Darlie Innocent? Then how do you explain... ?

[annkitty0630]

Well miss kitty I would say it proves that no one has come up with any evidence of innocence, even though there are 236+ posts on this particular thread which is titled evidence of innocence.

Well Kaiser Sousa, in no way there being 236+ posts means to me that there is "No Evidence of Innocence" just because a particular thread is followed by particular individuals???? It also does not justify why some people are not allowed to take their own time in forming their own opinions as to guilt or innocence. Please I have always believed these sites were meant for people to air their differences and come to their own conclusions in life??? JMO, and mine will change when I feel the evidence is enough. Sitting and still waiting?? I guess my problem with this has always lied in the fact of the Death Penalty when this case IN MY OPINION does not warrant it!!!!! PERIOD!! Take Care, Ann:banghead::twocents::twocents::waitasec:

 

[annkitty0630]

IMO. All these years later, and all the attention to this case, hasn't yielded anything that gives me any reasonable doubt (let alone evidence of innocence!)

BOOO!!! Then Again, Tuffy, to eachs own and we all have opinions??? :croc::waitasec::banghead:

 

[cami]

And after well over 10 years..........no evidence that proves her guilt absolutely, positively, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Yes there is. There's more than enough evidence to prove her guilt. If you only read her side then of course you will believe she's been unfairly prosecuted and convicted.

I too have never seen the graveyard video (because there isn't one), yet I believe strongly in Darlie's guilt.

Jeesh it's time that old "jury didn't see the graveyard video" was put to rest. Do you actually believe that had such a video been played in court, the jury would have acquited her? Not likely given all the blood evidence, her lack of serious injuries, her lies, and the absolute lack of any evidence that anyone was in that home that night but the family,etc.

 

[cami]

Darlie's statements cannot be considered useful for this kind of judgment. She had cops telling her what to say and asking her numerous questions making it seem as though she had many stories. What kind of evidence do you want? Can you answer one question or are you focusing on my spelling errors because you really don't have anything to say. If there were a hired killer, the knife and the screen plus Darin, Oh did I get that name right, would make perfect sense. What evidence can you look for that would be expected. Oh and expecting evidence is surely what would make a bad cop. This is what got her railroaded in the first place.

That is completely false Heart. Where did you get the idea that cops told Darlie what to say?

All of your posts are nothing but wild speculation, not backed by any evidence at the crime scene. As you are aware, this type of speculation is not allowed in court nor would the detectives investigate a case on such wild speculation. They follow the evidence.

The boys' blood on the back of Darlie's nightshirt are impact stains, blood that was flung from the knife as it was plunged into their bodies and then removed. Are you suggesting that you know more than the blood expert in this case? What are your credentials?

Okay so if Darlie is doing all this fighting on the couch, why is there none of the boys blood dripped there or why are there no cuts or slashes in the couch?

"expecting evidence" is not what makes a bad cop. All CS evidence gathering and analysis is based on Locard's Exchange Theory.

 

[cami]

Heart, you are so cracking me up!!! Love it... I have been through this many, many times and so many people (posters) on this site, which I now believe I get along with, are actually quite relentless in their beliefs!!! I have been fighting this one for years due to inconclusive evidence and not what I myself believe to be true facts. (JMHO ONLY)... I have sat here for years and still sit on the fence. All your valid insight is welcomed by me if no one else. Keep the light burning and the hope alive. Take Care!! Ann (BTW, I am almost 99% on the side of conviction, however, not the death penalty whatsoever)!! IMO, new trial should be ordered!!! :twocents::twocents::banghead::waitasec:

Yes, but Annie so are you relentless in your beliefs.

Then no one would ever be convicted of a crime or put to death with your rules then.


You have yet to state what the "inconclusive evidence" is or what your "true facts" are. It's all just opinion, no conclusions.

 

[cami]

Well Kaiser Sousa, in no way there being 236+ posts means to me that there is "No Evidence of Innocence" just because a particular thread is followed by particular individuals???? It also does not justify why some people are not allowed to take their own time in forming their own opinions as to guilt or innocence. Please I have always believed these sites were meant for people to air their differences and come to their own conclusions in life??? JMO, and mine will change when I feel the evidence is enough. Sitting and still waiting?? I guess my problem with this has always lied in the fact of the Death Penalty when this case IN MY OPINION does not warrant it!!!!! PERIOD!! Take Care, Ann:banghead::twocents::twocents::waitasec:

Goodness, it's been 13 years and you still need time? LOL.

What is the evidence of innocence? That's all I want someone to show me, where is it, what is it? Don't blame the investigation, don't blame the CSI's don't blame the cops, provide actual evidence of innocence...you know proof, like the DA has to when he brings a case to court.

 

[cami]

Hi Annkitty... I've been on this case for a over 10 years now and am happy to provide this for you.

YouTube- 2/2 New DNA Darlie Routier

Sami

And is this supposed to prove anything? Where is Darlie sobbing and crying and being held up by family and friends as she collapses?

As well there are many factual errors in this video. There's Barbara Davis lying her head off about photos of bruises not shown to the jury, yet the transcripts PROVE, the photos were shown to the jury. Charlie must have been asleep when those photos were given to the jurors during the trial.

Watch the two NY fingerprint experts? They are comparing a "patent" print and yet both state this "latent" print can be identified. So do you see, do you get it?

And once again, none of the incriminating evidence, the blood evidence, the fibre evidence was brought into the program. It's all one-sided for the defence.

 

[nicola]

Oh please, there is zero, nada, zlich evidence of innocence(I mean actually evidence that can be entered into court.) Never has been any evidence of innocence and never will be.

Darlie is on death row where she belongs.....as simple as that.

Oh by the way, I suffered an event when I was 5. Guess what I remember it like it was yesterday. I can recall every small detail. That was 40 years ago.

Darlie has "very selective memory loss, you see it kicks in when it is self serving and "she can't remember" when it is not self serving.

OK, sure. She remembered all of the details , days, weeks and months after the crime, but at trial "she can't remember". Especially during cross examinatio of "her many stories".

Gee just like so many other criminals......like Roger Coleman........he swore up and down, left and right, that was was innocent like Darlie. That he was framed, the DA was wrong, every one was wrong. He even had the Pope, movie stars and a very well known religious man "trying to overturn his conviction and death sentence.

Guess what after his execution, DNA was done at the expense of the Religious man. Roger Coleman was guilty as heck. He duped everyone into "believing" he was innocent and wrong imprisioned.

Again, the justice system got it right, the conning and manipulative "criminal" was rightly convicted.

So again, I seldom believe criminals as when I watch 20/20 or Primetime the first words out of a criminals mouth is "I am innocent".

Well guess what, you are a criminal, the justice system sentenced you behind bars or death and now you, the convicted criminal say you are innocent.

Gee I wonder who has to gain by claiming their innocence. That is right Ladies and Gents, the criminal and I for one am not "easily" conned.


Give me a break.......

Would you, if given the chance, say exactly the same thing to the countless people who have been exonarated from death row and have claimed their innocence all along? I wonder if your opinion would be different if you or someone you know was victim to a miscarrage of justice? No justice system is 100% right and for you to generalise that everyone convicted is guilty as sin is unfair. Like I said - I truly hope it never happens to you.

 

[cami]

Would you, if given the chance, say exactly the same thing to the countless people who have been exonarated from death row and have claimed their innocence all along? I wonder if your opinion would be different if you or someone you know was victim to a miscarrage of justice? No justice system is 100% right and for you to generalise that everyone convicted is guilty as sin is unfair. Like I said - I truly hope it never happens to you.

There have been many people exonerated from death row, but not all are a miscarriage of justice. Any time someone is exonerated, we all are pleased and sympathetic for that person who spent time in prison for a crime they didn't commit, at least I know I am. I think you will find that a lot of these exonerations are from crimes committed before the onset of dna. Many from the 70's and 80's, and I be interested to learn how many are based on eye witness testimony. Back then, if there was say blood type A found at the CS and the victim is Type B and you have Type A and you're a suspect, well then they'd look at you very closely. Since the '90's we've had the technology to advance these tests to single out the person who committed the crime.

For us who believe Darlie guilty, there will be no exoneration in this case. There's been nothing in 13 years and if those dna tests had singled out an alternate suspect, I believe we'd know by now. Darlie can sit on DR claiming she's innocent until the cows come home. The evidence says otherwise.

 

[annkitty0630]

Yes there is. There's more than enough evidence to prove her guilt. If you only read her side then of course you will believe she's been unfairly prosecuted and convicted.

I too have never seen the graveyard video (because there isn't one), yet I believe strongly in Darlie's guilt.

Jeesh it's time that old "jury didn't see the graveyard video" was put to rest. Do you actually believe that had such a video been played in court, the jury would have acquited her? Not likely given all the blood evidence, her lack of serious injuries, her lies, and the absolute lack of any evidence that anyone was in that home that night but the family,etc.

Why yes my buddy Cami, there is one, otherwise, how do you think people would have seen it or commented on it???? Again, you question anyone that has a different opinion other than yourself?? I agree, I question all you regarding your beliefs. Anyhow, that I guess is what makes everyone in this world different and unique, our difference of opinions. Can you imagine a world in which we lived in where every individual thought the same??? SCARY THOUGHT IN MY OPINION!!! Take Care Hon, still waiting on the tape?? Keep smiling and be true to yourself!!! Ann:twocents::waitasec::croc:

 

[annkitty0630]

Yes, but Annie so are you relentless in your beliefs.

Then no one would ever be convicted of a crime or put to death with your rules then.


You have yet to state what the "inconclusive evidence" is or what your "true facts" are. It's all just opinion, no conclusions.

OUCH Cami, testy, testy!!! And yes I am also relentless in my beliefs, however, I do NOT demean others for theirs!!! :waitasec::angel:

 

[annkitty0630]

Goodness, it's been 13 years and you still need time? LOL.

What is the evidence of innocence? That's all I want someone to show me, where is it, what is it? Don't blame the investigation, don't blame the CSI's don't blame the cops, provide actual evidence of innocence...you know proof, like the DA has to when he brings a case to court.

Okay Cami, I am going to try this again... I typed an entire response and the next thing I know, it disappeared... 13 years and still need time? Tell that to the individuals that sat on death row and were released or the individuals still sitting on death row that are innocent!!! I don't think that would tread much water with them. Anyhow, what proof did the DA actually show? Come on I know you are going to say it was the screen shard on the knife, the screen was cut from inside, the blood on the door & dryer, the blood in the sink, etc. How about the one question about the sock and the usual response that Darlie ran it down the alley (I believe it was) and then came back and slit her throat? Do you really think such a VAIN, VAIN person who supposedly thought of no one or anything other than her ownself would actually slit her throat with in cm of death? Okay, I believe the prosecution was able to convict on speculation about debt, character assasination about how VAIN she was and this need to take a vacation (blah, blah, blah) and wasn't able to afford it since her hubby's business wasn't doing to well and the fact they like (the rest of all yuppies on this earth) lived beyond their means. I still have such a hard time wrapping my brain around the fact that she killed those 2 little babies and DARRIN didn't hear a sound??? Or the fact that you would kill 2 little innocents for $5,000 grand each??? NO WAY!!! JMHO... Ann (Much more to Come) LOL :twocents::twocents::croc::waitasec::angel:

 

[whitywendy]

Okay Cami, I am going to try this again... I typed an entire response and the next thing I know, it disappeared... 13 years and still need time? Tell that to the individuals that sat on death row and were released or the individuals still sitting on death row that are innocent!!! I don't think that would tread much water with them. Anyhow, what proof did the DA actually show? Come on I know you are going to say it was the screen shard on the knife, the screen was cut from inside, the blood on the door & dryer, the blood in the sink, etc. How about the one question about the sock and the usual response that Darlie ran it down the alley (I believe it was) and then came back and slit her throat? Do you really think such a VAIN, VAIN person who supposedly thought of no one or anything other than her ownself would actually slit her throat with in cm of death? Okay, I believe the prosecution was able to convict on speculation about debt, character assasination about how VAIN she was and this need to take a vacation (blah, blah, blah) and wasn't able to afford it since her hubby's business wasn't doing to well and the fact they like (the rest of all yuppies on this earth) lived beyond their means. I still have such a hard time wrapping my brain around the fact that she killed those 2 little babies and DARRIN didn't hear a sound??? Or the fact that you would kill 2 little innocents for $5,000 grand each??? NO WAY!!! JMHO... Ann (Much more to Come) LOL :twocents::twocents::croc::waitasec::angel:

Ann - The evidence to me was the blood trail, the tiny handprint that was washed away, the bloody handmark that was covered up on the floor, the knife imprint in the carpet where Damon's blood was found. The blood trail shows he was trying to get away from someone, the same someone who had to put the knife down on the carpet to pull her son back to her (JMHO), the fact that her son Damon was HEADING to the door, not upstairs to the comfort of his parents, no he was trying to get out of the house. Why would a 4 year old do that instead of going for the parents. Because the parent was the one hurting him. JMHO. The washed away blood at the sink, the blood UNDERNEATH the broken wine glass. The fact that she did not once try to render aid to either of her sons. Darin did but Darlie was ONLY concerned about DARLIE. (there is that vainness you were speaking of). She was even asked/instructed to render aid but she still didn't. Of course you can say she was in shock and couldn't move. Which of course I do not believe either. She did not sound in shock on the phone with 911, she did not sound in shock when she was instructing the cops to the garage. The is not one definitive piece of evidence but a whole boat load placed here and there. I could go on and on but I would need to go back to the transcripts. And I do not want to hear anything about the transcripts being wrong. That situation was cleared up and the transcripts were certified. I am not being ugly to you, I am only stating my opinion.

 

[annkitty0630]

Ann - The evidence to me was the blood trail, the tiny handprint that was washed away, the bloody handmark that was covered up on the floor, the knife imprint in the carpet where Damon's blood was found. The blood trail shows he was trying to get away from someone, the same someone who had to put the knife down on the carpet to pull her son back to her (JMHO), the fact that her son Damon was HEADING to the door, not upstairs to the comfort of his parents, no he was trying to get out of the house. Why would a 4 year old do that instead of going for the parents. Because the parent was the one hurting him. JMHO. The washed away blood at the sink, the blood UNDERNEATH the broken wine glass. The fact that she did not once try to render aid to either of her sons. Darin did but Darlie was ONLY concerned about DARLIE. (there is that vainness you were speaking of). She was even asked/instructed to render aid but she still didn't. Of course you can say she was in shock and couldn't move. Which of course I do not believe either. She did not sound in shock on the phone with 911, she did not sound in shock when she was instructing the cops to the garage. The is not one definitive piece of evidence but a whole boat load placed here and there. I could go on and on but I would need to go back to the transcripts. And I do not want to hear anything about the transcripts being wrong. That situation was cleared up and the transcripts were certified. I am not being ugly to you, I am only stating my opinion.

Okay Wendy, you just got my heart crying and bleeding at the same time. Very, Very well put!!! Thank you for your honest input, means alot!! If I may, The broken wine glass was another one that never made sense to me since the investigators were all over the kitchen and trampled the evidence, meaning the vaccuum, etc. (JMHO of course)... The knife print on the carpet has always been a standing point of guilty to me, but the supposed night shirt darlie was wearing with the mix of DNA was another that didn't add up... You obviously read my earlier post to Cami and again I will say that the sock has always hung me up and the fact of the black supposed car seen in the nieghborhood that night and previous nights, the fingerprint that doesn't match anyone on the table, etc., etc., etc., Understand, I am only trying to search for the entire truth and nothing other than the truth so I feel satisfied if they put this woman to death... Hopefully you all understand that, I get tired of arguing and just really want to get to the bottom of what truly transpired in that house, however, I do not believe we will ever know that will we? Sorry for my babbling, it's what I do... Love Life and Take Care!! Ann :dance::dance:

 

[cami]

OUCH Cami, testy, testy!!! And yes I am also relentless in my beliefs, however, I do NOT demean others for theirs!!! :waitasec::angel:

Oh come on, I didn't demean you with this post!

I meant your belief that you would need 100% proof of guilt before you would try anyone, well the system doesn't work that way. The burden is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That's all the prosecutor has to prove..and that's why there are appeals, in case the prosecutor got it wrong.

 

[cami]

Okay Cami, I am going to try this again... I typed an entire response and the next thing I know, it disappeared... 13 years and still need time? Tell that to the individuals that sat on death row and were released or the individuals still sitting on death row that are innocent!!! I don't think that would tread much water with them. Anyhow, what proof did the DA actually show? Come on I know you are going to say it was the screen shard on the knife, the screen was cut from inside, the blood on the door & dryer, the blood in the sink, etc. How about the one question about the sock and the usual response that Darlie ran it down the alley (I believe it was) and then came back and slit her throat? Do you really think such a VAIN, VAIN person who supposedly thought of no one or anything other than her ownself would actually slit her throat with in cm of death? Okay, I believe the prosecution was able to convict on speculation about debt, character assasination about how VAIN she was and this need to take a vacation (blah, blah, blah) and wasn't able to afford it since her hubby's business wasn't doing to well and the fact they like (the rest of all yuppies on this earth) lived beyond their means. I still have such a hard time wrapping my brain around the fact that she killed those 2 little babies and DARRIN didn't hear a sound??? Or the fact that you would kill 2 little innocents for $5,000 grand each??? NO WAY!!! JMHO... Ann (Much more to Come) LOL :twocents::twocents::croc::waitasec::angel:

No, I've never believed the screen was cut from the inside. And no I've never believed Darlie killed the boys for insurance money. I don't care if she was vain, if you want to get yourself out of a murder charge or look as if your a victim, you'll do anything, it's happened many times before and will happen again.

I believe you need to scratch the surface and find out what was going on in Darlie's life at the time of the murders.

Yes, the cast-off blood on the back of her nightshirt proves to me she killed her kids.

Who but Darlie or Darin used the bread knife to cut the screen? The rubber dust and the polyglass fibre found on the knife were microscopically identical to the screen.

I'm not willing to ignore all the evidence because there is a sock that can't be explained. It's Darin's sock, it came from their house. It has nothing on it that would lead to any other individual, i.e. fingerprints or dna from an u/k source.

Yes, Darlie wrote in her statement that she never went into the Utility room yet her blood drops were found on the floor and dripped on the appliances. How did it get there if she never went in that room? Fly?

There's a heck of a lot more blood evidence than you have named here.

I've already stated what I think about DR exonerations on another thread. In no way will Darlie be exonerated of this crime so don't worry about it. If she happens to somehow get out of prison, she'll be rearrested on the court house steps for Devon's murder.

It's also very hard to believe that a stranger killed those boys for no reason too.

 

[whitywendy]

Okay Wendy, you just got my heart crying and bleeding at the same time. Very, Very well put!!! Thank you for your honest input, means alot!! If I may, The broken wine glass was another one that never made sense to me since the investigators were all over the kitchen and trampled the evidence, meaning the vaccuum, etc. (JMHO of course)... The knife print on the carpet has always been a standing point of guilty to me, but the supposed night shirt darlie was wearing with the mix of DNA was another that didn't add up... You obviously read my earlier post to Cami and again I will say that the sock has always hung me up and the fact of the black supposed car seen in the nieghborhood that night and previous nights, the fingerprint that doesn't match anyone on the table, etc., etc., etc., Understand, I am only trying to search for the entire truth and nothing other than the truth so I feel satisfied if they put this woman to death... Hopefully you all understand that, I get tired of arguing and just really want to get to the bottom of what truly transpired in that house, however, I do not believe we will ever know that will we? Sorry for my babbling, it's what I do... Love Life and Take Care!! Ann :dance::dance:

I'm not trying to argue :innocent:. Okay the broken wine glass. Well according to Darin that was what woke him up that night and then he heard Darlie screaming and came downstairs. I believe she threw the wine glass down because she was using the theory that she chased him/them through the kitchen to the garage. When they checked Darlie's feet at the hospital she did not have cuts on her feet so why are her bloody footprints found beneath the broken glass. The vacumn cleaner was just something she was holding onto. IMO I was confused about that to but after reading everything, I do not believe the vacumn cleaner had anything to do with the murder scene. It was just there.

The sock, I believe she used it the first time to stab her boys not wanting to get fingerprints on the knife. Then after she thought they were dead, I believe she went to the front door and put on shoes and took that sock herself to where it was found. There were only like 2 tiny spots of blood on it. IMO she was trying to show the direction the "killer(s) went.

The black car was pulled over shortly after the police got to the home. They made everyone get out, checked all of them for blood, weapons, check the car FOUND NOTHING but a bunch of teenagers hanging out. Had no connection whatsoever to the crime.

The bloody fingerprint on the table is Darlie's IMO, is a small person's fingerprint. It was like someone grabbed the table to support oneself. Did you know that there is a blood trail (Darlie's) on that couch next to that table? As if she was moving very quickly.. Then her and Damon's blood is found together past this area. This is IMHO when Darlie saw Damon moving and realized he wasn't dead and went after him. The blood trail surely paints a sad picture. It still breaks my heart thinking about.

 

[annkitty0630]

Oh come on, I didn't demean you with this post!

I meant your belief that you would need 100% proof of guilt before you would try anyone, well the system doesn't work that way. The burden is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That's all the prosecutor has to prove..and that's why there are appeals, in case the prosecutor got it wrong.

Oh Cami, I surely did not mean you were demeaning me, just other posters!! LOL, definitely yourself and I have come along way since that time... :woohoo::woohoo::twocents:

 

[annkitty0630]

Oh come on, I didn't demean you with this post!

I meant your belief that you would need 100% proof of guilt before you would try anyone, well the system doesn't work that way. The burden is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That's all the prosecutor has to prove..and that's why there are appeals, in case the prosecutor got it wrong.

Cami, I never said I needed a 100% proof of guilt to try someone, JUST TO PUT THEM TO DEATH!! By far and large, big difference on my side of the fence!! And we don't really want to get into the appeal process because as a whole, almost 99.9% of individuals are denied appeal right of the get go... Takes one trial (be it 2 days, 1 week or 1 year) to put an innocent person behind bars, and takes years and years and years and much more than the reasonable definition to set an innocent person free. Again, just my humble opinion as always!! I love the debate and the awesome insight you all bring, keep it up!! Let's not forget our Opinions are just Opinions and we all own them!! Be Happy and Love Large!!! Ann:twocents::Banane37:

 

[annkitty0630]

No, I've never believed the screen was cut from the inside. And no I've never believed Darlie killed the boys for insurance money. I don't care if she was vain, if you want to get yourself out of a murder charge or look as if your a victim, you'll do anything, it's happened many times before and will happen again.

I believe you need to scratch the surface and find out what was going on in Darlie's life at the time of the murders.

Yes, the cast-off blood on the back of her nightshirt proves to me she killed her kids.

Who but Darlie or Darin used the bread knife to cut the screen? The rubber dust and the polyglass fibre found on the knife were microscopically identical to the screen.

I'm not willing to ignore all the evidence because there is a sock that can't be explained. It's Darin's sock, it came from their house. It has nothing on it that would lead to any other individual, i.e. fingerprints or dna from an u/k source.

Yes, Darlie wrote in her statement that she never went into the Utility room yet her blood drops were found on the floor and dripped on the appliances. How did it get there if she never went in that room? Fly?

There's a heck of a lot more blood evidence than you have named here.

I've already stated what I think about DR exonerations on another thread. In no way will Darlie be exonerated of this crime so don't worry about it. If she happens to somehow get out of prison, she'll be rearrested on the court house steps for Devon's murder.

It's also very hard to believe that a stranger killed those boys for no reason too.

Cami, how funny the difference of the way you post on the Darlie Murder for Hire site vs. here. Why the attack method on this site? Do you have a point to prove??? All I ever want to do is debate and weigh the facts against the PRO and CON of Darlie's guilty. I have stated numerous times I am SOOO close but not there and you have to constantly be dominating in your opionions and not ever open to others???? LMAO at certain times... Anyhow, I am trying to stick to the facts as well as you are (just don't try to take it so seriously, you are not the prosecutor are you?) That is why there are juries all over the world, and diverse as they may be, because we all have our own individual opinions and ideologies. AGAIN, just my own humble little opinion that I have to live with every day!!! AND I DO 100% AGREE IF DARLIE EVER WAS TO WALK OUT OF PRISON SHE WOULD BE TRIED AGAIN FOR THE SWEET LITTLE DEVON!!! Duh, anyone know why they only tried her for Damon to begin with!!! God Bless both of their SOULS!!! Sweet Dreams and Take Care!!! Ann :waitasec::angel::dance: