Darlie Routier

[wasapi]

What evidence points directly towards Darlie's guilt?

Sinsaint, I have to be brief now, but I will start with the DNA. Or, lack of. All DNA matches Routier, Nothing from an "intruder". Another strong point is that the screen was slit from the inside. Some, like Henri, choose to believe in an intruder carefully broke through a door, went to the kitchen and got a knife and then went and slashed it from the inside. Then, goes back and picks another knife from the kitchen to stab everyone. Darlie, who was always a light sleeper, sleeps downstairs because the it's quieter, sleeps through her and her sons being stabbed before she fully wakes up.

And yes, her wounds were superficial.

There is so much more. It has been an interesting case to have followed from the beginning. Very sad though. I would be happy to answer any questions I can.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Sinsaint, I have to be brief now, but I will start with the DNA. Or, lack of. All DNA matches Routier, Nothing from an "intruder". Another strong point is that the screen was slit from the inside. Some, like Henri, choose to believe in an intruder carefully broke through a door, went to the kitchen and got a knife and then went and slashed it from the inside. Then, goes back and picks another knife from the kitchen to stab everyone. Darlie, who was always a light sleeper, sleeps downstairs because the it's quieter, sleeps through her and her sons being stabbed before she fully wakes up.

And yes, her wounds were superficial.

There is so much more. It has been an interesting case to have followed from the beginning. Very sad though. I would be happy to answer any questions I can.

There is not likely to be DNA of a murderer if he was wearing gloves. He didn't spill any blood. Darlie's husband was never checked for the blood on his jeans.

The wounds may seem superficial to a doctors who work in emergency rooms and have to deal with horrific injuries on a daily basis. There is the same sort of controversy in the Jeffrey MacDonald case were at least one injury came very close to vital organs. Darlie had one injury to her neck and throat that missed killing her by a whisker. Doctors don't always have right judgment. Many doctors don't believe that bugging happens.

The police and FBI jumped to conclusions and just decided Darlie did it from the start. It was only after the trial that the truth came out about Darlie's husband being involved in insurance scams and being prepared to invite burglars into the house. Divorce was being planned at the time of the murders. I don't know if there was any insurance money on Darlie, or her kids, in the event of death, or if it was ever paid out. Darlie's husband was never properly or thoroughly investigated. It was a serious injustice and a probable wrong verdict.

Terry Laber, the forensic scientist who worked for the prosecution to start off with now has an affidavit on the internet pointing out the inconsistencies and errors in the prosecution forensic case.

 

[Samson]

There is not likely to be DNA of a murderer if he was wearing gloves. He didn't spill any blood. Darlie's husband was never checked for the blood on his jeans.

The wounds may seem superficial to a doctors who work in emergency rooms and have to deal with horrific injuries on a daily basis. There is the same sort of controversy in the Jeffrey MacDonald case were at least one injury came very close to vital organs. Darlie had one injury to her neck and throat that missed killing her by a whisker. Doctors don't always have right judgment. Many doctors don't believe that bugging happens.

The police and FBI jumped to conclusions and just decided Darlie did it from the start. It was only after the trial that the truth came out about Darlie's husband being involved in insurance scams and being prepared to invite burglars into the house. Divorce was being planned at the time of the murders. I don't know if there was any insurance money on Darlie, or her kids, in the event of death, or if it was ever paid out. Darlie's husband was never properly or thoroughly investigated. It was a serious injustice and a probable wrong verdict.

Terry Laber, the forensic scientist who worked for the prosecution to start off with now has an affidavit on the internet pointing out the inconsistencies and errors in the prosecution forensic case.

Henri, this slashing the screen from the inside seems to preoccupy people. Can you cast any light on this matter?

 

[Henri McPhee]

Henri, this slashing the screen from the inside seems to preoccupy people. Can you cast any light on this matter?

From what I can make out there are doubts about this slashing of the screen from the inside. There were bungling detectives from the local police, and the FBI on the case, and at the crime scene, rather like in the JonBenet Ramsey case and the Jeffrey MacDonald case.

Lt. David Nabors head of Rowlett Police Department's Criminal Investigation Division says there were inconsistencies with her story and physical evidence and that he is comfortable with the case. The trouble is the police are apt to jump to conclusions, and to decide who did it, and then 'find' the evidence afterwards. Nabors is not a forensic scientist. There were disagreements between the forensic scientists on the case. Personally, I think the husband did it, possibly with the help of a hit man who was paid out of life insurance money.

There is background information to all this at:

https://soapboxie.com/government/Darlie-Routier

The Elements of Doubt

There are many things missing in this case.

Darin's admission of an insurance scam attempt.

The screen that was mis-reported as being cut from the inside.

Possible improper read-back of testimony to the jury by the court reporter.

Apparent conflict of interest with the attorney that represented Darlie Routier at trial had an apparent conflict of interest, because he was said to have had a prearrangement with Darin Routier and other family members not to pursue any defense that could implicate Darin. This attorney supposedly stopped key experts for the defense from finishing forensic examinations.

The pictures of Darlie's cuts and bruises on her arms which were taken when she was hospitalized the night of the murders.

The prosecution's refusal to provide access to any evidence in their custody in the case.

No DNA testing.

Some writers who have interviewed Darlie Routier have decided to help her fight to get a new trial. Since reporting their opinions on her situation, they report that their ability to visit her has been blocked or made so inconvenient that little can be accomplished.

During the trial investigators invoked their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination during cross examination, preventing the defense from rebutting their testimony. Why? This alone would be reason for disbelief and a new trial!

 

[Henri McPhee]

There were disagreements between the forensic scientists in the Darlie Routier case:

Affidavit of Terry L. Laber
In the Criminal District Court No.3
Dallas County, Texas
DARLIE LYNN ROUTIER
No. F96-39973-MJ IN THE CRIMINAL
DISTRICT COURT
NO. 3 OF
DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

AFFIDAVIT OF TERRY L. LABER

Before me, the undersigned notary, on this day, personally appeared Terry L. Laber, a person whose identity is known to me. After I administered an oath to him, upon his oath, he said:

1. My name is Terry L. Laber. I am over twenty-one years old and I reside in White Bear Lake, Minnesota. I am capable and fully competent to make this Affidavit. The statement herein are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge.

2. I received a B.S. in Chemistry from the University of Wisconsin in 1969. From 1969-1971, I worked as a Crime Laboratory Analyst for the United States Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory. From 1971-2000, I held a series of positions at the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Forensic Science Laboratory ("Minnesota BCA"), including forensic scientist, supervisor of Serology Section and Biology Section, and assistant laboratory director. In August of 2000, I retired from the Minnesota BCA.

3. I am presently employed approximately forty-hours per week as a senior project consultant for Minnesota BCA. I am also self-employed as a forensic consultant on an as-needed basis in White Bear Lake, Minnesota and have been so employed since 1981. As part of my work as a forensic consultant, I analyze physical evidence, such as blood stains, microscopic particles and other trace evidence left at crime scenes to determine what such evidence suggests about how the crime occurred or did not occur. I have testified as an expert in bloodstain pattern analysis about forensic analysis of physical evidence in over fifty trials, including trials in the State of Texas. I have served as a forensic consultant in more than two hundred other cases.

4. I am a member of several forensic science organizations including the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, the Midwestern Association of Forensic Scientists, and the International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts.

5. In August of 1996, I was retained by Douglas Parks and Wayne Huff, then-defense counsel to Darlie Lynn Routier, who was then-scheduled to be prosecuted for the death of her son Damon Routier. As part of that engagement, my colleague, Barton P. Epstein, and I viewed a number of pieces of physical evidence, then in the custody of the State of Texas. In August, 1996, Barton Epstein and I met with State's forensic analyst, Charles Linch, at the Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences in Dallas, Texas. We reviewed a number of pieces of physical evidence in Mr. Linch's possession. We also reviewed evidence in possession of the Rowlett Police Department.

6. Barton Epstein and I recommended to Mr. Parks and Mr. Huff that certain samples of physical evidence that we reviewed be analyzed to test the State's theory that the crime scene at 5801 Eagle Drive, Rowlett, Texas had been stated. For example:


a. Fiber and Opaque Material Said to Have Been Removed from Bread Knife: We recommended that microscopic and/or elemental comparison tests be conducted on the fiberglass and opaque materials removed from a bread knife to substantiate or dispute the State's theory that the source of these materials was the window screen in the garage of 5801 Eagle Drive, Rowlett, Texas.

b. Other Fibers Said To Have Been Removed from Knife on Counter: We recommended that the apparent wood fragments and blue fibers removed from the knife found on the kitchen counter be microscopically examined to determine their source.

c. Darlie Routier's Nightshirt: Based on defects (i.e. cuts) observed on the left side of the nightshirt, we determined that additional testing was required to identify the source of the defects. In addition, we recommended that genetic testing be conducted on several blood-stained areas of the nightshirt.

d. Hoover Vacuum Cleaner: Based on our visual examination of the blood stains found on the Hoover vacuum cleaner, we determined that genetic testing was required to determine the source of the blood.

e. Carpet: We recommended DNA and possible chemical testing of blood stains and prints left on the carpet from 5801 Eagle Drive, Rowlett, Texas.

f. Darin Routier's Blue Jeans: We recommended that genetic testing be conducted on several blood-stained areas of Darin Routier's blue jeans.

g. Pillow and furniture: We recommended that genetic testing be conducted on several blood-stained areas on the living room furniture, pillow and on the wine rack.


7. In late October 1996, Douglas Parks informed Mr. Epstein and I that he had been replaced as defense counsel by Darlie Routier and that we should send him a final bill for our services. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Parks informed us that he had been removed as trial counsel and Douglas Mulder had been substituted as the new trial counsel.

8. In late October or November 1996, I met with Douglas Mulder and his investigator, Lloyd Harrell, to discuss the testing that Barton Epstein and I had conducted to date. Barton Epstein did not attend that meeting.

9. During the meeting, I provided Mr. Mulder and Mr. Harrel with a general overview of the work done to date by Mr. Epstein and I. It was my impression that neither Mr. Mulder nor Mr. Harrell seemed particularly interested in that work. Both men asked me only a few questions. The meeting lasted about two hours.

10. Following the meeting, I expected that Douglas Mulder or one of his colleagues would follow up with me because the time in the introductory meeting was not sufficient time to explain in necessary depth the forensic significance of the analysis Barton Epstein and I had performed or had recommended be performed. Mr. Mulder did not retain either Barton Epstein or me to perform any of the testing we recommended, and so we discontinued all work on the case. I had no further involvement in the trial of Darlie Lynn Routier after November 1996.

11. Based on the analysis I performed in this case, it was my professional opinion in November 1996, and is my professional opinion today, that there were numerous pieces of physical evidence we reviewed that were not consistent with a staged crime scene. For example:


a. Review of the blood spatter on and near the vacuum cleaner indicated that the vacuum cleaner had not been pushed around by someone bleeding, but, instead, that most of the bleeding had occurred after the vacuum cleaner had been knocked down.

b. The placement of shards of glass below the location of the wine glasses indicated that the wine glass had broken while still in the rack and was not consistent with a person smashing or throwing the glass onto the floor as part of a staged crime scene.


12. In my professional opinion, scientific testing of the physical evidence would have been critical to Darlie Lynn Routier's defense. Independent testing of that physical evidence was crucial to properly evaluate the State's case. There were numerous potential holes in the State's case that required testing to conform or refute the State's presentation of the evidence and to provide evidence that could well have refuted the State's forensics testimony. These and other tests would have been critical to developing the physical evidence to refute the State's use of forensic and physical evidence and establish Darlie Lynn Routier's innocence.


a. Based on my blood-spatter analysis experience, for the theory that direct hits of Darlie Lynn Routier's blood being spattered from her stab would precisely covered each blood spatter of her tow sons Damon and Devon to have been correct would have required an extremely unlikely sequence of events. My preliminary analysis of the shirt Darlie Lynn Routier was wearing indicated only minimal area of blood spatter and the critical areas of spatter were not subjected to genetic testing. Genetic testing should have been conducted on those blood-stained areas of Darlie Lynn Routier's nightshirt. In addition, a microscopic examination should have been performed to determine the source of cuts observed on the left-side of the neck of the nightshirt.

b. Testing of the fiberglass and opaque material said removed from the bread knife should have been conducted to substantiate or dispute the State's theory that the source of these materials was the window screen in the garage, and the window screen was cut as part of the staged crime scene.

c. The apparent wood fragments and blue fibers removed from the knife found on the kitchen counter should have been microscopically examined to determine their source.

d, DNA testing should have been performed on the blood stains found on the Hoover vacuum cleaner to determine the identity of the persons or persons whose blood was on the vacuum cleaner.

e. DNA and possible chemical testing of blood stains and prints left on carpet and flooring should have been pursued to determine the identity of those who bled or left prints.

f. Genetic testing should have been conducted on several blood-stained areas of Darin Routier's blue jeans since they might have indicated that he was involved in the murder.

g. Genetic testing should have been conducted on several blood-stained areas on the furniture, pillow and wine rack to reconstruct the location and movement of individuals at the crime scene.


12. It is my professional opinion that further testing and evaluation of the items referenced above in numbered paragraphs 6-11 would help establish if in fact the crime scene was or was not staged. Such testing is necessary to confirm or refute the State's testimonial evidence presented at Darlie Routier's trial and to establish Darlie Lynn Routier's innocence. For example:

a. DNA testing and/or microscopic examination should be conducted on blood stains left on Darlie Routier's nightshirt, the Hoover vacuum cleaner, furniture items, pillow, wine rack, and all flooring and carpeting samples in the State's custody.

b. Chemical testing of the flooring and carpeting samples should also be explored. In addition, all microscopic slides of fibers and other matter removed from 5801 Eagle Drive should be examined to determine their source and/or to rule out possible sources.

c. Testing of the brush and powder used to dust the knives in the home at 5801 Eagle Drive should be performed and may refute the theory that fiberglass was consistent with the material from the garage window screen.

13. In order to conduct such testing, access to the above-referenced items in the State's custody, as well as samples of the garage window screen and all known blood samples would be required. Although certain testing might use up a portion of the existing sample, none would destroy the sample completely. Thus, there would be remaining sample for the State to conduct confirmatory testing should it desire to do so.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing 13 numbered paragraphs are true and correct.

STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RAMSEY

SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me by Terry L. Laber on July 11, 2002

Dated: ______________________________

[signed]
___________________________________
Terry L. Laber

 

[Sinsaint]

Sinsaint, I have to be brief now, but I will start with the DNA. Or, lack of. All DNA matches Routier, Nothing from an "intruder". Another strong point is that the screen was slit from the inside. Some, like Henri, choose to believe in an intruder carefully broke through a door, went to the kitchen and got a knife and then went and slashed it from the inside. Then, goes back and picks another knife from the kitchen to stab everyone. Darlie, who was always a light sleeper, sleeps downstairs because the it's quieter, sleeps through her and her sons being stabbed before she fully wakes up.

And yes, her wounds were superficial.

There is so much more. It has been an interesting case to have followed from the beginning. Very sad though. I would be happy to answer any questions I can.

The screen being cut from the inside is a common inaccuracy many people point to as a reason for her guilt. One of the reasons Darlie was arrested was because a blond hair was found stuck to the screen with the root still attached. In the affidavit for arrest and the later bail hearing it was suggested that this hair must have come from Darlie and proved she cut the screen from the inside. The hair and screen were tested after the bail hearing. The hair was not Darlie's and the screen had been cut from the outside. Linch, prosecution expert, testified to this at trial.

DNA actually supports Darlie's version. The prosecution's theory is that Darlie stabbed Damon first, then Devon and then herself at the kitchen sink. However, there is a castoff stain that is a pure mixture of Darlie and Damon on her shirt. The only way this could be possible is if Darlie's blood was already on the knife when Damon was stabbed.

I don't believe Darlie "slept through" anything. Assuming it was an intruder Darlie would have been the target and she's the person the intruder would have started with. During the attack on her one or both boys woke up so the intruder attacked them as well either to eliminate witnesses and/or to keep them quiet long enough for him to make his escape. Damon would have been attacked directly after Darlie while her blood was still on the knife to mix with his. Devon woke up and was attacked beside the couch where Darlie was laying. If Darlie were attacking Damon Devon would have ran towards the stairs to get his father for protection. If an intruder were attacking Damon Devon would have tried to get to his mother for protection. Evidence shows he was at that couch. Evidence also shows that Darlie was telling the truth when she said Devon walked to the entryway of the room where he was laying when paramedics arrived.

Darlie's wounds were not superficial. This is yet another misconstruing of the facts. At Darlie's bail hearing Parchman testified that Darlie's wounds were one to two inches from the carotid artery which to quote her was "a medical mile" from causing any real damage. We all know now that simply isn't true. At trial Dillwan testified the injury to Darlie's neck was two millimeters from the carotid artery, superficial to the carotid sheath. In medical terms this means the injury was just adjacent to the carotid artery. The general public has taken the word superficial and twisted it to mean something that was never said. Dr. Vincent Dimaio, the Godfather of forensic pathology, testified that had Darlie died he would have determined her wounds were defensive wounds and the manner of death as homicide.

If the prosecution's theory that Darlie cut herself at the sink is to be believed how do you explain the blood stain patterns on her shirt? There is staining on her shirt that shows blood from her neck ran to the left side and then down her back. The only way this could have happened was if she were laying down while her neck bled and keep in mind not a single person testified that she ever laid down with her shirt on.

 

[Sinsaint]

There is not likely to be DNA of a murderer if he was wearing gloves. He didn't spill any blood. Darlie's husband was never checked for the blood on his jeans.

The wounds may seem superficial to a doctors who work in emergency rooms and have to deal with horrific injuries on a daily basis. There is the same sort of controversy in the Jeffrey MacDonald case were at least one injury came very close to vital organs. Darlie had one injury to her neck and throat that missed killing her by a whisker. Doctors don't always have right judgment. Many doctors don't believe that bugging happens.

The police and FBI jumped to conclusions and just decided Darlie did it from the start. It was only after the trial that the truth came out about Darlie's husband being involved in insurance scams and being prepared to invite burglars into the house. Divorce was being planned at the time of the murders. I don't know if there was any insurance money on Darlie, or her kids, in the event of death, or if it was ever paid out. Darlie's husband was never properly or thoroughly investigated. It was a serious injustice and a probable wrong verdict.

Terry Laber, the forensic scientist who worked for the prosecution to start off with now has an affidavit on the internet pointing out the inconsistencies and errors in the prosecution forensic case.

Just wanted to elaborate on a few of your points and correct one...

James Cron was called in to evaluate the crime sceen within a few hours. He has done numerous interviews for television programs claiming that he decided within twenty to thirty minutes that Darlie did it. I will paraphrase his comments but can pull up the exact quotes if necessary. "After my initial walk through, finding no evidence of an intruder I decided one of the victims had to be the perpetrator... I told the investigators to start looking at the mother." This is evident in the fact he told Patterson to check Darlie's feet for cuts when he went to interview her the first time. This is a textbook scenario for what is called tunnel vision. He also told people at the scene to look for evidence Darlie was involved which explains why no evidence pointing to an intruder was never found. According to Darlie the intruder left through the window meaning the intruder most likely touched the gate that was found closed. This gate wasn't processed for evidence until six days later and the day after a heavy rain storm.

Brantley, an FBI profiler, was brought into the case. However, he never evaluated the scene to come up with a profile of the possible perpetrator. His evaluation was done backwards. Darlie was the perpetrator and he threw out a few theories about the evidence and erroneous crime facts to bolster his claims. First he explained what staging is and how people will stage items and then weave those items into their story. An example of this would be knocking over a table and then later saying "while I was fighting with the guy we hit a table and it got knocked over." He theorized Darlie staged the sock down the alley to give credence to her intruder claim. The problem with his theory is that Darlie never mentioned the intruder having a sock. If the sock were part of her staging she would have said something like "the guy put a sock in my mouth so I couldn't scream or I saw socks on his hands when I was fighting with him."

He also misstated some crime facts. He claimed there were no crimes of this nature in the area and home invaders always bring their own weapons when breaking into a house. Both statements were false. There was a rapist in the Dallas area who not only used knives found in the homes to attack his victims he used socks found in the homes to cover his hands. He also claimed that children wouldn't be harmed in this type of attack, rather they would be used as leverage over the mother to get her to comply with his demands. This assertion ignores the possibility (probability) that Darlie was attacked first and that the boys may have only been attacked because they woke up. They were no longer leverage; they were witnesses.

There was life insurance policies on Darlie and both boys. Her's was for $100-$150,000 and the boys were $5,000 each. The funeral expenses were around $12,000 so no money was made from their deaths.

Terry Labor was not a prosecution expert. He was a defense expert hired by the attornies who were initially appointed to represent Darlie. Both he and Bart Epstein came to the conclusion that the evidence supports Darlie's claims and that much of the evidence the prosecution claims was staged wasn't. When Mulder took over he had one meeting with them which Labor says Mulder just seemed disinterested in their findings and never called them to testify even though they were prepared to do so. During closing arguments the prosecution stated that no blood spatter or forensic experts testified on Darlie's behalf because they all came to the same conclusions as the state's experts. This statement was completely false and never corrected for the jury.

 

[Samson]

Just wanted to elaborate on a few of your points and correct one...

James Cron was called in to evaluate the crime sceen within a few hours. He has done numerous interviews for television programs claiming that he decided within twenty to thirty minutes that Darlie did it. I will paraphrase his comments but can pull up the exact quotes if necessary. "After my initial walk through, finding no evidence of an intruder I decided one of the victims had to be the perpetrator... I told the investigators to start looking at the mother." This is evident in the fact he told Patterson to check Darlie's feet for cuts when he went to interview her the first time. This is a textbook scenario for what is called tunnel vision. He also told people at the scene to look for evidence Darlie was involved which explains why no evidence pointing to an intruder was never found. According to Darlie the intruder left through the window meaning the intruder most likely touched the gate that was found closed. This gate wasn't processed for evidence until six days later and the day after a heavy rain storm.

Brantley, an FBI profiler, was brought into the case. However, he never evaluated the scene to come up with a profile of the possible perpetrator. His evaluation was done backwards. Darlie was the perpetrator and he threw out a few theories about the evidence and erroneous crime facts to bolster his claims. First he explained what staging is and how people will stage items and then weave those items into their story. An example of this would be knocking over a table and then later saying "while I was fighting with the guy we hit a table and it got knocked over." He theorized Darlie staged the sock down the alley to give credence to her intruder claim. The problem with his theory is that Darlie never mentioned the intruder having a sock. If the sock were part of her staging she would have said something like "the guy put a sock in my mouth so I couldn't scream or I saw socks on his hands when I was fighting with him."

He also misstated some crime facts. He claimed there were no crimes of this nature in the area and home invaders always bring their own weapons when breaking into a house. Both statements were false. There was a rapist in the Dallas area who not only used knives found in the homes to attack his victims he used socks found in the homes to cover his hands. He also claimed that children wouldn't be harmed in this type of attack, rather they would be used as leverage over the mother to get her to comply with his demands. This assertion ignores the possibility (probability) that Darlie was attacked first and that the boys may have only been attacked because they woke up. They were no longer leverage; they were witnesses.

There was life insurance policies on Darlie and both boys. Her's was for $100-$150,000 and the boys were $5,000 each. The funeral expenses were around $12,000 so no money was made from their deaths.

Terry Labor was not a prosecution expert. He was a defense expert hired by the attornies who were initially appointed to represent Darlie. Both he and Bart Epstein came to the conclusion that the evidence supports Darlie's claims and that much of the evidence the prosecution claims was staged wasn't. When Mulder took over he had one meeting with them which Labor says Mulder just seemed disinterested in their findings and never called them to testify even though they were prepared to do so. During closing arguments the prosecution stated that no blood spatter or forensic experts testified on Darlie's behalf because they all came to the same conclusions as the state's experts. This statement was completely false and never corrected for the jury.

Sinsaint, did this man have an alibi?

 

[Sinsaint]

Sinsaint, did this man have an alibi?

I don't believe so. Darlie's defense team didn't know about the crimes. He was caught in November 1996 but it was for credit card fraud or something. He was released roughly two years later and went right back to raping women within a few months. He was eventually caught in the house of one of his victims. His DNA was linked to five or six rapes dating back to December 1995. He was arrested (and convicted) for those rapes but it was years after Darlie was convicted. People who believe in her guilt ignore him as a possible perpetrator claiming Darlie wasn't raped and he never killed anyone ergo his crimes aren't similar.

I've looked up his appeal and his crime timeline is telling. He was raping women at an interval of roughly one rape a month with his last before the Routier murder being May 5, 1996. Then nothing. It was as if something made him suddenly stop. There were no more rapes attributed to him until after his release for credit card fraud (and Darlie's conviction). I found an article about him that stated aside from the ones he was convicted of, based on similarities of his known crimes (entering through windows, using knives and socks found in the victims' homes) he is suspected in roughly twenty other rapes. There was no DNA evidence found in those crimes so he was never charged. I would love to know the details of those unsolved rapes.

 

[Samson]

I don't believe so. Darlie's defense team didn't know about the crimes. He was caught in November 1996 but it was for credit card fraud or something. He was released roughly two years later and went right back to raping women within a few months. He was eventually caught in the house of one of his victims. His DNA was linked to five or six rapes dating back to December 1995. He was arrested (and convicted) for those rapes but it was years after Darlie was convicted. People who believe in her guilt ignore him as a possible perpetrator claiming Darlie wasn't raped and he never killed anyone ergo his crimes aren't similar.

I've looked up his appeal and his crime timeline is telling. He was raping women at an interval of roughly one rape a month with his last before the Routier murder being May 5, 1996. Then nothing. It was as if something made him suddenly stop. There were no more rapes attributed to him until after his release for credit card fraud (and Darlie's conviction). I found an article about him that stated aside from the ones he was convicted of, based on similarities of his known crimes (entering through windows, using knives and socks found in the victims' homes) he is suspected in roughly twenty other rapes. There was no DNA evidence found in those crimes so he was never charged. I would love to know the details of those unsolved rapes.

Sinsaint, this looks like a remarkably promising lead.
I am now provisionally believing the innocence side. It would be interesting to see how Ampulla and Wasapi counter this. It is a featured case at IA, and probably for good reason. I note Charlie Wilkes believes she is guilty, I must go back and read more.

 

[Henri McPhee]

There was life insurance policies on Darlie and both boys. Her's was for $100-$150,000 and the boys were $5,000 each. The funeral expenses were around $12,000 so no money was made from their deaths.

Terry Labor was not a prosecution expert. He was a defense expert hired by the attornies who were initially appointed to represent Darlie. Both he and Bart Epstein came to the conclusion that the evidence supports Darlie's claims and that much of the evidence the prosecution claims was staged wasn't. When Mulder took over he had one meeting with them which Labor says Mulder just seemed disinterested in their findings and never called them to testify even though they were prepared to do so. During closing arguments the prosecution stated that no blood spatter or forensic experts testified on Darlie's behalf because they all came to the same conclusions as the state's experts. This statement was completely false and never corrected for the jury.

That's interesting information. For some reason I have always had it in my head that Terry Laber once worked for the prosecution, but from what Laber said in his affidavit he says he was retained in the initial investigation by Douglas Parks and Wayne Huff then defense counsel to Darlie Routier. They seem to have been public defenders, though I may be wrong about that, and they seemed to be doing excellent legal work for Darlie until she was persuaded to change lawyers to the husband's lawyer. I don't think that was a good businesslike move. There was a conflict of interest.

I have never really made a profound study of the Darlie Routier case. It's just that I have had my doubts about it. To me the police and FBI decided she did it without the necessary supporting evidence, though they think they are right, as in the JonBenet case, and the Jeffrey MacDonald case. Was there ever any absolute certainty that there was only one insurance money policy on the two murdered kids by the husband?

 

[Sinsaint]

That's interesting information. For some reason I have always had it in my head that Terry Laber once worked for the prosecution, but from what Laber said in his affidavit he says he was retained in the initial investigation by Douglas Parks and Wayne Huff then defense counsel to Darlie Routier. They seem to have been public defenders, though I may be wrong about that, and they seemed to be doing excellent legal work for Darlie until she was persuaded to change lawyers to the husband's lawyer. I don't think that was a good businesslike move. There was a conflict of interest.

I have never really made a profound study of the Darlie Routier case. It's just that I have had my doubts about it. To me the police and FBI decided she did it without the necessary supporting evidence, though they think they are right, as in the JonBenet case, and the Jeffrey MacDonald case. Was there ever any absolute certainty that there was only one insurance money policy on the two murdered kids by the husband?

I agree her court appointed attornies were doing a far better job representing her. However, I don't think the issue was any loyalty Mulder had to Darin. Mulder did a television interview (Herzog I believe) where he stated he just didn't think any jury would believe Darlie could have killed her children so brutally. This was right on the heels of Susan Smith admitting to killing her children so jury members were definitely going to be open to the possibility. In short, he didn't take the case seriously enough.

As for Darin and the insurance policies... I don't believe he was involved. I believe the agent who wrote the policies testified that the policies were normal. Darin and Darlie both had insurance on themselves and the policies on the boys were fairly inexpensive with multi policy discounts. There were also no other policies on the boys or Darlie. Just as a side note, most insurance companies will not allow a child to be insured for over what is considered the cost for an average burial. Gerber is one of the largest child life insurance agencies and they only allow $10,000 for a child under 18. If Darlie or Darin wanted to make money off the death of the boys they would have needed ten to fifteen policies. The only policies that the police found on the boys were the two (one for each boy) that were testified to.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

I don't believe so. Darlie's defense team didn't know about the crimes. He was caught in November 1996 but it was for credit card fraud or something. He was released roughly two years later and went right back to raping women within a few months. He was eventually caught in the house of one of his victims. His DNA was linked to five or six rapes dating back to December 1995. He was arrested (and convicted) for those rapes but it was years after Darlie was convicted. People who believe in her guilt ignore him as a possible perpetrator claiming Darlie wasn't raped and he never killed anyone ergo his crimes aren't similar.

I've looked up his appeal and his crime timeline is telling. He was raping women at an interval of roughly one rape a month with his last before the Routier murder being May 5, 1996. Then nothing. It was as if something made him suddenly stop. There were no more rapes attributed to him until after his release for credit card fraud (and Darlie's conviction). I found an article about him that stated aside from the ones he was convicted of, based on similarities of his known crimes (entering through windows, using knives and socks found in the victims' homes) he is suspected in roughly twenty other rapes. There was no DNA evidence found in those crimes so he was never charged. I would love to know the details of those unsolved rapes.

Got any references for this guy? (Specifically about him and socks.)

 

[Sinsaint]

Got any references for this guy? (Specifically about him and socks.)

At the time that Brantley was testifying, however, police had records of other crimes that resembled the Routier murders. On December 8, 1995, an intruder entered a nearby residence, obtained a small kitchen knife, and held that knife against the throat of a victim in preparation for a sexual assault. Exh. B. On March 28, 1996, an unknown assailant threatened a child with a kitchen fork. Exh. A. In a series of other crimes, an unknown assailant used a single tube sock – similar to the sock found in the alley behind the Routier residence – to gag his victims and to conceal fingerprints. Exh. B (using a sock from the victims drawer as a gag) (December 8, 1995); Exh. C (same) (February 1, 1996); Exh. D (assailant used a tube sock to cover his hands) (April 7, 1996); Exh. E (using a sock from the victims drawer as a gag) (May 7, 1996). Had defense counsel been given this information, they would have been able to impeach Brantley with evidence that his investigation into similar crimes was inadequate, and that his conclusions were not based on inaccurate assumptions.

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Habeas/Habeas.html

This man was only convicted of two of these assaults (five or six other victims linked by DNA testified at his trial). He was never tried for his other suspected assaults so there is no known record of those crimes to compare similarities.

 

[wasapi]

I have never really made a profound study of the Darlie Routier case. It's just that I have had my doubts about it. To me the police and FBI decided she did it without the necessary supporting evidence, though they think they are right, as in the JonBenet case, and the Jeffrey MacDonald case. Was there ever any absolute certainty that there was only one insurance money policy on the two murdered kids by the husband?

Yes, there was only one policy by the husband, Darin. I lost many of my saved documents on the case with a computer crash a few months ago, but I can look up a reference or two. A facebook page about the case is a good reference option to find related links.

Speaking of Darin, I would like to say that after seeing him interviewed several times, as well as reading transcripts of him, I don't like him. As a human being, as a man. He is shallow, ignorant, materialistic.

But he isn't evil. He loves his children and his raising of their son, Drake, into adulthood is admirable. His simple mind wasn't equipped to predict how far his narcissistic, sociopath wife would go.

 

[Sinsaint]

Yes, there was only one policy by the husband, Darin. I lost many of my saved documents on the case with a computer crash a few months ago, but I can look up a reference or two. A facebook page about the case is a good reference option to find related links.

Speaking of Darin, I would like to say that after seeing him interviewed several times, as well as reading transcripts of him, I don't like him. As a human being, as a man. He is shallow, ignorant, materialistic.

But he isn't evil. He loves his children and his raising of their son, Drake, into adulthood is admirable. His simple mind wasn't equipped to predict how far his narcissistic, sociopath wife would go.

Which expert testified she's a narcissistic sociopath?

 

[Henri McPhee]

As for Darin and the insurance policies... I don't believe he was involved. I believe the agent who wrote the policies testified that the policies were normal. Darin and Darlie both had insurance on themselves and the policies on the boys were fairly inexpensive with multi policy discounts. There were also no other policies on the boys or Darlie. Just as a side note, most insurance companies will not allow a child to be insured for over what is considered the cost for an average burial. Gerber is one of the largest child life insurance agencies and they only allow $10,000 for a child under 18. If Darlie or Darin wanted to make money off the death of the boys they would have needed ten to fifteen policies. The only policies that the police found on the boys were the two (one for each boy) that were testified to.

I agree with you that a hit man may have been involved, but we don't know for certain the name of that hit man, if he exists. I am not as willing as you to give Darin a pass. His behavior when the police turned up was suspicious. I don't exactly know the forensic significance of blood on his jeans. All this talk of insurance scams and inviting burglars into the house is a red flag for me and it raises my eyebrows. It's not normal.

I just think the police and FBI never did a complete investigation. They are apt to jump to conclusions and they decided Darlie did it from the start. As far as I know there was never an investigation by a forensic accountant to see if Darin had more life insurance money from somewhere like the Cayman Islands or Belize, where there would be secrecy involved.

To go into the realms of speculation and guesswork and 'perhaps' and 'maybe' which would not be admissible in a courtroom, it could be that Darin intended to kill Darlie using a hitman but it went wrong and he missed by a whisker. I agree that Darlie is loathe to accuse her husband, or former husband, but this is very serious for her and there is a possibility she might be executed.

I agree with a poster on another forum:

This one is hard for me. I don't think she caused her own injuries- I do believe it was either the husband or an intruder (possibly hired by the dad).....
As a nurse, I highly doubt that neck wound would have been placed there as a decoy- that was meant to kill her plain and simple. By some miracle it was 1-2 mm too shallow.
You just don't cut there if you are trying to fake injuries and not kill yourself. That is what makes me think this wasn't her own hand.....
As far as involvement, I don't know... haven't read enough about it... I totally suspect the dad though just based on his history.

 

[Samson]

Yes, there was only one policy by the husband, Darin. I lost many of my saved documents on the case with a computer crash a few months ago, but I can look up a reference or two. A facebook page about the case is a good reference option to find related links.

Speaking of Darin, I would like to say that after seeing him interviewed several times, as well as reading transcripts of him, I don't like him. As a human being, as a man. He is shallow, ignorant, materialistic.

But he isn't evil. He loves his children and his raising of their son, Drake, into adulthood is admirable. His simple mind wasn't equipped to predict how far his narcissistic, sociopath wife would go.

Wasapi, this is not very useful.
First catch rabbit, please do not describe the thread subject like this until we can all be sure she did the crime.
I think it is vanishingly unlikely, so you are engaging in circular argument like a hamster.
You may be correct, but Sinsaint seems to have all the sorts of counter arguments that prove you wrong, difficult though you will find it.

 

[Sinsaint]

I agree with you that a hit man may have been involved, but we don't know for certain the name of that hit man, if he exists. I am not as willing as you to give Darin a pass. His behavior when the police turned up was suspicious. I don't exactly know the forensic significance of blood on his jeans. All this talk of insurance scams and inviting burglars into the house is a red flag for me and it raises my eyebrows. It's not normal.

I just think the police and FBI never did a complete investigation. They are apt to jump to conclusions and they decided Darlie did it from the start. As far as I know there was never an investigation by a forensic accountant to see if Darin had more life insurance money from somewhere like the Cayman Islands or Belize, where there would be secrecy involved.

To go into the realms of speculation and guesswork and 'perhaps' and 'maybe' which would not be admissible in a courtroom, it could be that Darin intended to kill Darlie using a hitman but it went wrong and he missed by a whisker. I agree that Darlie is loathe to accuse her husband, or former husband, but this is very serious for her and there is a possibility she might be executed.

I agree with a poster on another forum:

I don't think Darin hired a hitman. At most I think he might have hired someone to rob the house and it went horribly wrong. That might explain why Darlie agreed to have Mulder represent her and never even suggested Darin could have done it. In her mind she might have been thinking Darin hired the guy but he never wanted her or the kids to get hurt and she didn't want him to go to prison for it.

There couldn't have been other insurance policies. A) When a person dies the beneficiary who intends to collect on insurance policies needs to request a certified death certificate to send to each insurance company plus one or two more for legal purposes like declaring an estate. If there were multiple policies Darin would have needed to request a lot of death certificates and the police would have known about it. B) When an insurance company gets a claim on a policy where the death was a result of a homicide the insurance company will call the police to ask if the beneficiary is suspected of committing the crime. The police would know if the boys had multiple policies on them because they would have received multiple calls from multiple insurance companies. There is simply no way there was more insurance on the boys than the two policies everyone knows about. Darlie, on the other hand, might have been more insured than we know about.

I agree with the poster on the other board about Darlie's injuries. I don't believe they were self inflicted but I'll elaborate a bit on reasons other than the dangerously fatal neck wound. As a poster noted above, Darlie is apparently a narcissist. No narcissist is going to injure themself in such a way as to leave a hideous scar that can only be concealed with a turtleneck. If the neck wound were self inflicted Darlie would have needed to do it with her left hand. Same goes with the wound on her right forearm. She would have needed to switch the knife to her right hand at some point and stab her left shoulder. It defies logic she would have used both hands to stab herself with.

The wound on her arm is pretty telling. It's on the outer forearm and the direction is up and down. If someone were stabbing at her and she had her arms up in a boxer like defensive position this is the exact spot and direction you'd expect to see that wound. So Darlie, who doesn't appear to be all that bright, not only knows enough to inflict wounds on herself where they should be if she's defending herself but also makes inflicts them in the exact direction they should be? Nope. Not buying it. Same goes with the tears in her shirt. The prosecution claims they were part of hesitation stabs. It is far more likely those tears came from an attacker pulling at her with her shirt and stabbing at the same time. He managed to tear the shirt as it was pulled away from her body but didn't stab deep enough to penetrate her skin.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

At the time that Brantley was testifying, however, police had records of other crimes that resembled the Routier murders. On December 8, 1995, an intruder entered a nearby residence, obtained a small kitchen knife, and held that knife against the throat of a victim in preparation for a sexual assault. Exh. B. On March 28, 1996, an unknown assailant threatened a child with a kitchen fork. Exh. A. In a series of other crimes, an unknown assailant used a single tube sock – similar to the sock found in the alley behind the Routier residence – to gag his victims and to conceal fingerprints. Exh. B (using a sock from the victims drawer as a gag) (December 8, 1995); Exh. C (same) (February 1, 1996); Exh. D (assailant used a tube sock to cover his hands) (April 7, 1996); Exh. E (using a sock from the victims drawer as a gag) (May 7, 1996). Had defense counsel been given this information, they would have been able to impeach Brantley with evidence that his investigation into similar crimes was inadequate, and that his conclusions were not based on inaccurate assumptions.

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Habeas/Habeas.html

This doesn't give any details w.r.t. location or police report numbers or anything. It is simply assertion by defense attorneys. For all we know it could have happened in another state somewhere by someone's ex-boyfriend.

Moreover, the defense is complaining about not being given the incidents - isn't it their job to go find the incidents so they can create reasonable doubt? They are given a list of witnesses and they can depose them. It sounds like they are whining about not having done their own duties thoroughly.

This man was only convicted of two of these assaults (five or six other victims linked by DNA testified at his trial). He was never tried for his other suspected assaults so there is no known record of those crimes to compare similarities.

Who is it? Who was convicted? I would read about his crimes in the context of the Routier case if I knew who it was.