Darlie Routier

wasapi said:
There is a well researched forum on this case on FB. Recently I read the testimony from nurses who attended to DR's injuries. They all swore that if the situation had been different, the injury would have simply required butterfly bandages and she would have been sent straight home.

They also spoke of Darlie's lack of interest when one of the boy's bloody body was wheeled past her on a gurney. And, of her ongoing conversation about herself, but not questioning anything about her 2 dead sons.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, demeanour evidence. I don't know the answer, but it looks the dumbest get rich quick scheme I ever saw.
Demeanour evidence is a well researched can of worms, by the way. Mark Lundy is innocent yet 94% of the people state he is guilty because of his behaviour at his murdered family's funeral.
 
Samson said:
Fair enough, demeanour evidence. I don't know the answer, but it looks the dumbest get rich quick scheme I ever saw.
Demeanour evidence is a well researched can of worms, by the way. Mark Lundy is innocent yet 94% of the people state he is guilty because of his behaviour at his murdered family's funeral.
Click to expand...

I have actually pondered this quite a bit, in particular with regard to Amanda Knox, since her behavior is something that increased her troubles exponentially. Here's the thing: you just cannot get away from evaluating a potential suspect's behavior in the context of a crime. It is part of the overall assessment of a POI. IMO, as long as you have additional evidence, behavior should play an appropriate part in the process. I think it is important not to allow it to play a larger role than any other piece of evidence, but I think it is unreasonable to think it should not play some part.
 
Darlie has displayed evidence consciousness of guilt: she changed her story time and time (and bunch more times) as she learned the evidence the police had. She has NOT been excluded as the maker of the "bloody fingerprint" Darlie's supporters keep insisting will vindicate her. Darlie wrote letters from jail telling at least one person that "Glenn Mize" did it and when confronted with the real, live Glenn Mize in court admitted she lied.

Darlie had a little dog and those things are the barkiest items in the universe. Burglars hate them - they can hide and bark and wake up everyone in the house. Darlie's little dog DID NOT bark; because the murderer was his beloved owner, not some random stranger. (I have four little barky dogs, it's a size trait unless you own a dog breed that cannot bark or do something cruel to ensure it cannot.)
 
Henri McPhee said:
One of the jurors at the original Darlie Routier trial is totally convinced now that she is innocent.
Click to expand...

You're referring to the juror, Samford. He claims that the jury never saw the photos of her bruised arms. Even Darlie's defense team says that all the jurors saw the photographs of the underarm bruises. Three separate doctors contended that the age of the bruises were not consistent with them occurring the night of the murders and that they were self inflicted.
 
I haven't read the entire thread so I apoogize if this has all been hashed out already - I promise I'll go back and catch up.

After listening to the 911 call and reading Darlie's preliminary statement and her testimony from the trial I find it difficult to believe she's innocent.

Not only did she change stories as more evidence came out that would show her to be lying, she also seemed to have amnesia when it was convenient; she remembered trivial things like the flower arrangement falling but she couldn't remember exactly what woke her up - was it Devon crying or was it Devon tugging on her and calling "Mommy?"

During her testimony she argued with Toby Shook over a word in the 911 call transcript. It had been written as "I was fighting..." but later she realized that the story didn't fit with the evidence so she insisted that she said the word "frightening" - and even agreed when Shook asked her did she say "I was frightening." Talk about leakage. Not "frightened" but "frightening." Shook asked her several times.

In her preliminary statement Darlie said she had been sleeping on the couch the past week or so because the baby (Drake) woke her up when he moved around at night. By the way to me that means Darlie was a fairly light sleeper yet she slept through the stranger stabbing her two sons - and her.

IMO Darlie was sleeping on the couch because she and Darin had argued; they were having money problems and the day before the murders Darin was turned down for a 5k loan to cover an upcoming vacation to Pennsylvania.

Then she says she was awoken by Damon pressing on her shoulder then she became aware of a man standing near her feet. She said she "walked" after him then heard glass breaking. Why would she walk after him and not run after him? Or scream for Darin? Or scream at the man? Walking sounds like they were both having a leisurely stroll.

Darlie continues to follow the man, running back and forth through rooms, turning on lights, picking up the knife, and so on. When she finally calls to Darin she tells him "they cut them" meaning her two children. Wouldn't that be a priority?

Also, and this is more about me being a mom so it may not carry much weight but in the 911 call and in her preliminary statement she was sure her children were both dead - in fact she even asked the EMT if they were. As a mom, it would take a lot longer for me to believe my kids had been killed; I would go on hoping they could be saved right up to seeing them on a stainless slab in the morgue and maybe not even then.

Anyway, there's more but what I've outlined here is enough for me to think Darlie was not telling the truth and that she was more concerned with building her story than she was about her dying children. All my own opinion.

https://darliefacts.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/darlie-statement-june-8-96.pdf
 
Scordatura said:
I haven't read the entire thread so I apoogize if this has all been hashed out already - I promise I'll go back and catch up.

After listening to the 911 call and reading Darlie's preliminary statement and her testimony from the trial I find it difficult to believe she's innocent.

Not only did she change stories as more evidence came out that would show her to be lying, she also seemed to have amnesia when it was convenient; she remembered trivial things like the flower arrangement falling but she couldn't remember exactly what woke her up - was it Devon crying or was it Devon tugging on her and calling "Mommy?"

During her testimony she argued with Toby Shook over a word in the 911 call transcript. It had been written as "I was fighting..." but later she realized that the story didn't fit with the evidence so she insisted that she said the word "frightening" - and even agreed when Shook asked her did she say "I was frightening." Talk about leakage. Not "frightened" but "frightening." Shook asked her several times.

In her preliminary statement Darlie said she had been sleeping on the couch the past week or so because the baby (Drake) woke her up when he moved around at night. By the way to me that means Darlie was a fairly light sleeper yet she slept through the stranger stabbing her two sons - and her.

IMO Darlie was sleeping on the couch because she and Darin had argued; they were having money problems and the day before the murders Darin was turned down for a 5k loan to cover an upcoming vacation to Pennsylvania.

Then she says she was awoken by Damon pressing on her shoulder then she became aware of a man standing near her feet. She said she "walked" after him then heard glass breaking. Why would she walk after him and not run after him? Or scream for Darin? Or scream at the man? Walking sounds like they were both having a leisurely stroll.

Darlie continues to follow the man, running back and forth through rooms, turning on lights, picking up the knife, and so on. When she finally calls to Darin she tells him "they cut them" meaning her two children. Wouldn't that be a priority?

Also, and this is more about me being a mom so it may not carry much weight but in the 911 call and in her preliminary statement she was sure her children were both dead - in fact she even asked the EMT if they were. As a mom, it would take a lot longer for me to believe my kids had been killed; I would go on hoping they could be saved right up to seeing them on a stainless slab in the morgue and maybe not even then.

Anyway, there's more but what I've outlined here is enough for me to think Darlie was not telling the truth and that she was more concerned with building her story than she was about her dying children. All my own opinion.

https://darliefacts.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/darlie-statement-june-8-96.pdf
Click to expand...
This case is quite difficult, I find the plan ridiculous, and Sinsaint convincing. But Charlie Wilkes who has studied more cases than anyone cries guilty.
 
Scordatura said:
I haven't read the entire thread so I apoogize if this has all been hashed out already - I promise I'll go back and catch up.

After listening to the 911 call and reading Darlie's preliminary statement and her testimony from the trial I find it difficult to believe she's innocent.

Not only did she change stories as more evidence came out that would show her to be lying, she also seemed to have amnesia when it was convenient; she remembered trivial things like the flower arrangement falling but she couldn't remember exactly what woke her up - was it Devon crying or was it Devon tugging on her and calling "Mommy?"

During her testimony she argued with Toby Shook over a word in the 911 call transcript. It had been written as "I was fighting..." but later she realized that the story didn't fit with the evidence so she insisted that she said the word "frightening" - and even agreed when Shook asked her did she say "I was frightening." Talk about leakage. Not "frightened" but "frightening." Shook asked her several times.

In her preliminary statement Darlie said she had been sleeping on the couch the past week or so because the baby (Drake) woke her up when he moved around at night. By the way to me that means Darlie was a fairly light sleeper yet she slept through the stranger stabbing her two sons - and her.

IMO Darlie was sleeping on the couch because she and Darin had argued; they were having money problems and the day before the murders Darin was turned down for a 5k loan to cover an upcoming vacation to Pennsylvania.

Then she says she was awoken by Damon pressing on her shoulder then she became aware of a man standing near her feet. She said she "walked" after him then heard glass breaking. Why would she walk after him and not run after him? Or scream for Darin? Or scream at the man? Walking sounds like they were both having a leisurely stroll.

Darlie continues to follow the man, running back and forth through rooms, turning on lights, picking up the knife, and so on. When she finally calls to Darin she tells him "they cut them" meaning her two children. Wouldn't that be a priority?

Also, and this is more about me being a mom so it may not carry much weight but in the 911 call and in her preliminary statement she was sure her children were both dead - in fact she even asked the EMT if they were. As a mom, it would take a lot longer for me to believe my kids had been killed; I would go on hoping they could be saved right up to seeing them on a stainless slab in the morgue and maybe not even then.

Anyway, there's more but what I've outlined here is enough for me to think Darlie was not telling the truth and that she was more concerned with building her story than she was about her dying children. All my own opinion.

https://darliefacts.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/darlie-statement-june-8-96.pdf
Click to expand...

All that walking around on broken glass and she didn't have a single cut on the bottom of her feet. And the perp running out through the garage and squeezing through the window managed to not leave a single drop or smear of blood anywhere on the way through the maze of stuff in the garage (in the pitch black night) or around the window he supposedly escaped from. There was not even a mark or a speck of blood on the outside gate he had to throw his weight into in order to get it to open. There are so very many things about Routier's many accounts that defy imagination. Your instincts are spot on.
 
I just think the Darlie Routier case was bad police work. Her criminal attorney at the trial should never have been representing her husband as well. It was a conflict of interest which threw her under the bus. I still think her husband has some explaining to do, even if he didn't actually do it and he perhaps hired somebody else to do it for him.
 
Henri McPhee said:
I just think the Darlie Routier case was another gross miscarriage of justice case. She did not get a fair trial.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I wonder if you are trying to be obtuse. Darlie Routier is guilty. She has had more testing done then other inmates, and every single one has shown more evidence of her guilt.

Henri. Obtuse or just wrong, you are not going to convince anyone. She is guilty of stabbing her two sons to death, and she acted on her own. This little crush you have on her is absurd.
 
wasapi said:
Sometimes I wonder if you are trying to be obtuse. Darlie Routier is guilty. She has had more testing done then other inmates, and every single one has shown more evidence of her guilt.

Henri. Obtuse or just wrong, you are not going to convince anyone. She is guilty of stabbing her two sons to death, and she acted on her own. This little crush you have on her is absurd.
Click to expand...
Well, to be fair, he has convinced me of her guilt...
 
Samson said:
Innocent.
The so called plan is the stupidest thing I ever saw, unless death row was on her bucket list.
Click to expand...
Or, perhaps, she, like so many other murderers, is just not the criminal genius she though she was.
 
Henri McPhee said:
There is some interesting new media information about the Darlie Routier case at this website:

www.fordarlieroutier.org/
Click to expand...
Thanks Henri, I will study.
It is curious that the good witches on thread wish Darlie to be guilty, but blind Freddie sees she had nothing to do with this.


Keep up the good work, Darlie is totally innocent.

One day I would like to get an updated view from Charlie Wilkes, the best analyst ever, who still contends she is guilty.
 
wasapi said:
Sometimes I wonder if you are trying to be obtuse. Darlie Routier is guilty. She has had more testing done then other inmates, and every single one has shown more evidence of her guilt.

Henri. Obtuse or just wrong, you are not going to convince anyone. She is guilty of stabbing her two sons to death, and she acted on her own. This little crush you have on her is absurd.
Click to expand...

I think you mean less evidence of guilt. T10, a supposed mixed stain of Darlie and Devon (one that the analyst got three separate results on) has been determined to only be Darlie’s blood. So one of those cast-off stains on her shirt of one of her boys that everyone claims proves she’s guilty? Sorry, nothing but her blood in that stain.
 
The "intruder" was one great mastermind, or perhaps had a guardian angel protecting him. Leaving no evidence of his DNA behind, performing supernatural feats like cutting the screen from the inside, yet left the window he came through from the outside without disturbing the dusty ledge. As he brutally stabs two little boys repeatedly - wait - another miracle - he doesn't leave a hair, sweat, fingerprints, or any other form of DNA.

This "intruder" could have won Randi's million dollar challenge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom