Darin the silent one

[Dani_T]

Dani, why are you so convinced that the timeline is correct? That both boys were stabbed one right after the other?

Hey Goody

I'm actually not convinced that is the case (which is why in my last post I wrote 'But then again maybe we have all misunderstood how the crime happened...).

I think it is the default that we all run with (at least that I know I have run with) and we've all tried to fit Darlie's staging into those few minutes between Damon's last wound and the time he dies (taking into account the 911). It makes the most sense in many ways. For example we know that the sock had both the boys blood on it so unless it is TOTALLY unconnected to the crime and just happened to have both their blood on it from another time then it makes sense that both the boys were stabbed before at least that part of the staging. On the other hand why is there SO LITTLE blood on it?

But other things don't fit in with it. WHY was Damon still alive at all if she stabbed them both them moved onto all the staging? Why didn't she stab him again to kill him once and for all? What about the knife outline on the carpet? When did that get there? She was obviously bleeding profusely at that stage. How about the wash up at the sink? And the knife which looks like it was cleaned after being used on Devon but not after Damon and herself? What about the screen? She certainly wasn't bleeding (much) when she cut that.

So perhaps she killed Devon (who was so like his dad) and then went about staging- cutting the screen, wiping the bread knife, washing the butcher knife etc.

Perhaps Damon woke up during this (from the noise she was making?), saw Devon, even touched him and got blood on his hand (to leave the so called handprint on the couch). Perhaps he starts crying out or yelling or screaming and Darlie realises that she to cover her own butt not only because Damon has seen her running around staging stuff (not that he would know that at the time really) but also because he is going to draw attention to the scene before she is ready (she hasn't injured herself yet).

And so she stabs him out of desperation... but maybe because he was not the intended victim all along she just can't bring herself to make sure he is dead. Maybe that's why later on the 911 call she says for him to hang on, to not die. Maybe she is remorseful at that point because she has hurt her little Mamma's boy which was never her intention. Maybe that's why the knife outline is there because at one point she sets it down to go back to Damon not knowing what to do. But at the same time she realises she needs to revert back to plan and stick with her intruder story (because even if Damon DOES pull through the only choice she has is to focus on the here and now and cover her butt).

And so with Damon mortally wounded but still alive she runs the sock (??? I hate the sock ... where does it fit????), she cuts herself, breaks the wine glass, tries to wash up at the sink, goes towards the garage, looks in whilst holding the door etc, takes a minute to run through her story, and then calls Darin and 911.

How does it fit? Where does it fall apart (because I am sure it does).

 

[Dani_T]

Darin ran down the stairs wearing jeans. Did he regularly sleep in his jeans or did he hear screams, jump out of bed and take the time put his jeans on? What would you do in this situation?

It depends on which of Darin's statements you believe.

In his affidavit he wrote

2 police came in and I told them that my babys were stabbed, and she told them that he went out the garage. I ran upstairs to put my pants on, I looked (over?) and Drake was cring and I felt (relieved??) he was OK. I noticed my wallet hitting the floor and all I could think to do was to go to (Karen's presumably) house for Help....I went down stairs ran out the house and ran across the street....

At trial he said

Q. Over the recess, I was reading through
3 your statement. Did you put in your statement,
4 initially, is there something in there that after the
5 police got there, you went upstairs and put your pants
6 on?
7 A. No, sir, I had my pants on.
8 Q. But didn't you put in your
9 statement --
10 A. I put in my statement that I couldn't
11 remember putting my pants on before I went downstairs. I
12 knew I had my glasses on, because I can't see two feet in
13 front of me.
14 Q. Well, I mean, when you gave the
15 statement, you put in there that it wasn't until the
16 police got there, that you went upstairs and put your
17 pants on?
18 A. I knew that couldn't be true.
19 Q. But that is in your statement, isn't
20 it?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. That means you were down there nude?
23 A. No, sir, I wasn't down there nude. I
24 think I would have been embarrassed if the police
25 officers would have started coming in, and I would have
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
4493
1 been standing there stark naked.

So which is more likely/reliable?

In his affidavit written soon after the events he describes things like noticing his wallet hitting the floor which seems to be a distinct memory, and Drake crying. He describes how he was feeling - relieved that Drake was OK and that he he needed to do was get help for when the paramedics came. I'm no psychologist but they seem indicators to me of an actual event. On the other hand he talks about 2 officers arriving as if they came at once (which they didn't) and he leaves out Waddell meeting him on the front yard.

In his testimony suddenly he disputes all of this. says it didn't happen. And why? Well because he would have been embarrassed to be seen naked. This coming from a guy who used to apparently walk around the house naked before they had kids. He wasn't unused to being nude and months after the murders his reason for knowing why he was wearing pants when the police came was because he would have been embarrassed at the time? Never mind the fact that he had two dying/dead kids, a bleeding wife and an intruder on the loose. This whole embarrased story seems to me like it was made up as he became more 'removed' from the immediacy of the crime scene that night.

But notice he doesn't really answer the question at trial. We are still not sure whether he actually came down with pants on when he heard Darlie's scream or whether he wants us to think he went back upstairs before the police came in order to put pants on so he wouldn't be embarassed. He skirts around the whole issue really. I wonder why. Maybe he didn't want the jury to think that he left Darlie alone with the boys at any point during that time?

 

[StellaTravers]

I tend to believe he did have the pants on because of his description of the wallet, etc. I think he conveniently tailors his testimony to support Darlie's testimony as much as possible. Too bad he couldn't have been totally separated from Darlie and her family prior to the trial and all the police interviews. No doubt more of the truth would have came out.

 

[Goody]

It depends on which of Darin's statements you believe.

In his affidavit he wrote



At trial he said


So which is more likely/reliable?

In his affidavit written soon after the events he describes things like noticing his wallet hitting the floor which seems to be a distinct memory, and Drake crying. He describes how he was feeling - relieved that Drake was OK and that he he needed to do was get help for when the paramedics came. I'm no psychologist but they seem indicators to me of an actual event. On the other hand he talks about 2 officers arriving as if they came at once (which they didn't) and he leaves out Waddell meeting him on the front yard.

In his testimony suddenly he disputes all of this. says it didn't happen. And why? Well because he would have been embarrassed to be seen naked. This coming from a guy who used to apparently walk around the house naked before they had kids. He wasn't unused to being nude and months after the murders his reason for knowing why he was wearing pants when the police came was because he would have been embarrassed at the time? Never mind the fact that he had two dying/dead kids, a bleeding wife and an intruder on the loose. This whole embarrased story seems to me like it was made up as he became more 'removed' from the immediacy of the crime scene that night.

But notice he doesn't really answer the question at trial. We are still not sure whether he actually came down with pants on when he heard Darlie's scream or whether he wants us to think he went back upstairs before the police came in order to put pants on so he wouldn't be embarassed. He skirts around the whole issue really. I wonder why. Maybe he didn't want the jury to think that he left Darlie alone with the boys at any point during that time?

Maybe he was just lying from hour one.

What do you make of this, Dani?

Away from the ears of the cameramen, Sgt. Walling drew his superior into his confidence; he looked stunned. "Lieutenant, you won't believe what Mr. Routier said to me right before he left to go to the hospital with his wife. He turned to me and I swear to God he said, 'Golly, I guess this is the biggest thing Rowlett's ever had.' The man had two of his children slaughtered tonight, and he's acting like the damn circus is in town!"

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorio.../routier/6.html

 

[Dani_T]

Maybe he was just lying from hour one.

What do you make of this, Dani?

Away from the ears of the cameramen, Sgt. Walling drew his superior into his confidence; he looked stunned. "Lieutenant, you won't believe what Mr. Routier said to me right before he left to go to the hospital with his wife. He turned to me and I swear to God he said, 'Golly, I guess this is the biggest thing Rowlett's ever had.' The man had two of his children slaughtered tonight, and he's acting like the damn circus is in town!"

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorio.../routier/6.html

Hmmm - reluctant to really give it much weight to be honest. Crime library is not exactly renowned for getting all their facts straight for starters. Secondly they have put it in quotes which means they are claiming this is what he actually said - I'd like to know their source. If they are quoting either of the Davis' for example then I might be inclined to take the jist of it on board but I still wouldn't believe it was a 'direct' quote.

Even if he did say 'Golly, I guess this is the biggest thing Rowlett's ever had' I don't think it necessarily would had to have been taken in the way which Walling is quoted as taking it. It could have been said in a very dazed, shocked way... before Darin had really come to grips with what had happened. Who knows?

Ever since I started reading about this case I've just felt in my gut that whilst Darin has been involved in part of the cover up (perhaps even unwittingly), I don't think he played an active part in the murders that night and I also don't think he was quickly convinced to cover-up for her. But then again gut feelings are notoriously unreliable!!!

 

[Goody]

Hmmm - reluctant to really give it much weight to be honest. Crime library is not exactly renowned for getting all their facts straight for starters. Secondly they have put it in quotes which means they are claiming this is what he actually said - I'd like to know their source. If they are quoting either of the Davis' for example then I might be inclined to take the jist of it on board but I still wouldn't believe it was a 'direct' quote.

Even if he did say 'Golly, I guess this is the biggest thing Rowlett's ever had' I don't think it necessarily would had to have been taken in the way which Walling is quoted as taking it. It could have been said in a very dazed, shocked way... before Darin had really come to grips with what had happened. Who knows?

Ever since I started reading about this case I've just felt in my gut that whilst Darin has been involved in part of the cover up (perhaps even unwittingly), I don't think he played an active part in the murders that night and I also don't think he was quickly convinced to cover-up for her. But then again gut feelings are notoriously unreliable!!!

Check out Jeana's post in this thread on it.

I don't have a gut feeling about Darin but plenty of suspicions.

I bet there are plenty of things they said to police that haven't been doucmented or released to the public. I agree we can't know for sure if it is an accurate quote from the source I got it from but if he did say it, added to several other statements he has made, it could shed some light on where his head was at that night and what really happened. Think I will do a little more research to see what I can find.

 

[beesy]

Darin ran down the stairs wearing jeans. Did he regularly sleep in his jeans or did he hear screams, jump out of bed and take the time put his jeans on? What would you do in this situation

No, he says both. In one he first ran downstairs naked, then when he decided to go get Karen, he ran back upstairs to put his jeans on. This is in his first original hand-written statement. I tend to believe this one because it was taken soon after the murders. By the time he said he was never downstairs naked, he'd had a chance to re-think his story.

Also as I mentioned in a previous post, Darlie did not mention Drake upstairs when the police arrived. She also did not ask Darin if he noticed if the baby was okay before coming downstairs, and he was supposed to have been sleeping in the same room with Drake. The 911 tape indicates Darin just arriving on the scene. Darlie did not ask Darin anything about Drake's condition upstairs. I'll grant you they had their hands full downstairs but wouldn't you ask your husband about the baby sleeping upstairs? (Did you see Drake??? Is he okay

You're right that neither parent mentioned the baby upstairs to the PO's. But Darlie and Darin both say she asked him to check on Drake. I believe that Darin was upstairs asleep. I think they fought and he stormed off to bed. The bed is unmade and you know Darlie made that bed everyday. I think that's a little detail that they would not remember to stage.

 

[beesy]

Good point. I don't think Darin was sleeping at all that night, (there had to be sounds/noise during the time those boys were murdered) and I don't think Darlie just "snapped" and killed her kids....there was something planned that went horribly wrong....and Darin knows the story (or at least a good deal more than he's willing to admit). IMO

Darin knows the story, but he didn't plan any of this. He helped her pick up the pieces, but she was all alone in the decision to stab the boys.:twocents:

 

[beesy]

I have always thought that maybe there was a little sumthin' sumthin' with the little sisters.(yes I meant to pluralize.)The sister who brought the silly string has gone into her shell and will never talk to anyone about the case.Back to Darin-IF he fessesd up the charge would not be obstruction of justice but I am sure one of the legal minds on WS could tell us more specific. Conspiracy to Commit Capital Murder comes to mind-if there is such a charge,I don't know that's not my field.

Didn't Dana bring the Silly String?

 

[beesy]

Has no one thoght of this scenario before?There are some disrepencies about Darins whereabouts DURING the crime.Was he upstairs or not?What if he had an argument w/Darlie downstairs while the boys were sleeping?She may have gotten a ****you attitude and slain the 1st kid right in front of him and mortally wounded the2nd before he could react.Then the coverup begins,"Darlie we've got to do this and that etc."..I wish I could come up with a scenario that doesn't have the mom killing the kids but nothing comes to fruition.I am more concerned with the level of involvement that Darin had in this and how LE never looked at it properly.

Where are the discrepancies about Darin's whereabouts? They both say he was upstairs, every time, in every story. She even says something about it while on the phone with 911. I have no doubt Darin went to bed that night. The unmade big is a big clue. Darlie always made the beds and it's a tiny detail that I doubt they would think to stage with all the other things going on. Of course, that doesn't mean he didn't remember to unmake it. There are other reasons to believe he went to bed. I think he stormed upstairs to bed after the fight, giving her time to stew over it. This time is important because I think it's when she decided to kill the boys. If Darin did not go to bed, then you have to believe that Darlie just suddenly took off into the kitchen for the knife, ran back and stabbed away before Darin, who is much larger than Darlie, had a chance to stop her.

 

[Goody]

Where are the discrepancies about Darin's whereabouts? They both say he was upstairs, every time, in every story. She even says something about it while on the phone with 911. I have no doubt Darin went to bed that night. The unmade big is a big clue. Darlie always made the beds and it's a tiny detail that I doubt they would think to stage with all the other things going on. Of course, that doesn't mean he didn't remember to unmake it. There are other reasons to believe he went to bed. I think he stormed upstairs to bed after the fight, giving her time to stew over it. This time is important because I think it's when she decided to kill the boys. If Darin did not go to bed, then you have to believe that Darlie just suddenly took off into the kitchen for the knife, ran back and stabbed away before Darin, who is much larger than Darlie, had a chance to stop her.

Unless one believes he was in on it all along and just didn't have the guts to do the dirty work himself.

 

[beesy]

Unless one believes he was in on it all along and just didn't have the guts to do the dirty work himself.

True, so there are two things: that she did it in a blind rage and he stood there in shock while she stabbed both boys or that he planned it along with her. The first one is out. Darin could have easily stopped Darlie and there is no evidence of anything like that happening. The second, possibly, but then the ENTIRE tale is a lie, including the fight before bed. Everything up until then sounds like a pretty normal day. I think if they had planned it together, they would have gotten their story down better. The intruder story makes NO sense. Also, as many other parents do, I think they would have taken the boys out of the house and/or tried to create some sort of abduction scenario, possibly by a dingo or aliens..

 

[Goody]

True, so there are two things: that she did it in a blind rage and he stood there in shock while she stabbed both boys or that he planned it along with her. The first one is out. Darin could have easily stopped Darlie and there is no evidence of anything like that happening. The second, possibly, but then the ENTIRE tale is a lie, including the fight before bed. Everything up until then sounds like a pretty normal day. I think if they had planned it together, they would have gotten their story down better. The intruder story makes NO sense. Also, as many other parents do, I think they would have taken the boys out of the house and/or tried to create some sort of abduction scenario, possibly by a dingo or aliens.. [url="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_3_38.gif"]http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_3_38.gif[/url]

Unfortunately, we can't think for the Routiers. All we can do is analyze what they do and say in an effort to figure out what they were thinking. Some killers plan well, others don't plan at all, and still others are sloppy as hell. All of them make mistakes though, which usually puts them under suspicion if not in prison. I don't know what Darin's role in this was but too many things he's said keep nipping me in the heels.

 

[beesy]

Unfortunately, we can't think for the Routiers. All we can do is analyze what they do and say in an effort to figure out what they were thinking. Some killers plan well, others don't plan at all, and still others are sloppy as hell. All of them make mistakes though, which usually puts them under suspicion if not in prison. I don't know what Darin's role in this was but too many things he's said keep nipping me in the heels.

True again, but I am of the opinion that Darin wasn't in on it from the beginning. Why do you think Darlie was trying to clean up? I know why she cleaned the sink, but why her footprints? I guess her original plan did not include following the intruder through the house. That's the only reason I can think of. She has never changed that part of her story or the part about stopping, turning around and hitting the light. Is this to explain all the back and forth prints that she couldn't clean up?

 

[Goody]

True again, but I am of the opinion that Darin wasn't in on it from the beginning. Why do you think Darlie was trying to clean up? I know why she cleaned the sink, but why her footprints? I guess her original plan did not include following the intruder through the house. That's the only reason I can think of. She has never changed that part of her story or the part about stopping, turning around and hitting the light. Is this to explain all the back and forth prints that she couldn't clean up?

Funny, but I have been thinking about footprints today, too. I think she just screwed up because the footprints came late. By that I mean the blood from her neck wound had to seep down her body to her feet to make the foot prints. She must have been in the UR early in the crime when her arm was the only injury or maybe while her shirt was absorbing most of the blood from the neck wound. So she didn't have an explanation ever planned for the lack of footprints leading to the UR. Maybe she didn't realize how much blood she'd left in there. It stands out to us because we are looking at close ups but in actuality the drops are probably smaller and not as noticeable in real time.

As for why she tried to clean up footprints, that is confusing. That area was near the sink, I believe. It is hard to say since they didn't use all of that evidenc at trial. I understand though that it is common for someone to start one thing, then change their mind and go another route when staging or trying to cover up a crime.

What I don't get is why she didn't wrap a towel around that bleeding arm if she didn't want it bleeding everywhere. You'd think that would be the first thing she would do, esp if she were cleaning up blood on the floor.

Another footprint puzzle for me is why Darin has no footprints. He was close enough to the bodies late enough to have stepped in the blood that pooled around the boys. Was he just extra careful that he didn't? Sems odd that he got no blood at all on his feet and Darlie was dripping everywhere and stepping everywhere.

 

[Jimthecarpetguy]

Funny, but I have been thinking about footprints today, too. I think she just screwed up because the footprints came late. By that I mean the blood from her neck wound had to seep down her body to her feet to make the foot prints. She must have been in the UR early in the crime when her arm was the only injury or maybe while her shirt was absorbing most of the blood from the neck wound. So she didn't have an explanation ever planned for the lack of footprints leading to the UR. Maybe she didn't realize how much blood she'd left in there. It stands out to us because we are looking at close ups but in actuality the drops are probably smaller and not as noticeable in real time.

As for why she tried to clean up footprints, that is confusing. That area was near the sink, I believe. It is hard to say since they didn't use all of that evidenc at trial. I understand though that it is common for someone to start one thing, then change their mind and go another route when staging or trying to cover up a crime.

What I don't get is why she didn't wrap a towel around that bleeding arm if she didn't want it bleeding everywhere. You'd think that would be the first thing she would do, esp if she were cleaning up blood on the floor.

[color=#0000ff[quote]]Another footprint puzzle for me is why Darin has no footprints. He was close enough to the bodies late enough to have stepped in the blood that pooled around the boys. Was he just extra careful that he didn't? Sems odd that he got no blood at all on his feet and Darlie was dripping everywhere and stepping everywhere. [/color]

Where are Darins footprints anyway?There was alot of blood and sooner or later he had to have traipesed thru a puddle somewhere and then left a mark.Unless he was careful around the crime scene,Hmmm.

 

[Goody]

Where are Darins footprints anyway?There was alot of blood and sooner or later he had to have traipesed thru a puddle somewhere and then left a mark.Unless he was careful around the crime scene,Hmmm.

That is exactly my point. Pretty convenient he wasn't wearing a shirt, too. By the time he got to the hospital, he'd already cleaned up and borrowed a shirt fromt he neighbor. Consequently no blood evidence that could be tested except what little was on his jeans. Not saying he had to have one or even should have, but it is not impossible that his shirt went down the sewer with the other sock and just was never found. Just another one of those little things that makes my antenna twitch.

 

[beesy]

That is exactly my point. Pretty convenient he wasn't wearing a shirt, too. By the time he got to the hospital, he'd already cleaned up and borrowed a shirt fromt he neighbor. Consequently no blood evidence that could be tested except what little was on his jeans. Not saying he had to have one or even should have, but it is not impossible that his shirt went down the sewer with the other sock and just was never found. Just another one of those little things that makes my antenna twitch.

I've thought about his back and how lucky he was to be shirtless(if that's even true) and he made sure he said he touched all 3 victims to excuse any blood on his jeans.
I've never thought about his footprints, or the lack thereof. :waitasec: