Desert Fox
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2014
- Messages
- 6,147
I know it has been a while but this should also be linked to
http://injusticeanywhereforum.org/download/file.php?id=1864
http://injusticeanywhereforum.org/download/file.php?id=1864
DF, link doesn't work for some reason.I know it has been a while but this should also be linked to
http://injusticeanywhereforum.org/download/file.php?id=1864
Ok maybe NZ can't get it.I clink on it and it opens the PDF for the DNA tests?
Ok maybe NZ can't get it.
DF, out of curiosity, what do you think of the case?
Charlie Wilkes cogently argues she is guilty, so I regarded that as a difficult hurdle for innocence, but I see she is an IA promoted case, which suggests she should be innocent.
Nobody should be on death row, least of all those that killed their own children. But the case seems open and shut. Jeremy Bamber deserves a thread here, in a case where it is possible he is in jail for a crime perpetrated by his sister. Her children were shot dead.I do not want her to be guilty but I don't see any way that it is someone else. If the DNA tests had shown somebody else, especially the railroad murder, would have of course changed things.
I do think there is/was something wrong in her head. I would likely to see her somehow get off death row.
Edit: The PDF report is the DNA report on various items all showed that she was almost certainly the contributor and there are some minor contribution which were consistent with her husband.
Start here. There is lots of info about the crime all over the internet.
Darlieroutierfactandfiction.com
I think she did it, but I leave room for a sliver of doubt, and I would welcome real evidence pointing to an alternative. So far I have heard a lot of argumentation, some of it passionate, but I have not seen any good evidence pointing away from Routier.
For me, the most significant incriminating fact is the difference between Routier's injuries vs. those of the kids. That doesn't fit an intruder scenario, and neither does anything else about that crime scene.
The bloody sock... I think she must have planted it before she injured herself and made the call.
The main arguments for Routier's innocence seem to be her alleged good character and the fact that she took good care of the kids. I have looked over quite a few cases of maternal filicide, and I am not convinced. Check out Suzanna Simpson for purposes of comparison.
This is an interesting post, because it represents the polar opposite of how I look at a criminal case.
I always start by asking myself, "what happened here? What kind of crime was this?"
This one had to be one of two crimes:
- A deranged, random intruder.
- Maternal filicide.
I think it was more likely the latter, because the kids had multiple stab wounds in their chest and abdomen, whereas Routier had a non-fatal stab wound in her neck. It sounds like a self-inflicted wound to create a cover story, c.f. Michelle Kehoe or Diane Downs.
And, as you say, Routier's story is problematic. She says she slept through this. That is hard to believe.
BUT, where was Tommy Lynn Sells when the Routier murders went down? The basic scenario, as described by Routier, is not without precedent.
I can't say for sure with Routier. I think she probably did it.
The investigation showed the screen had most likely been cut with a knife from the butcher block set in the kitchen and a layer of dust on the inside windowsill had been undisturbed.
Luminol discovered blood cleanup on the counter surface all around the sink, as well as cleaned up drips of blood on the floor in front of the sink where someone apparently stood in one place for some time dripping blood. There was no appreciable amount of blood found on the couch, where Darlie claimed to have been when the intruder inflicted her injuries. Detectives theorized Darlie inflicted her wounds to herself while standing in front of the kitchen sink. There was one child's handprint in blood on that couch, but it had been cleaned up and was discovered with Luminol.
Darlie's wounds were of a completely different severity than those of her sons, in the opinion of the medical examiner who performed Devon's autopsy and also examined Darlie.
The one son was already dead at the time the husband reached him, the other barely alive at all, with just a hint of a pulse. When the police arrived, they instructed Darlie to put pressure on the wound of the one barely alive son, She ignored the request.
It seems she had ample time to clean up and stage the scene. I am sure this was part of it. Thank god it didn't succeed in getting her off.
Here are a few more tidbits:
"They" vs "he":
In the 911 call, Darlie said, "They came in and..."
By the time detectives arrived, this had become "He...," as she changed her story to a single attacker.
The supposed exit of the intruder was through the utility room and through the garage, yet there were no lights on and it was said to be a type of obstacle course to get through there, an unlikely means for escape without leaving bloody evidence. There was no blood in the garage nor on the fence an intruder would have had to have passed to escape that way. Also no blood on the difficult-to-open gate through which an intruder would have exited. Flower beds between the garage and the gate were undisturbed. The garage door was closed and locked from the inside.
Bloody bare footprints from the kitchen heading into the family room belong to one set of feet which matched Darlie's. There were no bloody prints leading to the utility room and none in the utility room or the garage.
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.
Both have precedents (cf. Suzanna Simpson and Tommy Lynn Sells), both are rare, and this had to be one or the other.
Above you note that the nature and limited extent of Routier's injuries could be explained if she defended herself. She deprived herself of this explanation with her statements, however, presumably because her husband was upstairs at the time of the murders, so she could have called out for help.
So, if this was someone like Tommy Lynn Sells (cf. Julie Rea Harper, who is undoubtedly innocent) we have to contemplate a scenario where the intruder forced his way in, found a woman and two children sleeping, stabbed both children repeatedly in the chest and abdomen without waking up the woman (or the man who was sleeping upstairs), 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.
If she is innocent, it is a strange case, but still one of the major problems with the police and prosecution generally is that they don't examine evidence with an open mind but instead look to prove guilt.
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![]()
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.
As always websleuths has an enormous amount of material on this case. The autopsy photo of one of the boys showed someone had held him on his stomach and drove a knife six times(I think it's hard to see) all the way through him. John Douglass would call this overkill and I agree.
Whatever happened it was an 'emotionally powered act of violence as JD would say) . How that fits in I have no clue.