Darlie Routier

[Elagabalus]

... and then stabbed the sleeping woman once in the neck before running off.

I'm not buying it. It is implausible on the face of it, and it doesn't appear to match the blood evidence at the crime scene. At the same time, I can't say it's impossible or that the blood evidence is infallible.

Not just once.

darliefacts.com/darlies-injuries/

It looks like she was a little more competent in self-inflicting stab wounds than Jeffery MacDonald.

 

[Elagabalus]

I didn't know anything about this case beforehand; after reviewing the information presented in this thread pro and con, were I on the jury I would vote to convict. The undisturbed layer of dust on the windowsill is persuasive to me; an intruder, if he existed, would have to disturb that dust while entering. The sock was probably planted before the crime, and the bloody footprints are pretty damning.

I'm still on the fence, but appaerently that "window sill" in question is/was only 15 inches off the ground. On the otherhand, the back gate was locked from the inside with no signs of an intruder.

The sock had the blood Devon and Damon’s on it so how could she have planted it before the crime?

 

[Desert Fox]

Opinions on how competent the crime scene analysis was?

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Opinions on how competent the crime scene analysis was?

I don't know, but I'd like to have about 10 times more crime scene photos than what I have seen over the years. One of the problems with her story is that she says she was sleeping on the couch when she was stabbed or cut with the knife. The photos I have seen don't show any blood on the couch, and you'd sure expect to see some.

Her supporters say there was blood on the couch, but it doesn't show in the photos, and the couch was discarded after the crime. Kind of like the windshield on Kennedy's limo...

 

[Desert Fox]

I don't know, but I'd like to have about 10 times more crime scene photos than what I have seen over the years. One of the problems with her story is that she says she was sleeping on the couch when she was stabbed or cut with the knife. The photos I have seen don't show any blood on the couch, and you'd sure expect to see some.

Her supporters say there was blood on the couch, but it doesn't show in the photos, and the couch was discarded after the crime. Kind of like the windshield on Kennedy's limo...

If there was the competency that I have seen out of some Texas law enforcement and unwillingness to take a new look at the case, I would be extremely skeptical about a guilty decision.

 

[Elagabalus]

I realize that this is a pro innocent site but I found this to be revealing:

http://darliefacts.com/the-nurses/

Everyone wants her to be guilty.

 

[Desert Fox]

I realize that this is a pro innocent site but I found this to be revealing:

http://darliefacts.com/the-nurses/

Everyone wants her to be guilty.

I take almost no stock in how emotional somebody appears to be.
I hate when that is used as evidence, I admit.
Edit: That is actually for either side just like I take no stock in lie detectors for either side.

Also, nurse handwriting is not much better than doctors

 

[Aepervius]

I consider mathematically trying to determine guilt about as useful as "Eyes for Lies."

Those calculation remind me the creationist calculation on the probability of the cell being a random occurrence to 10^-450. They reek of one own assumption and are meaningless.

Example :

"Evidence of a break in. There is a cut screen and a bloody finger print that could not be matched to anyone in the house. The evidence of breakin is kind of weak, but there nonetheless. I estimate this evidence as having a probative value of 40% --> Pointing to Routier's innocence for 60% or 40% guilt."

Now change to
"Evidence of a break in. There is a cut screen and a bloody finger print that could not be matched to anyone in the house. The evidence of breakin is kind of weak, but there nonetheless. I estimate this evidence as having a probative value of 20% --> Pointing to Routier's innocence for 80% or 20% guilt."

Or to
Evidence of a break in. There is a cut screen and a bloody finger print that could not be matched to anyone in the house. The evidence of breakin is kind of weak, but there nonetheless. I estimate this evidence as having a probative value of 11.2% --> Pointing to Routier's innocence for 88.8% or 11.2% guilt.

I only changed the numbers. Not the fact. But you can't dispute those numbers because they are not related to the cited facts. They are just pulled out of thin air. The same can be repeated for all numbers until you reach whatever your gut feeling was at the start.

Just simply state that you feel that the evidence are weak and be done with it. Associating subjective numbers with the scenario does not make it more coherent than "my< gut feeling is that she is innocent".

 

[Aepervius]

I realize that this is a pro innocent site but I found this to be revealing:

http://darliefacts.com/the-nurses/

Everyone wants her to be guilty.

The problem is that "innocence" web site latch onto any very small irrelevant details to try to show as if the investigator are a bunch of moron, the jury blind, and the evidence always interpreted in favor of the innocent.

Fact is, up to now none of this occurred despite the defense being aware of the SAME evidence than the internet expert.

 

[Desert Fox]

The problem is that "innocence" web site latch onto any very small irrelevant details to try to show as if the investigator are a bunch of moron, the jury blind, and the evidence always interpreted in favor of the innocent.

Fact is, up to now none of this occurred despite the defense being aware of the SAME evidence than the internet expert.

My whole issue is if we can reasonably (not possibly) get someone else into the house and committing the crime.

Look, I consider if she is guilty that there was something mentally wrong with her and that should be a reasonable argument for not executing her. I think it is probable that she also tried to commit suicide at the same time.

I am anti Death Penalty but would not feel bad if or when Charles Ng is executed. I would feel that her execution is different.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

My whole issue is if we can reasonably (not possibly) get someone else into the house and committing the crime.

Look, I consider if she is guilty that there was something mentally wrong with her and that should be a reasonable argument for not executing her. I think it is probable that she also tried to commit suicide at the same time.

I am anti Death Penalty but would not feel bad if or when Charles Ng is executed. I would feel that her execution is different.

Is it because she is a woman? I tend to feel differently about mothers who kill their children. Innocent children don't get to choose their parents and they rely 100% on their parents. To violate this trust and to ignore the immense, automatic, overwhelming inborn love between a mother and her dependent, helpless children warrants the death penalty IMO.

 

[Desert Fox]

Is it because she is a woman? I tend to feel differently about mothers who kill their children. Innocent children don't get to choose their parents and they rely 100% on their parents. To violate this trust and to ignore the immense, automatic, overwhelming inborn love between a mother and her dependent, helpless children warrants the death penalty IMO.

Different cases, I have different reasons. I think though that she might have some mental issues such as postpartum depression although nothing like as bad as Andrea Yates.
Edit: Why I believe Yates belongs in a mental institution and Routier (unless I can find some evidence of innocence) belongs in prison.

In addition, Charles Ng seemed to delight in what he did. He likely would be an actual psychopath and I don't think she is although there may be narcissist parts of her personality.

 

[Stellafane]

Start here. There is lots of info about the crime all over the internet.

http://www.darlieroutierfactandfiction.com/

Based on the information provided in this link, I'd say the verdict was a correct one. I suppose one could contrive an implausible series of events that could collectively comprise a case for doubt, but I think that would be confusing reasonable doubt with conceivable doubt.

 

[Stellafane]

My whole issue is if we can reasonably (not possibly) get someone else into the house and committing the crime.

Look, I consider if she is guilty that there was something mentally wrong with her and that should be a reasonable argument for not executing her. I think it is probable that she also tried to commit suicide at the same time.

I am anti Death Penalty but would not feel bad if or when Charles Ng is executed. I would feel that her execution is different.

I also oppose the death penalty, but for reasons that may be a bit different from yours. My opposition is not based on any sympathy for the convicted; I simply don't believe society should be in the business of killing people except in self-defense.

 

[Desert Fox]

I also oppose the death penalty, but for reasons that may be a bit different from yours. My opposition is not based on any sympathy for the convicted; I simply don't believe society should be in the business of killing people except in self-defense.

I am not for executing Charles Ng, I just would not shed too many tears for him.

I don't see execution as serving any real purpose being that crime rates do not seem to be reduced by the death penalty and there is arguable evidence that states (nations as well) without have lower murder rates.

I do not see the prison system as vengeance but reform. The worst of the worst you need to permanently keep out of society however.

 

[Stellafane]

Here I will list the evidence in this case that I believe is probative, and assign probability values to them. And then calculate the probability of guilt.

Evidence pointing to innocence:
1. Evidence of a break in. There is a cut screen and a bloody finger print that could not be matched to anyone in the house. The evidence of breakin is kind of weak, but there nonetheless. I estimate this evidence as having a probative value of 40% --> Pointing to Routier's innocence for 60% or 40% guilt.

2. Routier's wounds do not appear to be self-inflicted. I am no expert but from the descriptions and pictures I've seen, I think it is unlikely she caused them herself. Guilt value: 35%

3. Routier's sons were alive when she called 911---one was still alive when the police arrived. Why would a murderer call 911 before her victims were dead? She changed her mind? She thought they were dead? or was she not the murderer? guilt value: 25%

4. The bloody sock. It is unclear how Routier could have planted this. An intruder may have used it and dropped it while he was running away. Guilt value: 40%

Evidence pointing to guilt:
5. Darlie Routier could not give a straight story about what happened. While this points to guilt, I also believe someone sufferring a traumatic experience may possibly not remember things well. So, it is not absolute proof of guilt--not proof she was lieing. Guilt value: 60%

6. An intruder stabbing the boys to death but only non-fatally injuring an adult also there. This seems unlikely---though if Darlie fought back, it may have scared the intruder off, maybe why he didn't kill her. Guilt value: 55%

7. Darlie Routier was concerned that she touched the knife and telling the operator over the phone she might have got her fingerprints on it. This could be an indication that she was making up an allibi to explain her fingerprints. Guilt value: 60%

The probability of guilt, given a list of evidence e1, e2, ..., en each with an associated probability of guilt of p(ei) can be calculated as:

p(e1)*p(e2)*...p(en)/(p(e1)*p(e2)*...p(en)+(1-P(e1))*(1-p(e2))*...(1-p(en)))

.4*.35*.25*.4*.6*.55*.6/(.4*.35*.25*.4*.5*.55*.6+.6*.65*.75*.6*.4*.45*.4)
= 0.17 17% probability of being guilty or 83% probability of being innocent.

So I calculate Darlie Routier is innocent with probability 83%

PS: yes, I like numbers!

David

The problem with all of the above is that Darlie's guilt is not a matter of mathematics. We're not talking about a hypothetical or future event; we're talking about something that actually happened. She did it, or she didn't do it -- probability has zero to do with it. (I like numbers too!)

 

[Stellafane]

I am not for executing Charles Ng, I just would not shed too many tears for him.

Truth be told, neither would I. The Ng case is a particularly severe challenge to my opposition of capital punishment. (Fortunately Lake self-administered his own sentence.)

 

[Desert Fox]

Based on the information provided in this link, I'd say the verdict was a correct one. I suppose one could contrive an implausible series of events that could collectively comprise a case for doubt, but I think that would be confusing reasonable doubt with conceivable doubt.

Sorry, while I do not believe in the death penalty, I would argue that before the death penalty is even entertained, there needs to be NO DOUBT (Within human limits.)

 

[David Sugar]

I'm still on the fence, but appaerently that "window sill" in question is/was only 15 inches off the ground. On the otherhand, the back gate was locked from the inside with no signs of an intruder.

The sock had the blood Devon and Damon’s on it so how could she have planted it before the crime?

There's evidence that points to Routier's guilt, as well as others that point to her innocence. Different people may assign different weights to the evidence. The bloody finger print, which cannot be matched to anyone in the house, for example, makes it very difficult for me to find Darlie guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

David

 

[David Sugar]

The problem with all of the above is that Darlie's guilt is not a matter of mathematics. We're not talking about a hypothetical or future event; we're talking about something that actually happened. She did it, or she didn't do it -- probability has zero to do with it. (I like numbers too!)

Except for the fact that we cannot know if she is guilty. We must evaluate the evidence and come to a conclusion---that conclusion is a probability of guilt.

Of course, my post is not proof that Darlie's probability of guilt is 18%. Everyone weighs the evidence differently and will come to different conclusions, and different probabilties. Weighing of evidence is subjective.

David