Dylan Redwine Story on Dr. Phil
Yesterday, Dr. Phil spent the last 15 minutes of his show talking with Elaine Redwine, mother of Dylan, 14, who missing on November 9, 2012.
Dylan’s parents were divorced and Dylan flew in to spent some time with his dad. On the day after his arrival, Mark, Dylan’s father said his son wouldn’t get up in the morning, so he went to run errands without him. When he came back, Dylan was missing.
Dylan’s remains were found in June 2013 on a mountain side 10 miles drive from Mark Redwine’s house, and according to reports only 2% of his remains were actually found.
Dr. Phil had Mark and Elaine Redwine on before, and I have seen both parents in multiple interviews. The last time Mark was on Dr. Phil he agreed to take a polygraph and then admitted to heavy drinking the night before the test, which if I remember right disqualified him for the test. And now, this time, Dr. Phil offered for him to take a lie detector again, and he refused. This does not concern me at all. Mark is not the type of guy who functions well under pressure. Furthermore, he talks about a polygraph he took prior to this one, and I can’t help but wonder if it came out inconclusive, and hence why Mark has fears. I would have fears too if I took a polygraph and it couldn’t tell if I was truthful when I was. I absolutely wouldn’t take another one. Why on earth would anyone take that risk on something that isn’t even scientific?
I do not see any hotspots in Mark’s behavior that indicate to me that he is being deceptive about his son’s disappearance in this interview. The police have been to Mark Redwine’s house and Elaine’s latest request (for her to go to his house with the sheriff) wouldn’t serve any other purpose but to try to pin the crime on Mark again. I think he was wise to refuse her request. The police have already executed a search warrant for Mark’s house. It isn’t like she would get “new” information to solve the crime. The Sheriff already did that.
I do see Dylan’s mom, Elaine, bent on a mission to convince people that Mark is the murderer rather than to actually find the truth. This concerns me. In Elaine Redwine’s initial interviews, she was inconsistent, and flagged me, though I specifically stated it doesn’t mean that she was involved. I cannot say what the inconsistencies mean. I can just say she was inconsistent. Mark hasn’t flagged me as deceptive. I had a couple of questions I wanted to ask him from previous interviews, but overall, nothing jumps out at me.
This case is a true mystery. I’d like to be able to sit down and talk to both parents to get to the heart of this story, personally.
I couldn’t bring myself to watch the Dr. Phil episodes. While I agree that many of Mark’s decisions are smart ones for himself (whether guilty or not)-including immediately hiring a lawyer, and I acknowledge that Elaine is likely hell bent on getting Mark punished, I’m very surprised by your overall assessment of Mark not seeming deceptive. Watching every past clip of him on the news and interviews from 2012 and 2013, I really wanted to find a possible ‘mystery’ in this case and looked for every little nugget to help form a small seed of doubt in my head. But I just couldn’t find any. If I remember correctly, I felt that Mark talked like he “knows” Dylan is dead right from the get-go. And so many of the ways he phrased things were so unusual for someone who has no idea what happened and had no involvement. Everytime he talked, I saw more blazing red flags. As interested as I am with crime and mystery, I I just cannot stand to watch another interview with Mark. I hope that whatever the case may be, justice comes soon for Dylan and his family.
I did not find any hot spots in Mark’s earlier interviews. Elaine shows a very strong emotional bias, which will not lend its to her seeing the truth, sadly, whatever the truth is.
I have mixed feelings about polygraph tests, but in this case, it does concern me. I really like Dr. Phil’s comment about it too. How is this behavior of not wanting to take a polygraph (and likely sabotaging it by drinking the night before–They probably tell you not to drink right?) consistent with a father trying to find his son? Why is there pressure on him? If he didn’t do it, there’s no pressure right? Isn’t being nervous and not handling pressure well, one thing, and not having anything to do with the disappearance of your son, another? Meaning, what type of person is nervous while taking a polygraph, after being wrongly accused, to help find their son by clearing themselves? And why am I so lost today?
>If he didn’t do it, there’s no pressure right?
I totally disagree there. My job involves interviewing and hiring people for a Fortune 500 company. Polygraphs are so inaccurate that Congress passed a law that they can not be used for any purpose in pre-employment, so I can not use them in the process of hiring people. The law is called the Electronic Polygraph Protection Act (for example, here: http://www.polygraph.org/section/resources/employee-polygraph-protection-act-eppa).
It’s very possible to come up with false results from polygraph tests. If he didn’t commit the crime, but the polygraph says he did, then he has a LOT to be concerned about. That seems like a lot of pressure to me. I do not know how aware he is (or is not) of the false positives or negatives in polygraph testing.
I don’t know enough polygraphs to respond accurately concerning their accuracy, but that isn’t the problem for me. It’s a problem for him, obviously. Still, is it consistent with a father wanting to assist in finding his murdered son? He’s not going on a job interview, where who know’s what he’ll be asked about what. He knows exactly for what it is. I understand what you’re saying, and again, I’m disagreeing with Eyes here, so statistically, the odds are against me, but I need to question to keep learning. I understand that people can get nervous, sweat more, and increase their breathing, while telling a lie or the truth. I’d likely be worried getting a polygraph for a job interview, but for the murder of my son that I didn’t commit? I think I’d be more nervous for the job interview. I think they are two very different things, and I’m still lost on this.
Polygraphs are so unreliable, that there’s no good reason to take one. No matter how much you want to help the police, the polygraph results are not going to be of significant use. The only real use they have is in intimidating people. If you’re innocent, and the polygraph gives a false positive, the police are going to focus on you. If you want the actual murderer found, why would you choose to waste their time that way?
I do agree with you here. I loved watching dr phil for a very long time, but I was always confused at why he purported lie detector tests to be near 100% accurate. When I studied this in college long ago it was widely accepted that they weren’t much more than 60% accurate. And when I did some follow up research, I couldn’t find anything that they had gotten much better since that time. If you were innocent of a crime, risking the odds of being found “guilty” and having the pressure taken off looking for the real guilty party might not be worth it. I’m not sure if I’d do a polygraph unless maybe the polygrapher could clearly demonstrate the the machine was working 100% on me before asking me the incriminating questions.
Can someone hook me up with a link the archive 1st episode dr. phil article? I must have missed that (which sucks because I was watching for one!!!) and it sounds really interesting.
Dr Phil gives me the creeps… let’s look at his face during these interviews. What can deception experts tell us about all these weirdo tv doctors?
Cecilia there are two uses I can find for a polygraph – to intimidate and to interrogate.
Cecilia there are two uses I can find for a polygraph – to intimidate and to interrogate – both acting under the pretense that the polygraph will detect a lie.
The accuracy of the polygraph is the problem but you don’t see it as a problem. Why not instead accuse the man based upon a tarot readers cut of the cards!
Wow! U knocked me over with those facts! I see polygraph tests n a whole new light after reading everyone’s comments on this post. Thanks Brent & everyone, I always learn something 🙂
I am absolutely baffled that you would not see Mark Redwine as deceptive. I followed the missing person case from day one, and have read as much information as possible (not sourced from Dylan’s mom) about this case. If you watched the full interview that occurred last year, you would see Mark Redwine’s utter delight in seeing his ex-wife’s pain and his completely inconsistent statements. He has contradicted himself, and never lifted a finger to really search for Dylan. Have you seen the original interview? If not, please do as I’d love to hear your perception of the entire interview.
Ok, I found the article in your archive in which you analyze the original Dr Phil interview in which Mark Redwine was actually present in the studio. I remember watching it when it aired and was aghast at the barely suppressed look of glee that Mark Redwine had on his face when Dylan’s mom was crying. I’m just really surprised that this didn’t jump out at you too.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean anything relevant to Dylan– it can just as easily only mean that he and his ex don’t get along with each other for whatever reason. It isn’t a clue to deception. (I don’t remember the interview well enough to comment on that expression at this point though, so this comment presumes that you’re correct)
Keith,
Respectfully, I disagree and think that his expressions are relevant when in response to particular comments or questions from Elaine. Isn’t that what Eyes interprets frequently?
Eyes,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhD1dUN_JWk
If you have time, could you tell me what expressions you see on Mark’s face at 28:00, 28:48 (right after Elaine says, “And please, I hope you didn’t hurt him.”, at 33:00 (same expression he flashes at 33:17)
And at 36:07 (we see the same expression at 36:55).
Thanks!
At 28:00, its CONTEMPT. And that makes sense. And at 28:47, he isn’t making any expression. At 33:00 he simply purses his lips, which DOES NOT indicate lying. It’s plain old frustration. And 36:55 he simply LAUGHS because there is confusion on the polygraph and he says he doesn’t want to tell you that. None of that indicates DELIGHT.
wow exactly! yes yes yes! he is frustrated throughout the whole interview. the mother on the other hand shows fewer reliables signs of frustration than him. although she shows sadness.
Thank you for the response. To clarify, I wasn’t asking about all of those times in the video because I thought they indicated delight, I was just curious about what you thought about those expressions at those points and sought your input. The only one I thought indicated delight is between, 28:45-28:47. I see a suppressed smile and wrinkling at the corners of his eyes. Even after I paused it, it looks like it to me.Throughout the interview, his eyes wrinkle in a way that looks like his eyes are smiling, though it’s hard to tell if he is smiling because of his mustache. At 33:00, it looks like his mouth is turned down, and his chin is wrinkled, and his lower lip folds under his upper lip. Same expression at 33:17. Is this what you meant by frustration?
With all due respect EYES, I just don’t believe you’ve ever had lots of experience with a sadistic psychopath. I unfortunately was raised by one, I can tell you they don’t always show the normal “hotspots” they are THAT good at acting…there are no true feelings of love. A truly sadistic person delights, no, actually LIVES just to cause another being suffering. This is a level of evil that is hard for most of us to wrap our brains around yet many people have suffered at the hands of these monsters. I really wish you would do more research into the true sadistic/psychopathic/rageaholic personality type. I think you would find not all people fit into the mold or formula used to decide lies verses truths.
Nightlifter…I do know what you are speaking about firsthand. I am sad to report. And they are their own species with their own clues. I can spot them a mile away, but most people do not believe what they are capable of. You are correct on that.
“as the father of a missing still missing child….” wasn’t that a flag?
Mark is clearly uncomfortable talking to Dr. Phil, and I think he just fumbled here due to nerves. That is not a red flag for me considering his demeanor. No.
Yes, I have gone back and watched the earlier interviews and am getting a better overall sense of his demeanor. He gets flustered and absolutely feels that all eyes fingers are pointed at him and seems unable to communicate with his ex-wife. Also I find that Dr. Phil failed to remain open-minded as he claimed he would do. And even if I find him somewhat strange at times, I couldn’t believe how rude Dr. Phil was to say to his face that if he is innocent then there is something wrong with him (in the first show). Theoretically he is going through the same pain as Elaine, but doesn’t get treated that way.
After doing some light research, I am now of the mind that I would not take a polygraph out of principle, so I shouldn’t expect anyone else to either, regardless of the circumstances. My logic was in assuming that something as widespread as the polygraph under a skilled operator had been scientifically tested to satisfaction at some point. Now, why should I think that in this world? Ha.
I see no urgency in Mark to find his missing son. He seems tuned out and doesn’t express any ideas of what may have happened. I wonder why he doesn’t mention any questionable persons in the area or some other dangers the boy might have faced. We all would have some idea of what could have happened to a child staying at our home. Mark is just dull to the whole thing. He could be drinking heavily, but not too heavily to play the game of turning the tables and blaming Elaine.
Elaine does seem out to get Mark, but I didn’t hear anything about Mark having a history of violence. I would like to know more. I don’t blame Mark for not wanting to take a lie detector on the Dr. Phil Show.
Mark’s comments about a still missing child does seem off. He may have lost touch with reality. Another thing he claims to not know the results of the first test he took, but he says he will stand by those results no matter what they are. I find that strange. He doesn’t appear to trust lie detector tests, but he says he will stand by the results of the first test, no matter what it is. There is something off about this remark. No one would say that about a lie detector test if they didn’t already know the results. He may just be stalling Dr. Phil, however. I don’t feel that he is really being honest or really co-operating in any way.
That poly operator is scary enough to cause me to have a false positive result. I have never seen him smile, and I have watched him for years. His face seems frozen into a hard mask. He would convince me that I was guilty, and I didn’t even know the boy.
While the polygraph is being mentioned, isn’t that a myth to bust Eyes?
I can’t believe that machine is still being brought up as some sort of indicator of truthfulness or deception because the consensus amongst experts I thought was that it is unreliable.
That is the consensus among experts and researchers who’ve studied the polygraph. The only people who claim otherwise are companies selling polygraphs and sometimes polygraphers or people who use them. The FBI knows they’re bogus, the CIA knows they’re bogus, Congress knows they’re bogus, scientists know they’re bogus, the courts (mostly) know they’re bogus, basically everyone knows they’re bogus except the people they’re used on, which is really the only reason they’re ever even marginally effective to begin with. :
Thanks Keith,
I was given this https://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-018.shtml
by George W. Maschke who runs the anti-polygraph site.
The are sections worth reading including most notably the conclusion.
Just skimmed that link and read the bulk of the salient portions– it echoes other more extensive research that I’ve read in the past. I was going to post a link to one of the larger examinations of polygraph accuracy, but this guy pretty well summed it up in that link without having to wade through 132 pages of a pretty dry report. However, if you’re REALLY interested, here’s the paper from that investigation. http://ota.fas.org/reports/8320.pdf
Here’s a sample from that (these particular results are from the polygraph’s best outcome scenario– specific-incident, limited suspects, as you’d typically have with a criminal investigation like in this Redwine case. Other scenarios tend to fare even worse than this, some of which I believe your link touched on as well). Note especially that “correct innocent detections” range dropping as low as 12.5%! That means that under the conditions of whatever that study tested, an innocent person would be mis-identified as guilty 7 out of 8 times! This is why Mark is VERY wise not to submit himself to a polygraph if he is innocent.:
Six prior reviews of field studies:
—average accuracy ranged from 64 to 98 percent.
Ten individual field studies:
—correct guilty detections ranged from 70.6 to 98.6 percent and averaged 86.3 percent;
—correct innocent detections ranged from 12.5 to 94.1 percent and averaged 76 percent;
—false positive rate (innocent persons found deceptive) ranged from O to 75 percent and averaged 19.1 percent; and
—false negative rate (guilty persons found nondeceptive) ranged from O to 29.4 percent and averaged 10.2 percent.
Fourteen individual analog studies:
—correct guilty detections ranged from 35.4 to 100 percent and averaged 63.7 percent;
—correct innocent detections ranged from 32 to 91 percent and averaged 57.9 percent;
—false positives ranged from 2 to 50.7 percent and averaged 14.1 percent; and
—false negatives ranged from O to 28.7 percent and averaged 10.4 percent.
I agree. The willingness of the parent to take a poly may be what investigators are looking for. If my child were missing, I would sacrifice myself to take a poly to try to clear myself. Until the parents are clear, the investigators can’t be fully free to look elsewhere. Most parents would jump thru fire to get their child back. Mark’s lack of urgency really bothers me. I just don’t know what to believe about him.
I agree that the poly is unreliable, and if Mark were to show some kind of false reading on the Dr. Phil Show, it would prejudice people against him. Dr. Phil may know more than he is letting out, or he may just be frustrated that Mark isn’t more co-operative, but he, obviously, doesn’t like Mark.
Elaine may be having some guilt about her parenting, as well. Most people have some guilty feelings if something happens to their child. They feel that they failed to protect them, whether it was their fault, or not.
I watched the original interview of Elaine and I agree with you now that she seemed off. More so than her husband in his original interview (he has such an interesting subdued tone however).
In the two original interviews, they both have interesting subdued tones in their voices. I don’t know why that jumps out at me.
From watching the original interviews, I started wondering if she suspects he was being hidden (like had a hunch mixed with uncertainty), and then there were answers to certain questions that were very odd no matter what.
On the first show, Dr. Phil really lays into Mark, treating him with little respect but treating the mother with utmost respect. The different treatments, given that both have theoretically suffered for 3 months is striking.
Elaine Redwine shows a lot of “put on” anger towards Mark. It’s like active hate, almost Nero. There is no lost love between these two.
I too am surprised at your comment that you don’t see any hot spots.
This case so clearly points to dad.
Dad does not look for his missing son who disappeared just hours after a forced visit.
Dad has a history of violence and is an alcoholic (bad mixture)
Search dogs could not pick up Dylans scent despite Mark stating he slept on the couch. After hours laying on a blanket, they would be able to pick up scent
Then the past tense languages shortly after Dylan disappeared.
MARK “He was the light of my life and he meant everything to m”
This is ALARMING! He clearly uses past tense language twice.
It was not a slip. He did that TWICE. It was not months or years later.
And to the comment above that “Elaine Redwine shows a lot of “put on” anger towards Mark”… I would be too if I thought he killed my son. I don’t see deception in her. I see her struggling to control her anger because at the end of the day, she still wants answers….. I think she knows very well what Mark is capable a of as does his other son. Can you imagine sitting there with the man you think killed your child and having to hold it together. I would want him tortured for the truth. I think that’s all we are seeing with her… Her struggle to hold it together facing her sons murderer knowing that he holds the answers.
I believe Mark killed him. I also think it may have happened on the drive home. I do not think Dylan slept at home that night. I think dad disposed of the body that night then ran errands around town just to alibi build.
I mean, he forced this kid to come stay with him and in less than 24 hours he is gone
Has a history of violence
And really didn’t bother to help search
Any parent that does not search until they pass out to me is raising red flats
It’s like you already gave up without even looking.
And look at Marks other son and the level of hate. That didn’t come from a tunnel. Mark did that. Mark created that hate. The older brother wasn’t just young and influenced by the mother. That hate is real and Mark created that. Period.
So now you expect us to believe that this man that was physically abusive and is hated by his own kids could not have killed one of them?
Negative
I watched an interview where she says Mark put a dead rat in her car. He denies it. She smiles strangely and says “it is typical of you though” and changes the word rat to rodent as if that would make it more believable. That is a weird thing to accuse someone of and say well if you didn’t it it’s still typical of you. That is so weird. It just seems to me she is actively hating him, like she never got over the divorce. Maybe saying it is put on is going a bit too far, but I see her anger as very active…. I wish I could better explain what I am sensing. None of any of these observations mean that Mark didn’t kill him……. When you notice how people are acting you can’t always help what you notice. It’s not always enough to prove guilt or lack thereof. The son’s hatred was noteworthy, but that does not prove guilt or innocence of the father. I saw some similarities between his active hatred and the mother’s. Something subtle that I cannot explain. Anyways….. the father could be guilty certainly. It is unknown at this point.
As for facing the man I believe was the murderer I think I would be angrier than she is……… that is why this story confuses me.
Emotional bias strongly affects one’s ability to see the truth or lies, and Elaine shows incredible emotional bias. When I work on cases, I cannot trust relatives because of emotional bias unless they show they can be unbiased. Elaine is not able to do that, so anything she says has little value to aid in finding the truth, sadly.
I agree you you 100%. Who’s to say that on the drive home that there wasn’t an argument and Daddy lost his temper and strangled the child. No scent in the house, that’s a huge flag.
The other thing, this had to be someone local. Even if you choose not to think its the dad.
The location of his remains were not easily accessible. So that tells us this was not some random act.
It’s not like it was someplace you could drive too or quickly dispose of a body.
This was rough terrain. Someone needed to know the area. It would take a lot of time.
Thanks to everyone for the education on the polygraph! Before I would’ve taken one n assumed accuracy had I been asked. Not now. On the sad case of the Redwine’s, I don’t know how to judge parents who are suffering such pain and scrutiny. Thankfully I get to benefit from Mrs Eyes expertise, which let me watch from her point of view!