Darlie Routier

[wasapi]

Wellllllll....... I still go back to the point that it's not up to the prosecution, in this example, to prove that there was no intruder. (snipped)

So to go back to the Routier case, it's the job of the prosecution to prove that a) every single piece of evidence (and lack of evidence) is compatible with Darlie Routier being the murderer, and b) the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from the totality of evidence (and lack of evidence) is that Darlie Routier was the murderer. If any single piece of evidence is incompatible with Darlie's guilt, then it's a near-terminal problem for the prosecution. And if the whole evidence set can be explained by an alternative reasonable scenario in which Darlie is not the killer, then this indeed is a terminal problem for the prosecution.

In this case, it appears to me that the prosecution has met its burden of proof on both counts. I believe that, for example, the "intruder" evidence - and lack of evidence - is in fact wholly compatible with a no-intruder scenario; and I believe that the totality of the evidence (and lack of evidence) has only one reasonable conclusion: that Darlie was the murderer of her two sons - for many reasons, perhaps chief among which is the motivational reason of quite why any mythical intruder of any kind would break into the house, then kill the two children with a knife taken from within the house (all without waking the mother who was sleeping right next to these murders......), then only slightly injure the mother, then escape. If the motive for intrusion was robbery, then why stab the two children to death? If it was some sexual motive, then likewise. (And there are many more points at which I believe the evidence can only be reasonably explained by Darlie as murderer)

Well said. I appreciate when someone can comment, based on calm reason and steady logic. Absent is any emotional voice or judgmental tone.

Thank you, London John.

 

[Whip]

The prosecution has to prove to the satisfaction of the jury that the evidence supports its theory of the case

correct

and does not support the defense theory.

incorrect. this is a ploy by defense attorneys to lure the prosecution in and distract from the prosecution presenting their facts. Some prosecutors fall for it, others do not. prosecution is absolutely not required to address anything at all presented by the defense.

 

[Henri McPhee]

You people are just assuming Darlie tried to commit suicide. You assume nothing in a murder investigation. In my opinion, the husband is a bad character. There was a non-amicable divorce about to happen and he wanted to get rid of his wife so she could not share any proceeds of a divorce. Her injuries were not slight and she did not prevent the police from being called. I agree with this comment on the internet:

Generally speaking, if someone wants to take their own life they will just do it and police arrive at the aftermath.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

rape kit

Do I understand correctly that a rape kit was lost? It has been some time since I studied the Isaiah Fowler case, but I seem to recall that the knife came from within the house in that instance, and IMO the explanation that there was a crazed intruder is more likely than that Isaiah Fowler committed the murder.

 

[LondonJohn]

Do I understand correctly that a rape kit was lost? It has been some time since I studied the Isaiah Fowler case, but I seem to recall that the knife came from within the house in that instance, and IMO the explanation that there was a crazed intruder is more likely than that Isaiah Fowler committed the murder.

There was a rape kit used in the Routier case? Did Darlie Routier ever claim she was raped or sexually assaulted by the intruder/"intruder"?

 

[desmirelle]

You people are just assuming Darlie tried to commit suicide. {snip of Henri drivel}:

Darlie basically wrote a suicide note in her diary. She didn't go through with it, but she wrote it.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the story is a little murky

"There is some intimation in the trial record that the appellant was sexually assaulted by the unknown intruder and that there may have been a partial rape kit performed on her when she was transported to the hospital.54  At present, however, the appellant has provided no concrete evidence that such an examination was actually done,55 or, if it was, that any biological material that may have been recovered was retained.   As with the claim of saliva on the tube sock, the appellant fails to meet her threshold burden of showing that there is even any “evidence containing biological material” to be tested.56" Link1

1 Q. What was her response when you asked
2 her that [did she think that she was raped]?
3 A. She told me something like, "Well,
4 when I woke up I felt a pressure down there."
Link2

 

[Chris_Halkides]

investigators taking the fifth

The Skeptical Juror wrote, "The investigators, however, invoked their Fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination when they were cross-examined by Routier's attorney." I am unable to come up with a good reason why investigators would take the fifth. Nothing I have found so far convinces me that Mrs. Routier is innocent, but I have found some things that give me pause.

 

[HSienzant]

You people are just assuming Darlie tried to commit suicide.

Henri! How you doing?

Is there even one accused person in history of the world you think was correctly accused?

Cain maybe? Or was he framed by God?

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

The bloody sock... I think she must have planted it before she injured herself and made the call.

Where's the corresponding bloody shoe? How many people can run out of their socks without running out of their shoe?

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

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...

As an aside and not an attempt to derail the thread: The original damaged windshield is in the National Archives. Not discarded. Just replaced.
http://jfklancer.com/photos/limo/CE351.jpg

Hank

 

[desmirelle]

The Skeptical Juror wrote, "The investigators, however, invoked their Fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination when they were cross-examined by Routier's attorney." I am unable to come up with a good reason why investigators would take the fifth. Nothing I have found so far convinces me that Mrs. Routier is innocent, but I have found some things that give me pause.

If you read the trial transcript, the men took the fifth AFTER the defense attorney said/suggested they had broken the law, committed a felony - something along that line. Taking the fifth under those circumstances is reasonable, even for a police officer. If you're not sure where the questioning is going and you've been accused of something, taking the fifth is smart.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Recording

If you read the trial transcript, the men took the fifth AFTER the defense attorney said/suggested they had broken the law, committed a felony - something along that line. Taking the fifth under those circumstances is reasonable, even for a police officer. If you're not sure where the questioning is going and you've been accused of something, taking the fifth is smart.

Link "Jimmy Patterson, who was the lead detective on the case, went so far as to set up a secret recording device at the boys’ grave site. He hoped to catch Darlie on tape confessing to the crime. When asked about these activities on the stand, Patterson pled the Fifth Amendment which is done when a person wishes to refrain from self-incrimination." Unfortunately the link at this set, which presumably was to the transcript, does not work.

 

[Samson]

Link "Jimmy Patterson, who was the lead detective on the case, went so far as to set up a secret recording device at the boys’ grave site. He hoped to catch Darlie on tape confessing to the crime. When asked about these activities on the stand, Patterson pled the Fifth Amendment which is done when a person wishes to refrain from self-incrimination." Unfortunately the link at this set, which presumably was to the transcript, does not work.

Perplexing case, my puzzlement is the absurdity of the plan, with the aim to settle financial woes.
Like so many similar, how could it succeed?
How could there be a remotely plausible expectation?
This is my baseline in the case. The plan is just ridiculous!!!

 

[desmirelle]

Perplexing case, my puzzlement is the absurdity of the plan, with the aim to settle financial woes.
Like so many similar, how could it succeed?
How could there be a remotely plausible expectation?
This is my baseline in the case. The plan is just ridiculous!!!

I don't believe she had a financial motive, that theory is an attempt to explain the unexplainable. Is there ever a good reason to slaughter one's children?

I believe it's more likely this was a 'get back at Darin' event. Perhaps caused by a combination of things: her postpartum depression, suicidal state of mind prior to this night (her diary plan), the argument she and Darin had that night and who knows what else. She was supposedly sleeping downstairs because Drake was keeping her awake, so perhaps sleep deprivation played a part in it.

 

[wasapi]

I don't believe she had a financial motive, that theory is an attempt to explain the unexplainable. Is there ever a good reason to slaughter one's children?

I believe it's more likely this was a 'get back at Darin' event. Perhaps caused by a combination of things: her postpartum depression, suicidal state of mind prior to this night (her diary plan), the argument she and Darin had that night and who knows what else. She was supposedly sleeping downstairs because Drake was keeping her awake, so perhaps sleep deprivation played a part in it.

I agree. A financial reason never made sense. However, I believe the financial hardship they were under at the time, exacerbated her issues, post partum depression, narcissism, dissatisfaction with many aspects of her life. She exploded in rage. When she wrote in her dairy the night before, 'forgive me God, for what I am about to do', was she said regarding her plan to commit suicide. Rare for a narcissist. I don't believe that was what she wanted God to forgive her for. She murdered her children.

I don't care if she spends the rest of her life in prison. I also don't care if she is executed. I am not pro-death penalty. I did not vote for it. But this case needs to be resolved, and those precious little boys deserve justice.

 

[Henri McPhee]

I still think it was an unsafe verdict.

 

[wasapi]

I still think it was an unsafe verdict.

Henri. No one seems to care what you think about it. You never presented any real evidence, other then to cherry-pic a couple. You are simply not credible, just as the recourses you offer are credible. Your perspective is clear, as your posts are repeated and rehashed.

 

[Whip]

there is no 'safety' aspect to a verdict.

 

[Bill Williams]

I still think it was an unsafe verdict.

With due respect for my friend, LondonJohn, I agree with Henry McPhee. The sock evidence as well as Darlee's wounds being anything-but superficial are enough to cast doubt on the prosecution's theory.

She should have been acquitted, and since she was not she should be pardoned by the Texas governor.