Poll: Did Darlie Routier murder her children?

[nicola]

She had plenty of time to plant the sock. Moreover, how do you know she just woke up? Can you give me some evidence? These "stories" were given over a period of time. Still to this day, she cannot seem to recall how many "intruders" there were. If they were on her, if they fought her, etc. I would think that by now she would have a story that would remain consistent. Its not.

Please read my reply to kitty 5001 for the reason why she didnt have time to plant sock. How can I give evidence of someone being asleep? The same as you cannot give me evidence that she was awake. Although there was evidence of her lying on her sofa, sleeping or not, beacuse there was blood showing the outline of her pillow on the sofa.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Please read my reply to kitty 5001 for the reason why she didnt have time to plant sock. How can I give evidence of someone being asleep? The same as you cannot give me evidence that she was awake. Although there was evidence of her lying on her sofa, sleeping or not, beacuse there was blood showing the outline of her pillow on the sofa.

Neither of us can give any evidence because she lied so many times.

 

[nicola]

Her alibi for sleeping on the couch was that she was a light sleeper and the baby kept her awake all night, so saying she was in a "deep sleep" doesn't wash. Moreover, she said that one of the boys woke her up and spoke to her, so there goes another theory of your's. Nothing she says makes sense. Of course they were scared because they say their own mother attack them with a butcher knife. So, either they made noise, woke her up or not. She cannot even make up her mind after all this time. Read the transcripts. Read all 16 statements. You can't have it to suit you. The evidence speaks for itself. She lied on the witness stand and so did her husband.

Just because someone thinks they are a light sleeper does not mean that they do not occasionally go into deep sleep. Eg my mam is a real light sleeper but she does not always hear my sister coming in, she does most of the time but not all. Darlie said that she was slepeping downstairs cause her baby would wake her up, that indicates to me that she was tired beacuse of baby waking her all time. It depends how tired she is. She stated that one of the boys said 'mommie' she doesnt state how clearly or infact how loudly, maybe he didnt even say it as memory can be very decieving especially coming out of sleep. I dont think you should put so much importance on the '16 different stories' as they are all quite simular, and the fact that she had been asleep and had just woken would leave her confused, some of the 'stories' came off different people, who would remember what they were told differently. As you asked me before though, I cannot prove she was asleep but she was definatly lying down because of the blood outline from pillow on sofa. The only way to prove/disprove guilt is to give her another trial and let her defence team access to all evidence so they can test them. There have been to many innocent people sent to their death, there has even been cases where people have been released from death row where they would have been executed.

 

[CW]

Darlie told 15 or 16 different storys I was bought up not to lie because if you tell just one lie you have to tell another lie to cover that first lie up and IMO that's why she told so many different story's.(lies) If you've did any research here you would of found that many of us have said that she deserves a new trial due to the trial transcript errors,but the out come will be the same GUILTY...

 

[nicola]

Darlie told 15 or 16 different storys I was bought up not to lie because if you tell just one lie you have to tell another lie to cover that first lie up and IMO that's why she told so many different story's.(lies) If you've did any research here you would of found that many of us have said that she deserves a new trial due to the trial transcript errors,but the out come will be the same GUILTY...

I have read others opinions here and am aware that other people also believe she deserves a new trial, I was just stating my opinion. Out of those that have expressed the opinion that she deserves a new trial most give thier reason as transcript errors. I however believe she deserves a new trial firstly because of reason stated previously, secondly because the defence should have a chance use new testing methods on the evidence. Lastly I believe that since the first trial was such a 'farce', as there is alot of controversy surrounding evidence. It seems to me that this woman was convicted on expert testimony not on what happened. There is alot of stuff that simply does not add up. I will not be convinced of Darlie Routiers guilt unless all the doubts I have on the subject are 'cleared up'.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Please read my reply to kitty 5001 for the reason why she didnt have time to plant sock. How can I give evidence of someone being asleep? The same as you cannot give me evidence that she was awake. Although there was evidence of her lying on her sofa, sleeping or not, beacuse there was blood showing the outline of her pillow on the sofa.

She had plenty of time, regardless of your post.

 

[whitywendy]

Okay, how do I start? New poster here (1st time ever anywhere) so...sorry if I ramble on etc.

I was living in Texas (Galveston) when this occurred. I remember thinking (prior to any info being released) that the husband had something to do with it. Then when I watched the segment that night on the news, I just knew that man either did this or hired someone to do it. My reasons, were of course completely based on my "gut feelings". Mind you I am/was the same age as Darlie and just couldn't see or fathom her harming her children. Low and behold (2 weeks later) the silly string tape is aired. I just stood there in amazement watching her laugh, chop on her gum and of course spraying the "guilty string". Yep, that mother killed her children...end of story, several days later she was arrested. I did not follow the trial but I do remember reading an article the LA TIMES wrote up on the trial after she was found guilty. I remembered thinking at that time, there has to be something else to this story because I just couldn't see the "her kids were just in her way" justify these actions. (i.e. doubt.) I believe this was due to the fact that I did not have any children yet and just didn't actually grasp the horrible, horrible crimes against those two precious little boys. Around this time, I lost my mother, she was so young, I was so young, it just "broke" me. I remember everything that happened the day I found out of my mother's death. Everything of course was in slow motion but I do remember it as though it was yesterday. But Darlie couldn't remember anything about the night some evil person broke into her house and tried to rape/kill her and succeed in killing her children.

I actually forgot about this incident until I ran across the court tv crime story around the 10 year anniv. and there is something in the story towards the end that says "in all fairness, new evidence has given doubt that Darlie actually committed these crimes. OH MY GOODNESS, I thought and I googled her and found the site ran by her family I believe and then the best one of all that proclaims her innocence but yet gives you access to all of the trial transcripts that proves she is evil evil evil evil..... Now I must admit I went back and forth over that darn fence the entire time I read the transcripts. The site is so misleading. This was last year and finally a little of a month ago, I found this site and read just about everything posted. I want to thank Cami, Jeana, GOODY (RIP), Camella, Beesy, JimPence, Mary and of course there are a few others on here that I just can't remember at this time for helping clear my mind and finally be able to sleep at night now that I do know deep within my soul that Darlie is where she belongs.

Long story short...do you think that she will be communed to LWOP since Texas just dropped the DP for the young women who smothered her newborn son but wasn't caught until the newborn girl was discovered. I read that they couldn't prove that she was a danger to others so therefore they communed her. What if this happens with Darlie? I believe we are going to have to be HAPPY with her living. But just thinking about her having to be with the regular prison population puts a smile on my face and gives me hope that she WILL get what she deserves one way or the other.

Sorry for writing so much, you guys should be thankful I didn't write everything I have been thinking, lol. On that note, I wish everyone a beautiful and safe holiday weekend

 

[whitywendy]

Oops sorry Windchime.. thank you too!

 

[whitywendy]

Please read my reply to kitty 5001 for the reason why she didnt have time to plant sock. How can I give evidence of someone being asleep? The same as you cannot give me evidence that she was awake. Although there was evidence of her lying on her sofa, sleeping or not, beacuse there was blood showing the outline of her pillow on the sofa.

What blood outline of the pillow on the sofa? Did I miss out on this info? Where in the transcripts does it mention the outline of the pillow?

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

As you asked me before though, I cannot prove she was asleep but she was definatly lying down because of the blood outline from pillow on sofa.

Do you mean that the shape of the pillow was outlined on the sofa or that the shape of Darlie's head was outlined on the pillow? Because if it was the outline of a pillow on the sofa, all that would show is that there was a pillow on the sofa, not that Darlie was lying down.

 

[cami]

What blood outline of the pillow on the sofa? Did I miss out on this info? Where in the transcripts does it mention the outline of the pillow?

I've never read anything about an outline of blood of the pillow. Darlie did not bleed on the sofa, she bled at the kitchen sink where she inflicted the neck cut...that's why there was so much blood rinsed down the sink and the counter wiped..as the luminol proved.

She could have rested her bleeding arm on that sofa pillow and transferred the blood that way.

MOO

 

[cami]

Thank you for that info as I have not read any where abot it being found in someones garden. Although I still am finding it hard to see how this woman is guilty. I cant see her having enough time, after 'stabbing her kidsw', to plant the sock.I remeber reading a Drs statement that one of the boys would have had approx (cant remember exact time off top of my head) 9-11mins to live after being stabbed. Therefore, as Darlie was on phone to the 911 operator for nearly 6mins that leaves her bout 3-5mins to plant sock and viciously attack herself, and judging by the extent of her bruises/knife wounds it looks to me that there would be no way she could have done this as quickly as implied. Another thing that bothers me is the bruising/knife wounds themselves, I cant understand how a right handed person can injure thier right forarm as servere as that themselves (the wound went right to te bone). Her neck wound came within 2mm of severing her carriod artery and her necklace was embedded in the wound, if she did cut her own neck and was hesitant in doing so why wouldnt she 'go round' her necklace. The bruising on both her arms looks like she was defending herself from an attack. Since Darlie is right handed, if she did attack herself, why is the more serious wound on her right arm as I would expect it to be on her left? I really dont think she did this, after all if she did kill her kids why not wait untill they were dead to call ambulance and claim that she had been hit unconcious, why did she call an ambulance to try and save them?

Nicola, if you read the trial transcripts and not the .org site, you'd know that Guzman testified as to the knife in his backyard and you'd know that the tool expert ruled that knife out as a murder weapon.

You'd also learn that Damon was stabbed, moved his position and was stabbed again and it's the second group of stabbings that starts the 9 minute timeline. Actually, the 911 call starts it.

If she was defending herself from a vicious attack that caused those bruises, why didn't the perp just punch in her straight in the mouth and knock her out and then kill her like he did those boys? How do you think she got those bruises? What was the weapon used? Why no broken bones?

She called the ambulance for herself in my opinion..she went a little too deep when she cut her own neck at the kitchen sink.

 

[cami]

Okay, how do I start? New poster here (1st time ever anywhere) so...sorry if I ramble on etc.

Long story short...do you think that she will be communed to LWOP since Texas just dropped the DP for the young women who smothered her newborn son but wasn't caught until the newborn girl was discovered. I read that they couldn't prove that she was a danger to others so therefore they communed her. What if this happens with Darlie? I believe we are going to have to be HAPPY with her living. But just thinking about her having to be with the regular prison population puts a smile on my face and gives me hope that she WILL get what she deserves one way or the other.

Sorry for writing so much, you guys should be thankful I didn't write everything I have been thinking, lol. On that note, I wish everyone a beautiful and safe holiday weekend

Hi wendy: No, I don't think Darlie will get her sentence commuted unless she receives a new trial for some reason and she pleads this time and does not continue to claim innocence and tells what Darin's role in all this is/was. The state is quite prepared to try her for Devon's murder if she receives a new trial anyway.

Welcome to our forum Wendy...sort of quiet right now...with one thing or another.

 

[JMO8778]

Hi,I'm new to this thread(but not the forum),but it does appear to me Darlie is guilty,IMO.I haven't read a lot about the case,so I do have a couple questions.. is it true one of her sons was alive and talking when she made the 911 call? And,how and when is it thought she got the bruises? I remember seeing Darin on Unsolved Mysteries and he was lying,as I later found out,talking about money and saying he was making more and more every year..."so what was the problem?",he asks.Problem is,it seems he knows more than he's saying and IMO,he's holding back out of fear of being charged with something,right alongside there with Darlie.
What I can gather out of it is perhaps they got into an argument when he returned from taking her sister home(taking too long,I recall),and I think Darlie suspected they were having an affair.I think it escalated into a psychical fight,with Darlie sustaining the bruises then.I think she killed the kids out of anger at Darin,to hurt him to the fullest degree possible.
I've also read the bruises didn't show up until later,is it possible they got into another fight after she got out of the hospital,either that, or the bruises just needed time to come to the surface and show up?Any thoughts?Like I said,I don't know a lot about this one,so I appreciate anything anyone can fill me in on....thx.

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

You're right, JMO. Bruises take time to appear.

 

[StellaTravers]

Nicola, if you rely on emotion, reading only the supportive sites,listening to her family or even corresponding with Darlie herself, it is apparent she is innocent. BUT if you read the transcripts and use logic, it is hard to deny that she is guilty. I have been on both sides of the fence. I even TRIED to put myself back on her side of the fence because I didn't want to believe she did it. She seems so loving, her family is so devoted, etc. But to believe she is innocent, everyone involved with this case (except for Darlie and her family) are lying. Granted, innocent people do get convicted. I just don't think this is one of those cases.
You mentioned the sock. As pointed out, it is totally possible for the sock to have the SMALL blood spots that it did and her carry it out. It is totally possible for her to have ran it out there not leaving blood traces behind because IMO she wasn't injured at the time. Can't prove it, but chances are if an "intruder" had the sock and got the boys blood on it then hers would have been there too. By the way, why in the world would an intruder pick up a sock to begin with? We already know "he" was careless enough to drop the knife-why in the world did he hold onto a sock long enough to drop it outside? Doesn't make sense for him to have it in the first place, but if he was going to drop a knife why not drop the sock?
As for her wounds, I have no idea how she could have self-inflicted bruises like that. Personally, I don't think she did it herself. But how would someone else have quickly done that without waking up the children or her having an opportunity to scream or make other noise? And why would they waste the time or put themselves in danger of being caught by striking her arms repeatedly when it would have been so easy to stab her? All those motions that would have been used creating bruises inside her arms could have been more effectively used wielding the knife? Then there are the cuts to her shirt that have no underlying cuts on her body. How would those have been made by an attacker? After all she was flat on the couch-we know that because her statement has never wavered that she first remembers being on the couch and seeing the intruder walking away. She's on the couch laying down so her shirt is going to be against her body, not away from her as if it would be if she were standing up. Yet there are cuts to the shirt where there are no cuts to her body.
True I can't prove any of my opinions, but until they can be disproven I can't discount them either.
Then there is the bloody outline of the knife on the carpet. Why would someone else let go of the knife even for a second? And of course the handprint that showed up with the Luminol. No, there are no pictures in evidence but why would the investigators make that up? I know the supporters want to say the police were antsy to get the case solved, but I don't think they were that anxious to take the chance that a killer was loose on the neighborhood. And, even if they were trying to rush to solve it(which I don't believe they were) it would take someone really creative to make up "we saw a handprint in blood that had been wiped off the couch". Not going to happen. And of course the massive amount of blood surrounding the sink. Now, the people believing in Darlie's innocence will tell you that the blood was wiped off by Darlie wetting towels. Fine, then there should have been SMEARS of blood not a surface that was devoid of any blood yet luminescent under the luminol.
Then there is the knife. Supporters claim the fiber that was found on it was from the brush used testing it. However, there was also the rubber coating that is found on the screen fibers.
I'm not even worrying with the silly string deal but just for the record the family tells of a very solemn, tearful service held prior to that. The one thing I did notice about the silly string clips is there is no evidence on her face of having shed tears. Have you seen her face after she cries? That wasn't it. But true everyone handles grief differently and maybe she wasn't crying-doesn't prove everything. You would think though if someone had attacked her she would have been a bit more shaky about coming out in public. nothing fearful there.
Then there are the little things. For years she and her family have denied that they had any marital problems or argued that night. Suddenly they both admit they spoke of a separation that night. Why did they feel a need to lie about that? And what about the fact that she was sending letters out from jail accusing someone and detailing facts about the investigation that were blatant lies? Why would someone innocent do this? It doesn't make sense.
In order for her story to be true a lot of "odd things" have to be overlooked. The best way that explains them away is police ineptitude or corruption. It isn't just police though that have to be lying or mistaken in order for her to innocent. It is the paramedics, Karen Neal, Barbara Jovell. For this to be true, we have to believe that someone came into that house and managed to attack all three of them (Damon, Devon, and Darlie) quickly and quietly enough for none of them to have the opportunity to move away from their original spot of rest. We know Darlie couldn't have been attacked first because she had those massive bruises that would have taken time and caused enough movement around the couch to wake up the boys, giving them time to move or scream while the person was distracted by Darlie. Devon most probably was awake enough to struggle some, since he has that injury on the back of his leg and the cut on the arm where he reflexively put up the arm to protect himself. Damon moved but only after he was attacked. So how does someone do this without at least one victim being alerted? The theory out there is that two people did it. That would give more opportunity for trace evidence to be left.Doesn't fit.
Read the transcripts thoroughly with an open mind. It is so easy to be swayed by emotion but the unfortunate truth lies in the transcript.

 

[Mary456]

I've also read the bruises didn't show up until later,is it possible they got into another fight after she got out of the hospital,either that, or the bruises just needed time to come to the surface and show up?Any thoughts?

This is going to come as a shock to everyone here, but I have a few thoughts about the bruises (no boo-ing from the audience, and yes, I'm talking about Jeana and Cami, lol!)

JMO, here's how it shakes out:

1. The murders occurred on 6/6. The bruises didn't show up until 6/10.

2. Darlie was in the hospital for 2 1/2 days, during which time her right arm was checked by nurses and doctors every day, including the day she was discharged. No bruising, no swelling, no redness.

3. Every single doctor and nurse testified that, at the very least, there would have been red discoloration and some swelling on her right arm within 24 to 48 hours after suffering enough blunt trauma to cause the deep purple bruises photographed on 6/10.

The only reasonable explanation is that Darlie inflicted the blunt trauma to her right arm after she left the hospital. Could Darin have beat her after she was discharged? No, I don't think so. If he had, you would expect bruises on both arms, not just her right arm.

The ICU nurse testified that Darlie became very agitated when the police photographed her wounds in the hospital. Why? Well, I think it's because she knew her arms had no bruises, and she'd already told a zillion people that she'd fought and struggled with a really big intruder.

She couldn't undo what she'd already stated to police, so she tried to make the evidence fit her story. Darlie tried her best, but she was really bad at it.

 

[JMO8778]

thx,that's sounds plausible.Is it true her lips were swollen? If so, I wonder how that happened?

 

[nicola]

Stellatravers, thanks for post. I aint got time noe to reply to everything metioned but I will ask you a question regarding your theory to her kitchen sink. If the sink was cleaned up, as you stated there was massive amount of blood INFRONT of sink, why was there not blood found elsewhere around sink. There are no traces of blood found anywhere but where Darlie said she was standing. Most importantly if a clean up took place where are the cleaning products/items used to clean up? If towels were used, as you say, there would have been smears of blood. Luminol makes blood turn flurescent in dark, the pictures I have seen of the kitchen sink dont need luminol to see blood as they are taken in daytime. As you see in pictures the blood has not been wiped around either. I dont think a clean up occured at all. You may be right about emotion, but how can you read about two kids being killed and not feel some emotion. I have a child myself and as a mother I cannot even begin to think about something like this happening to kids. If Darlie gets a second trial and she was found guilty, believe me I would even volunteer to be first to insert the tubes into her arms. Although if she did get second trial I doubt she would be convicted. I understand there are evil people in world who do evil things, yes even to kids, but I dont think Darlie is one of them.

 

[JMO8778]

You're right, JMO. Bruises take time to appear.

thx for both the responses I got on this one..one other thing I was thinking about,is that I'm a very easy bruiser myself,and I wonder if Darlie is as well.Whenever I get blood taken for lab work,I end up with a bad bruise on my arm a few days later,as it does take time to come to the surface,esp if it's going to be a severe bruise..I wonder if the same could have happened to Darlie...could some of it have been from needles being inserted into her arm for iv's or for bloodwork?bc in the pics,some of it looks very close to where blood would have been taken or an IV inserted.JAT.