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.

Dateline NBC: The Secret and Patricia Esparza

Did you catch Dateline this past weekend? They featured the story of Patricia Esparza, who was questioned and plead guilty to voluntary manslaughter in the killing of Gonzalo Ramirez.

Patricia swears she is innocence and didn’t have anything to do with Ramirez’s death and that the others in the story did it. While we didn’t see the others, I can tell you unequivocally that I did not believe Patricia at all.

She was riddled with clues the entire broadcast.

I wrote about Patricia Esparza back in December of 2013 after she wrote an article for the HuffPost making her argument. Her argument is full of hotspots. Check it out by clicking on the link above.

I also talked about her here as well.

“Her Own Words Did Her In”

Here is an interesting interview for you. What do you see?

Anita Smithey “The Verdict” 48 Hours

When I watched Anita Smithey on 48 Hours, I do not believe that she said one honest thing in the entire interview. It was jaw dropping and the clues were abundant from the very first minute we see her to the very end of the interview. I could write a book on her.

Anita tries to portray a very different person then she truly is, but fails miserably at it.

When Anita hears the verdict, if she was truly a victim, I would expect surprise or shock, but we see none of it. Then you can literally see Anita work up a reaction–a very fake one. Listen to her give a fake wail as she attempts to “collapse” in her attorney’s arms. And look at how upset she is in this still shot below when she is wailing!  That wail she creates is anything but real and genuine.

anita
When I listen to the 911 call, there are immediate clues that she is acting in her voice. There are notable changes which can be immediately articulated.

I love how she shoots him, and then has no fear and goes outside and says on the 911 call as she sits outside on the steps, “I don’t want him to die.”

Wait a minute here!!   I thought you were afraid for your life–that he was going to kill you–but you turned your back and went outside and sat down?  And had no fear??

Would you turn your back on someone without knowing if they are 100% dead if you feared for your life?

How is that anywhere consistent with her story?

It’s flat out absurd.

Anita said on 48 Hours, “Did I think he could kill me, yes I did.”

If you are truly afraid, you don’t turn your back on the man even if you think he is dead, because if he is a dangerous, he could just pull through and surprise you, and kill you!  Fear doesn’t dissipate that quickly in a life or death situation.

I love how Anita says “he had violent sex with me” instead of rape. You notice she can’t use the word “rape”?  It’s notable.

According to one of Anita’s friends during the trial, Anita shared with her that she and Robert willfully engaged in “rough sex” by choice and there was knives involved and she enjoyed it. It was her “thing”.

Hmmm…

When Anita recounts Robert coming after her, she shows no supportive emotions whatsoever. You’d think she was talking about a lunch party instead.  There is no fear, stress, concern, or tension in her face at all. It’s eerily missing.

Anita’s injuries are completely superficial, and worse she admits she made them herself. There was no intense pressure from police in the interview we see. She could have left at any time, but she chose to keep talking by choice–to convince police of what she was saying.

After the murder, Anita called her best friend and said, “I’m sorry, I didn’t want it to go this way. He was hurting me.”

I would expect Anita to say that she feared for her life, that he was raping her and was going to kill her, but she doesn’t.  She can’t quite say it because I believe its untrue.

Anita says when talking about Robert showing up at her house the night she killed him, “I was a little concerned with what he is doing here. I don’t know where this is going.”

Anita wants you to think he surprised her, right?  Yet we hear that he came by to have sex on Monday nights when her kids were at their father’s house. So it wasn’t unusual for them to spend time together.

Furthermore, a detective says, “Anita first said Mr. Cline came over to the house that night and somehow was able to get inside the house.”

Then she says after Robert came over, he fixed her cable.  He just randomly shows up and decides to fix her cable?  Are you buying it?

After he fixed the cable, they watched a movie and started kissing, “Okay, so he wants to have sex, and this is what we do and he’ll go home.  So I’m sort of consensual on…you know, having sex with him….initially.”

Do you see how she is all over the board here?

After the sex, 48 Hours reports that Anita said she got dressed and she told Robert to leave, and she talks about how he put a knife to her neck.  Notice she tells him to leave–that’s quite bold if she is an abused women under his control. Don’t you think?

Anita says, “‘I’m like….if you hurt me, you’re not going to get away with this. Everyone’s gonna know it’s you’ …Because I felt at that moment, is he threatening to kill me? Like what is he doing with the knife? I don’t understand like what he’s doing.”

Does that make sense?

If you just had sex with someone, and they violently attack you afterwards and come after you and put a knife at your neck, would you not know what was going on?

Her story is a absurd.

Then Anita says nothing more about the knife, her being cut (no details), just now Robert wanted “rough sex”.

No offense here, but when men age, they typically need time before they can engage again.  And she no longer fights him?  Suddenly he is reaching for coconut oil — that investigators found in the bathroom, not where Anita said it was.

Yeah, right.

So Anita says, “I’ve gotta gun (which she says put under her pillow when he got the coconut oil) get off of me.”

And she wants us to believe big bad Robert Cline who is so much bigger than her, and raping her, and who is sitting on top of her docilely stops, watches her wiggle around, finds her gun and shoot him.

In the back.

How did he even get on his stomach when he was raping her?

So much of this story is missing. For a reason.

Suddenly she is stronger and more powerful then him. Wow!

Then she says, “We were so close, like he was right there. We were so close. To the point that I think he was almost leaning on the gun.”

With his back?

This is crazy.  Big bad Robert just leaned on her gun.  He had no fear of a gun and let her wield it at him.

Right.

Her entire account is riddled with lies, false accounts and nonsense. I personally believe she intentionally killed Robert.  She was sick of him, his arguments with her, and wanted finally to show him who was really in control and it wasn’t Robert.

I suspect Anita and Robert had tense relationship.  They argued and were like oil and water at times. I don’t disagree about that. There was verbal arguments, and maybe some heated situations, but I don’t believe a word Anita tells us this incident at all.

I could write a book about this woman. Thank goodness she is locked up!

There is actually one huge whopper in this case that I haven’t addressed.  Do you know what it is?