him. Because somebody knows something. We've got to find him and we need to know he's okay.
Here we see distance between prayers and Dylan and the past tense reference to Dylan indicating belief or knowledge of Dylan's death.
R: This is you guys' platform today. You can use this to get out any message you want.
M: Well, I don't want the focus to be mainly on me. I want the focus to be mainly on Dylan because that's where, that's the most important thing right now.
We always note that which is reported in the negative as very important. This is where the subject chose to begin his "message" as he was told he could get "any message" he wanted out. This is what he states upfront and is most important to him.
Note "mainly" indicates other focuses. This is repeated.
Note that it is very sensitive to him as he feels the need to explain why the focus should be on a missing child.
Why would the parent of a missing child feel the need to explain why the focus should be on the missing child?
And you know, if the process of what's going on with the authorities and the people handling this is to search my home, all the had to do was ask. I would have willingly let them come in. I've given them, I've cooperated with them in every way. Anything they've asked me for, I've been willing to do. Anything they suggested I do, whether it be sitting at the house waiting for the phones to ring or Dylan to walk through the front door, I'm willing to do whatever I need to do. And that's what I want everyone to understand is that, you know my focus is on Dylan and what's going on with him and trying to keep the investigation moving forward in whatever necessary means that is. So, you know in cooperating with them and we can you know, keep the focus on the search for Dylan. And that's where I'm at with all of this.
R: So you went to run errands. Were you going to take him with you to run errands?
Mark Redwine's answer, first in its entirety, and then broken down for analysis. This is where critical analysis exists.
M: 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 that he had been communicating with. As he had indicated to me he had been up until 4 o'clock in the morning the night before, he was tired from being in the airport most of the day in his travel from Colorado Springs to Durango. I laughed at him kind of jokingly because I know him. If he ain't got to get up, he's not likely to get up.
And he's not the type of kid who's going to get up at 6:30 if he doesn't have to.
But you know, his friends are important and I know they're important me.
So there was a possibility but it doesn't surprise me he elected to not get up when I left. And when I left, he acknowledged everything I was saying to him and that I would be back.
He knew when I came back that I would be working on getting him down to his friends. And that's part of the struggle we all have, you know, what happened to him between the time I left and when I got back. And that's what nobody seems to be able to answer.
M: 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 that he had been communicating with.
1. "there was some discussion."
Note the passive language of "there was some discussion" rather than report what was said. Passivity in language is used to conceal. It is likely that father and son had an argument the night before. Note the distancing language found in the use of the word "with" regarding that night.
When communicative language is passive, the concealment is often due to an argument or fight. Whatever it is, the subject does not want it known.
2. "with me" is distancing language. We can say things like, "we went to the store" or "Bob and I went to the store" but when one says "I went to the store with Bob" we note the word "with" between them, indicating distance.
Note that "with me" is used twice. He is distancing himself from Dylan regarding this timer period. Twice, so close together, is acute.
3. "so" explains the reason why.
4. "or" He says "trying to text him or that he had been communicating with" allows for one or the other.
As he had indicated to me he had been up until 4 o'clock in the morning the night before,
He only "indicated" to Mark Redwine; Dylan did not "say" he was up until 4 o'clock in the morning. Dylan did not say he was up until 4. There is no speech nor quotes from Dylan at this point.
This is very concerning.
How was this "indicated"?
Dylan has no voice here.
he was tired from being in the airport most of the day in his travel from Colorado Springs to Durango. I laughed at him kind of jokingly because I know him.
Redwine feels the need to explain why he "laughed" at his son. This laughing was "kind of" jokingly.
Note that he laughed "at his son" and not "with" his son. The laughing was only "kind of" jokingly, making it serious.
This was likely a very bad argument in which the father held the son in contempt, laughing at him.
If he ain't got to get up, he's not likely to get up.
He does not say that he stayed asleep. We must note what he says and what he does not say. This statement may be truthful, but it may be that Dylan was deceased at this time.
Dylan was not able to get up here. This is generalization, not specific, meaning that Mark Redwine is avoiding specifically anything Dylan said or did at this time.
It is similar to:
Q. Did you smoke pot last Wednesday while on shift?
A. I am one who doesn't smoke pot much.
The answer avoids the issue and goes to a generalization.
And he's not the type of kid who's going to get up at 6:30 if he doesn't have to.
Here we find the generalization and not what specifically happened. This, along with the other indicators, suggest that Dylan was not able to get up, nor able to speak at this time in the statement.
Mark Redwine has used the language of Domestic Violence and control. He is not someone who is not going to wake his son up if he wanted him up. This is why he avoids saying "I tried to wake him up" instead uses a "general" theme of what Dylan was like, in general terms.
But you know, his friends are important and I know they're important me.
The word "but" is to refute that which was previously stated. Here, what is he refuting? The notion that Dylan was asleep?
If he is going to attempt to portray Dylan as asleep, only to rebut this, we will not argue with him.
So there was a possibility but it doesn't surprise me he elected to not get up when I left. And when I left, he acknowledged everything I was saying to him and that I would be back.
Note that there was only a "possibility" that he "elected" not to get up. This means that Mark Redwine knows that there were other "possibilities" why Dylan did not get up, but does not want to share them. It is the time frame, however, that jumps out at us.
Here we come to the critical part of Mark Redwine's story. This is the "cluster of blues" taught by LSI that shows the hyper sensitive part of the story where critical information has been removed.
Note that Dylan no longer speaks. He is no longer quoted at this point in the account. It is as if Dylan no longer has a voice. He can "indicate" and he can "acknowledge" but he cannot "speak."
Was Dylan Redwine dead at this point?
He knew when I came back that I would be working on getting him down to his friends. And that's part of the struggle we all have, you know, what happened to him between the time I left and when I got back. And that's what nobody seems to be able to answer.
There was a "struggle"between father and son. Dylan lost.
Dylan "knew" early on, but is still not quoted.
When Mark Redwine "left" is specifically where the missing information exists.
Nobody "seems" to be able to answer. This is true, but it only "seems" to be this way. If Mark Redwine can answer the question, it would explain why it only "seems" that nobody can answer.
Mark Redwine can answer the question of what happened to Dylan between the time he left and the time he got back.
People do not like to lie as it causes internal stress. Here it only "seems" that nobody can answer, as it appears to the public, but he adds in this word, "seems" because of the stress that comes from lying: he avoids making a direct lie.
R: Can you tell me about your plans for Thanksgiving?
versus an angry confrontation with his son. Mark Redwine is unable to control his animosity towards his ex wife and investigators will seek to learn if he killed Dylan to hurt his ex, or if Dylan died due to an unplanned or unintended consequence from the "struggle."
M: Well, because he was with me for such a short period of time, we had touched on a few things. One of the things was we talked about going to my brother David's house in Castle Rock. Um, I know his friends were important to him so we were wanting to make sure he had adequate time with his friends. Um, you know basically the plan was Monday and Tuesday he would spend with his friends. Maybe Wednesday, you know we had talked a little bit about going bowling or doing something as an activity, not with just me and him, his friends included. Then we would have Thanksgiving day to ourselves. Or there was a possibility we would travel and get to my brother's house. So, you know, none of that ever got finalized. I mean, we were just focusing on the next day and what we were going to do and how that was going to take place. That's as far as we really ever got. You know, his friends are important to him and I certainly don't expect him to spend a whole week with me when he's got, he's grown up in this community and he's got tons of people who love and care about him.
This is a very lengthy explanation as to why he did not have concrete plans. He even leaves himself open with "or" plans, so that he can change his account. There is a constant repetition about his "friends", showing high sensitivity to Redwine.
Note the change of language from "touched on" to "talked" about.
R: So he was going to spend a whole week with you. When was the last time he saw you?
Note the change of language from "touched on" to "talked" about.
R: So he was going to spend a whole week with you. When was the last time he saw you?
The question is when was the last time Dylan saw Mark; not the last time Mark saw his son. This reveals the thinking of the interviewer.
M: Um, I think probably sometime in early September, I had flown him over from Colorado Springs on a round trip ticket on that point so he came over here and probably spent three or four days with me and that. And then you know, we obviously got him back to the plane and got him back safely to his mom. And you know, in that case it was a transfer flight from the Durango airport or Denver airport leaving to Colorado Springs. And it was my goal to keep him on a direct flight or one that he never had to change planes on with because there was some controversy between mom and I about him being thirteen years old and being able to do those kinds of things. And so, you know, when I got the flight for him I made sure it was flight he could get on in Colorado.
M: Um, I think probably sometime in early September, I had flown him over from Colorado Springs on a round trip ticket on that point so he came over here and probably spent three or four days with me and that. And then you know, we obviously got him back to the plane and got him back safely to his mom. And you know, in that case it was a transfer flight from the Durango airport or Denver airport leaving to Colorado Springs. And it was my goal to keep him on a direct flight or one that he never had to change planes on with because there was some controversy between mom and I about him being thirteen years old and being able to do those kinds of things. And so, you know, when I got the flight for him I made sure it was flight he could get on in Colorado.
On the last visit, "we" got him back, we got him back "safely" to his mother.
This time, he did not.
"He was having no part of it. You can't get him to bed and you can't get him up. "
"Never heard from him. I sent him text messages. Hey dude, are you up yet? Call me. Is there anything you need?"
****************************************************************************
Regarding waking Dylan up:
"He was having no part of it. You can't get him to bed and you can't get him up. "
Note the passivity in the language. He did not say "I could not wake him up", but "you", which is distancing language. The passivity conceals information.
He did not say Dylan was asleep here. Note the distancing language of "you" and not "I"
It is hard to believe that Mark Redwine could not wake up his son, unless his son was dead.
"Never heard from him. I sent him text messages. Hey dude, are you up yet? Call me. Is there anything you need?"
Alibi building noted.
Note that the dropped pronoun means no commitment. Yet, the pronoun, "I" returns immediately. When he said, "I sent him text messages" he told the truth and this is something police can verify.
"Never heard from him" is also true, but this is likely because Dylan was deceased. He sent specific messages in which he even quoted himself as he was alibi building: 'I was sending messages because I thought he was alive' type.
The constant use of "friends" by someone who only saw his son a few times a year is sensitive.
It appears to be part of the contention. It appears that Dylan did not want to spend Thanksgiving with his father, but with his friends. This is a sensitive issue to Mark Redwine and likely a source of anger.
From Kaaryn Gough:
...he was with me the night before. And you know, I saw him in the morning before I left to go run my errands.
Change in language: he was with me applies only to the night before. But in the morning, he onlysaw him. The father no longer considered his son to be "with him" in the morning.
The constant use of "friends" by someone who only saw his son a few times a year is sensitive.
It appears to be part of the contention. It appears that Dylan did not want to spend Thanksgiving with his father, but with his friends. This is a sensitive issue to Mark Redwine and likely a source of anger.
From Kaaryn Gough:
...he was with me the night before. And you know, I saw him in the morning before I left to go run my errands.
Change in language: he was with me applies only to the night before. But in the morning, he onlysaw him. The father no longer considered his son to be "with him" in the morning.
****************************************************************************
Who is the "we" Mark Redwine so often references? This is likely an attempt to share guilt.
Analysis conclusion:
Mark Redwine is deceptively withholding information about what happened between himself and Dylan just prior to Mark Redwine's leaving of the home.
0 comments:
Post a Comment