claudicici
Well-Known Member
:goodpost:
ITA with both of your posts Cathy.
ITA with both of your posts Cathy.
Darlie Innocent? Then how do you explain... ?
- Thread starter cami
- Start date
New Posts
-
-
UK - Sara Sharif, 10, found murdered in house, Surrey, Aug 2023 *POIs ARREST* #3
- Latest: Pinkestpanther
-
TX Melonie Ballenger, 46, Last Seen at Home - Wylie, TX
- Latest: truthfinder2019
For the moment I'm going to ignore your unsolicited personal assessment of my beliefs in this case, but we will go back to it.
I've seen the seam argument before and it's possible the pattern is jeans...it's just as possible it isn't the seam of jeans. It's not clear enough to say for certain what the pattern is. However, what is exceedingly clear is that no one has lower legs long enough to bruise the entire length of the arms unless legs are moving up and down the arms. For such a clear pattern like that there would have to be persistent pressure which, if you're still thinking logically, means no struggle.
To sum up, either the bruises were made from stationary lower legs on the arms which would mean there would be less bruised area OR the pattern is not from the seam of jeans but something else which would account for the larger surface area.
It is not hard to hit someone with your fist to knock them out, especially a man hitting a woman in the face or chin. You've obviously never been hit or you would know that, a good kick to the chin will knock you out pretty good. By the way, I didn't specify a fist. She could have been hit with any number of objects all of which can knock a person out.
I'm not sure why you went off on a tangent about the pain an intruder would experience. I doubt he would care about momentary pain if it served its purpose.
So your explanation for the armpit bruising is that it's from a spreading bruise on the upper arm? As a theory it's okay but it requires a leap I won't take since I've never seen an upper arm bruise act in that way.
As for the rest of the story about being held down, let me ask you this...if this man is on top of her and supposed struggling while holding a knife, why is there no other knife marks on either Darlie OR the couch? No, the man couldn't have had a knife if he was struggle with Darlie.
Of course you're going about this backward. You're assuming she's telling the truth about the struggle because of the bruises, but a struggle is not the only way she could have gotten the bruises. Then you add to that the fact that logic dictates there could not have been a struggle on the couch with a man who had a very large knife in his hand. I think you should rethink your assumptions and maybe stop taking Darlie's word for any of this.
But let's get to the least likely part of your theory (which is based purely and solely on Darlie's word). If, as you say, Darlie was pinned by someone sitting on her those bruises would not be that dark. She was on a soft surface which means the weight would have been in part absorbed by springs and cushions.
You also need to consider the ridiculous angle of the slashing. According to her own story, the slash begins on the right side and angles right and down. Her right side was against the couch, which means the murderer would have angled the knife in a space between the cushion and her neck and then angled down and to the right while supposedly she is struggle and yet keeps the slash in a relatively continuous line. Even if her head was turned to the left, the rest of the slash would be awkward. What foolishness! Why not just stab her? A stab is more likely to be fatal, too, so why slash in an awkward way and in an awkward place?
No way, the slash is far more consistent with someone starting to slash their own throat.
As for your personal comments, you don't know me and I've never given an opinion about the boys or even mentioned agonizing for them in any way. So your unsolicited assumption that my opinion is influenced by my feelings is not only not supported by facts, it crosses a line into the personal that I never invited you to cross. When I give my opinion, we can talk about my feelings for the boys but not before.
I've noticed something very interesting about your posts. While you appear to believe in Darlie's guilt it's pretty obvious you actually believe in her innocence - your undermining of the evidence as well as quoting her story as being fact being just two reasons I think that.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist in any way but I do believe you are playing a game here.
CathyR
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 398
- Reaction score
- 9
No games just a desire to see facts and forget the emotional aspects. As I stated before there was no insult intended. I do however sense a great deal of animosity to my post as I was trying to raise the issues that could be considered REASONABLE DOUBT.
I don't know if she is guilty or innocent but I do not feel like she got a fair trial. Part of that is her own fault and that of her husband's. Or should we say soon to be ex husband. While I may not like the verdict in the Casey Anthony trial I think Judge Perry did an excellent job. He bent over backwards to make sure BOTH sides got a fair trial. Judge Francis not so much.
I feel the emotional aspect of the crime and Darlie's not normal social behavior helped too much to convict her. I think the prosecution overdid the emotional aspect and from personal experiences with crimes ( have had several friends murdered and have had to serve on a jury before). I am not happy with the way this case was investigated. I have several police officers and correctional officers in my family in addition to doctors, nurses, and a couple of pharmacists and quite a few teachers. As a "true crime" game we played on a long vacation many years ago we debated the case after doing a few weeks of research before hand and acquiring some of the books on the case. Most of us believed her guilty but the police officers pointed out many flaws in the investigation. The doctor and 1 of the pharmacist were our "medical experts" I am also a medical professional but my specialty is optical. We had to explain medical terminology and such.
I have worked with large animals quite a bit and have sustained bruises all over my body and even some pretty bad facial injuries. I had two sisters growing up and while my older one and I often had physical confrontations hitting each other(punching) in the face never happened. I got scratched but not hit.
Have you ever had a bruise? Did you not notice the way the bruise was larger than the actual injury you received. Did you notice the bruises got bigger the more time elapsed. That is how they heal. The blood is carried away by capillary action not arterial or venous flow. That is why they appear at the surface of the skin.
As I stated before the worse and darkest bruise is on the arm (the right) is the one that sustained a deep knife wound. That wound penetrated into the bone. That is going to cause bleeding into the muscle. The blood pooled underneath the injury and that is the source of the worst bruises on her right arm. It wasn't caused by a struggle but by her arm stab wound.
Consider the direction of the throat slice, was it made from behind or from the front. Is the perp right or left handed?
In your first post you stated that the lack of facial injuries was suspicious. If you don't want to strike someone in the face because you have a knife in your hand and stabbing them seems like a better way to kill them than hitting them what are you going to use a knife or your fist? Do you want to fight them or kill them?
If the perp has ever had a fight before and struck someone in the face and didn't knock them out ( most people don't have that kind of power or Muhammad Ali would be the normal not the rarity) they are not going to resort to that as even to control the victim. It would require them to give up their weapon.
What about the slices on her fingers? Those are known as defense wounds.
Why is there no blood from a 3rd victim on the knife?
Mama Darlie is a victim too. She lost 2 grandsons she adored and I get the opinion from reading about her and seeing her pleas on the internet that she would not be standing behind Darlie if she thought she did it.
For someone who was cutting herself up Darlie came dangerously close to killing herself as the neck wound was not superficial and that has been proven with the publishing of her medical records. The prosecution used a game of wordplay. Superficial to the carotid artery does not mean her wounds were superficial. Same as I have had a spontaneous abortion does not mean I killed my baby but that I had a miscarriage. Superficial to the carotid means it came close but did not cut it.
I am very disturbed with the investigation and you should be as well but for the grace of God go I. If you look at only the evidence and none of the emotional aspects of this case you might understand why this case disturbs so many people.
The EXACT order of the photographs taken cannot be determined. It is very obvious that items had to be moved around but the primary pictures showing a crime scene before items are moved does not exist as the photographer did not label his film canisters. This is not a case of digital photographs but the old fashioned 35 mm film type. The conclusions the prosecution made because photographs "prove it" is cannot be trusted as the exact order is unknown.
The conclusions that she murdered for profit are not born out by the amount of insurance money they collected and the amount the spent on the funeral.
The conclusion that she felt over whelmed by caring for an infant and 2 older children makes no sense. If she was overwhelmed it was by the more labor intensive care of an infant. Anyone who has ever had children knows that when they are old enough ( the boys most certainly were) sending them outside to play can buy you a short amount of some ME time. It was June ideal outdoor playtime not February when they might have to stay indoors because of bad weather. Why did she not just suffocate the baby with a plastic bag and pretend it was SIDS? [Please no comments on this statement as I do not suggest anyone to do this to their child]
The lies they both told did Darlie no good but Darin has yet to be prosecuted for insurance fraud.
If he did contract for the house to be robbed then getting a knife from the butcher block to cut loose the wires from all that electronic equipment makes perfect sense and sure looks more like robbery than fraud. Why would you have your robbers unplug everything and neatly roll up the wires. No he wanted a Slash and Stash type robbery as it looks more real.
People who do this kind of stuff are not extremely smart and most likely have a drug/alcohol problem.
If these robbers also got their dates wrong ( I said they aren't real smart) it could explain why they entered the house on that night. The trip to Pennsylvania was delayed by one week and all the cars being present would not be an alert to the robbers they were still at home as Darin told them they were flying. Darin gave them plenty of information about his home and what contents he wanted "robbed". Where they were located in the house etc.
If these robbers decided to cut Darin out of the deal and just fence the stuff and rob it on the wrong night that could explain why they entered on the "wrong" night. What could Darin do about it after the fact. Go to the police and complain the robbers I hired won't cooperate and return my stuff? They might have assumed the family would be upstairs asleep and if provided with a key by Darin they could have entered the house on a previous night just to see if they could enter and exit without waking anyone.
I do not like to accuse anyone of doing this without some pretty strong evidence but if Darin was involved and he did this I imagine he was smart enough to have someone else do it for him. Who? His low life robbery connections. Why-Darlie had just asked for a separation and he was mad and scared at what he thought he would lose- his life's work, a business that could not sustain the financial damage a divorce would cause and his relationship with his kids.
I would like to see a new trial or at least further investigation by a better qualified department than the Rowlett PD.
If it was your family murdered wouldn't you want the best possible investigation possible to occur?
After reading multiple books on the subject and personally asking people who live in Rowlett who are not connected to this case I think the Rowlett police did not do the best job possible. They are a small force with very limited experience and resources. The responding officers had never been to a crime like this before. The photographer had never taken as many photos as they needed at any one crime before.
Since we are going to put her to Death I want to make sure this isn't another case like the Timothy Cole family has had to endure. An innocent man died in prison serving time for a crime he did not commit. His family has worked tirelessly and for a very long time to clear his name and find the guilty party. Both goals have been accomplished but sadly Timothy isn't here to enjoy his freedom or his name cleared.
If you believe she is guilty there is nothing to lose by her getting a new trial. If we put her to Death and she was in fact innocent then we killed a woman for having gaudy taste, bad social skills, and being dumb enough to lie to investigators about her husband and her fighting and previous involvement in a crime that isn't even a DP crime.
I just have enough doubts that I feel putting her to Death may be the wrong thing to do. I just don't feel the State used enough good solid proof of guilt and relied upon the emotional aspects they could invoke from a jury. I have been a juror on a case ( not involving a death or injury) where the prosecution used similar tactics. When we reached the jury room and took our first vote I was the sole not guilty and was forced to ask my fellow jurors to not convict the guy because he was an obvious idiot but because the evidence presented ( that were in direct relation to the crime) led them to no other conclusion. When we ignored all the emotions the prosecution tried to invoke in us we had a clear idea of what really happened. The true perp was later caught and confessed and none of us had convicted an innocent person based on emotions and not facts.
That IS the game lawyers play on both sides of the table.
I don't know if she is guilty or innocent but I do not feel like she got a fair trial. Part of that is her own fault and that of her husband's. Or should we say soon to be ex husband. While I may not like the verdict in the Casey Anthony trial I think Judge Perry did an excellent job. He bent over backwards to make sure BOTH sides got a fair trial. Judge Francis not so much.
I feel the emotional aspect of the crime and Darlie's not normal social behavior helped too much to convict her. I think the prosecution overdid the emotional aspect and from personal experiences with crimes ( have had several friends murdered and have had to serve on a jury before). I am not happy with the way this case was investigated. I have several police officers and correctional officers in my family in addition to doctors, nurses, and a couple of pharmacists and quite a few teachers. As a "true crime" game we played on a long vacation many years ago we debated the case after doing a few weeks of research before hand and acquiring some of the books on the case. Most of us believed her guilty but the police officers pointed out many flaws in the investigation. The doctor and 1 of the pharmacist were our "medical experts" I am also a medical professional but my specialty is optical. We had to explain medical terminology and such.
I have worked with large animals quite a bit and have sustained bruises all over my body and even some pretty bad facial injuries. I had two sisters growing up and while my older one and I often had physical confrontations hitting each other(punching) in the face never happened. I got scratched but not hit.
Have you ever had a bruise? Did you not notice the way the bruise was larger than the actual injury you received. Did you notice the bruises got bigger the more time elapsed. That is how they heal. The blood is carried away by capillary action not arterial or venous flow. That is why they appear at the surface of the skin.
As I stated before the worse and darkest bruise is on the arm (the right) is the one that sustained a deep knife wound. That wound penetrated into the bone. That is going to cause bleeding into the muscle. The blood pooled underneath the injury and that is the source of the worst bruises on her right arm. It wasn't caused by a struggle but by her arm stab wound.
Consider the direction of the throat slice, was it made from behind or from the front. Is the perp right or left handed?
In your first post you stated that the lack of facial injuries was suspicious. If you don't want to strike someone in the face because you have a knife in your hand and stabbing them seems like a better way to kill them than hitting them what are you going to use a knife or your fist? Do you want to fight them or kill them?
If the perp has ever had a fight before and struck someone in the face and didn't knock them out ( most people don't have that kind of power or Muhammad Ali would be the normal not the rarity) they are not going to resort to that as even to control the victim. It would require them to give up their weapon.
What about the slices on her fingers? Those are known as defense wounds.
Why is there no blood from a 3rd victim on the knife?
Mama Darlie is a victim too. She lost 2 grandsons she adored and I get the opinion from reading about her and seeing her pleas on the internet that she would not be standing behind Darlie if she thought she did it.
For someone who was cutting herself up Darlie came dangerously close to killing herself as the neck wound was not superficial and that has been proven with the publishing of her medical records. The prosecution used a game of wordplay. Superficial to the carotid artery does not mean her wounds were superficial. Same as I have had a spontaneous abortion does not mean I killed my baby but that I had a miscarriage. Superficial to the carotid means it came close but did not cut it.
I am very disturbed with the investigation and you should be as well but for the grace of God go I. If you look at only the evidence and none of the emotional aspects of this case you might understand why this case disturbs so many people.
The EXACT order of the photographs taken cannot be determined. It is very obvious that items had to be moved around but the primary pictures showing a crime scene before items are moved does not exist as the photographer did not label his film canisters. This is not a case of digital photographs but the old fashioned 35 mm film type. The conclusions the prosecution made because photographs "prove it" is cannot be trusted as the exact order is unknown.
The conclusions that she murdered for profit are not born out by the amount of insurance money they collected and the amount the spent on the funeral.
The conclusion that she felt over whelmed by caring for an infant and 2 older children makes no sense. If she was overwhelmed it was by the more labor intensive care of an infant. Anyone who has ever had children knows that when they are old enough ( the boys most certainly were) sending them outside to play can buy you a short amount of some ME time. It was June ideal outdoor playtime not February when they might have to stay indoors because of bad weather. Why did she not just suffocate the baby with a plastic bag and pretend it was SIDS? [Please no comments on this statement as I do not suggest anyone to do this to their child]
The lies they both told did Darlie no good but Darin has yet to be prosecuted for insurance fraud.
If he did contract for the house to be robbed then getting a knife from the butcher block to cut loose the wires from all that electronic equipment makes perfect sense and sure looks more like robbery than fraud. Why would you have your robbers unplug everything and neatly roll up the wires. No he wanted a Slash and Stash type robbery as it looks more real.
People who do this kind of stuff are not extremely smart and most likely have a drug/alcohol problem.
If these robbers also got their dates wrong ( I said they aren't real smart) it could explain why they entered the house on that night. The trip to Pennsylvania was delayed by one week and all the cars being present would not be an alert to the robbers they were still at home as Darin told them they were flying. Darin gave them plenty of information about his home and what contents he wanted "robbed". Where they were located in the house etc.
If these robbers decided to cut Darin out of the deal and just fence the stuff and rob it on the wrong night that could explain why they entered on the "wrong" night. What could Darin do about it after the fact. Go to the police and complain the robbers I hired won't cooperate and return my stuff? They might have assumed the family would be upstairs asleep and if provided with a key by Darin they could have entered the house on a previous night just to see if they could enter and exit without waking anyone.
I do not like to accuse anyone of doing this without some pretty strong evidence but if Darin was involved and he did this I imagine he was smart enough to have someone else do it for him. Who? His low life robbery connections. Why-Darlie had just asked for a separation and he was mad and scared at what he thought he would lose- his life's work, a business that could not sustain the financial damage a divorce would cause and his relationship with his kids.
I would like to see a new trial or at least further investigation by a better qualified department than the Rowlett PD.
If it was your family murdered wouldn't you want the best possible investigation possible to occur?
After reading multiple books on the subject and personally asking people who live in Rowlett who are not connected to this case I think the Rowlett police did not do the best job possible. They are a small force with very limited experience and resources. The responding officers had never been to a crime like this before. The photographer had never taken as many photos as they needed at any one crime before.
Since we are going to put her to Death I want to make sure this isn't another case like the Timothy Cole family has had to endure. An innocent man died in prison serving time for a crime he did not commit. His family has worked tirelessly and for a very long time to clear his name and find the guilty party. Both goals have been accomplished but sadly Timothy isn't here to enjoy his freedom or his name cleared.
If you believe she is guilty there is nothing to lose by her getting a new trial. If we put her to Death and she was in fact innocent then we killed a woman for having gaudy taste, bad social skills, and being dumb enough to lie to investigators about her husband and her fighting and previous involvement in a crime that isn't even a DP crime.
I just have enough doubts that I feel putting her to Death may be the wrong thing to do. I just don't feel the State used enough good solid proof of guilt and relied upon the emotional aspects they could invoke from a jury. I have been a juror on a case ( not involving a death or injury) where the prosecution used similar tactics. When we reached the jury room and took our first vote I was the sole not guilty and was forced to ask my fellow jurors to not convict the guy because he was an obvious idiot but because the evidence presented ( that were in direct relation to the crime) led them to no other conclusion. When we ignored all the emotions the prosecution tried to invoke in us we had a clear idea of what really happened. The true perp was later caught and confessed and none of us had convicted an innocent person based on emotions and not facts.
That IS the game lawyers play on both sides of the table.
No games just a desire to see facts and forget the emotional aspects. As I stated before there was no insult intended.
I didn't mention any insult was laid at my post. I didn't characterize the situation at all other than to say you stepped over a personal line you had no business stepping over and no had information to support your assumption that my emotions were affecting my opinion. For a person that claims to only look at facts you failed miserably.
I do however sense a great deal of animosity to my post as I was trying to raise the issues that could be considered REASONABLE DOUBT.
Animosity? No
Suspicion? Yes, and this post has done nothing to alleviate it.
I don't know if she is guilty or innocent but I do not feel like she got a fair trial. Part of that is her own fault and that of her husband's.
Okay....so you don't think she got a fair trial and blame it on the Routiers but you provide no clear theory or supporting evidence for that suspicion. I see no facts offered.
Judge Francis not so much.
Again, no specific reasons supported with facts.
I have several police officers and correctional officers in my family in addition to doctors, nurses, and a couple of pharmacists and quite a few teachers.
Ditto. Funny thing though..my family of doctors, cops and a few forensic people said this was a good investigation. Not perfect but well within the boundary of "good". No investigation is perfect.
Have you ever had a bruise? Did you not notice the way the bruise was larger than the actual injury you received. Did you notice the bruises got bigger the more time elapsed. That is how they heal. The blood is carried away by capillary action not arterial or venous flow. That is why they appear at the surface of the skin.
Of course I've had a bruise, but we're talking about a good 6 inches of arms that would have had to have the "spread". In my experience, backed by pictures I've taken of my bruises from surgeries, the bruise only spreads about 2 inches diameter from the wound.
Consider the direction of the throat slice, was it made from behind or from the front. Is the perp right or left handed?
It couldn't have been from the back, not deep enough and too awkward an angle.
The angle, the depth and the fact that it is two slashes, like I said, is consistent with self infliction. Imagine her in front of a mirror. She starts to cut, the pain hits and she pulls the knife away. She bucks up her courage, starts another slash right by the end of the other slash and slashes fast while instinctively yanking back her head and pulling away the knife, which makes for the shallow cut and downward angle.
In your first post you stated that the lack of facial injuries was suspicious. If you don't want to strike someone in the face because you have a knife in your hand and stabbing them seems like a better way to kill them than hitting them what are you going to use a knife or your fist? Do you want to fight them or kill them?
That's not actually what I said. I clearly implied I didn't buy that the intruder hit Darlie on the arms to cause the bruising. I didn't buy it because it's an ineffective place to violently attack someone you are supposedly trying to kill. A far more effective place would be the face and head where you can actually cause unconsciousness.
On an unrelated topic I also opined that slashing Darlie was an awkward and ineffective way to kill Darlie. A person with a large knife and a prone body will hardly slash instead of stabbing if the purpose was murder.
Two distinct arguments against two distinct points. If you want my opinion, I don't think there was an intruder at all. I think Darlie may have sustained some bruising from either Devon or Darin during the attack and later expanded on it either alone or with Darin. I think the throat wound is self inflicted in the way I described. The crime scene supports this opinion far more than the story Darlie told, which is why I believe the evidence and not the stories.
What about the slices on her fingers? Those are known as defense wounds.
No, those shallow cuts with no evidence of bleeding are in no way defensive wounds against a knife that size, a simple search on Google will show you that. It's far more likely she sustained them by putting the knife down at some point (knife print on carpet) and picking it back up but grabbing the blade instead of the handle and dropping it immediately after she felt pain.
Why is there no blood from a 3rd victim on the knife?
Yep, definitely a game....I've heard this broken record before.
But I'm assuming you are referring to the lack of Devon's blood on the knife? Remember the blood found in the sink, all three blood types found? Obvious watered down blood on towels? Pretty easy leap from there.
Mama Darlie is a victim too. She lost 2 grandsons she adored and I get the opinion from reading about her and seeing her pleas on the internet that she would not be standing behind Darlie if she thought she did it.
Hmmmm :floorlaugh:
For someone who was cutting herself up Darlie came dangerously close to killing herself as the neck wound was not superficial and that has been proven with the publishing of her medical records.
So your argument is that Darlie wouldn't risk possibly killing herself to stage an injury? I don't see how you can prove that since so many people through history have done just that, risked death to inflict an injury for either attention or to support a story they are telling. If I had any confidence that Darlie knew her injury was possibly so serious, I would support the theory she wouldn't do it. But I don't think she knew and doubt she was worried about anything more than convincingly floating her story.
The prosecution used a game of wordplay. Superficial to the carotid artery does not mean her wounds were superficial. Same as I have had a spontaneous abortion does not mean I killed my baby but that I had a miscarriage. Superficial to the carotid means it came close but did not cut it.
And the defense engaged in wordplay with the open/unlocked gate.
So?
The EXACT order of the photographs taken cannot be determined.
This mistake was admitted to in open court and argued in front of the jury and they obviously didn't find it to be enough for reasonable doubt. Why? Because it basically means very little except the carelessness of the photographer. This is another reason you have blown your cover high and wide, this argument of mistakes in the investigation that don't amount to much in the way of evidence is the last resort of supporters.
If I had been on the jury I would have discounted it too unless it had had a real impact on the accuracy or truthfulness of the photographic evidence.
But which conclusions are you talking about? Which conclusions came solely from the photos that were seriously impacted by a timeline not being accurately produced?
The conclusions that she murdered for profit are not born out by the amount of insurance money they collected and the amount the spent on the funeral.
That was motive. You don't have to prove motive so whether they proved it or not is irrelevant.
However, we have no independent evidence that Darlie knew how much a funeral cost. For all you know she thought 10K was more than enough for the funerals with a little left over for a vacation.
The conclusion that she felt over whelmed by caring for an infant and 2 older children makes no sense.
You're applying your own actions on Darlie's situation. Given the depression and suicide attempt earlier and the fact that she had someone coming in to clean and had both the neighbor and her sister come over to help with the kids, it's pretty clear she was overwhelmed. Anyone with kids knows THAT.
The lies they both told did Darlie no good but Darin has yet to be prosecuted for insurance fraud.
If he did contract for the house to be robbed then getting a knife from the butcher block to cut loose the wires from all that electronic equipment makes perfect sense and sure looks more like robbery than fraud. Why would you have your robbers unplug everything and neatly roll up the wires. No he wanted a Slash and Stash type robbery as it looks more real.
Darin can't be prosecuted for insurance fraud because there was no fraud committed. An affidavit does not a crime make.
I do not like to accuse anyone of doing this without some pretty strong evidence but if Darin was involved and he did this I imagine he was smart enough to have someone else do it for him.
Wow, that's a heck of a leap you're taking based on affidavits alone. I've always found that following evidence, not stories, to be a better way to assess guilt and innocence.
I would like to see a new trial or at least further investigation by a better qualified department than the Rowlett PD.
That's a slander on a police department with no proof of incompetence. They made mistakes but to say they were unqualified is going too far.
Since we are going to put her to Death I want to make sure this isn't another case like the Timothy Cole family has had to endure.
The crime determines the sentence, not the quality of evidence. Darlie got the death penalty because she was convicted of murdering a child under 5, not because of the quality of the proof against her.
If you believe she is guilty there is nothing to lose by her getting a new trial.
Intellectually I don't care if they retry her, she'd be convicted again.
Practically I see no reason why she should get a new trial based on nothing more than to assuage anyone's feelings she may have been wrongfully convicted. We have an appeals system that will protect her.
I didn't mention any insult was laid at my post. I didn't characterize the situation at all other than to say you stepped over a personal line you had no business stepping over and no had information to support your assumption that my emotions were affecting my opinion. For a person that claims to only look at facts you failed miserably.
I do however sense a great deal of animosity to my post as I was trying to raise the issues that could be considered REASONABLE DOUBT.
Animosity? No
Suspicion? Yes, and this post has done nothing to alleviate it.
I don't know if she is guilty or innocent but I do not feel like she got a fair trial. Part of that is her own fault and that of her husband's.
Okay....so you don't think she got a fair trial and blame it on the Routiers but you provide no clear theory or supporting evidence for that suspicion. I see no facts offered.
Judge Francis not so much.
Again, no specific reasons supported with facts.
I have several police officers and correctional officers in my family in addition to doctors, nurses, and a couple of pharmacists and quite a few teachers.
Ditto. Funny thing though..my family of doctors, cops and a few forensic people said this was a good investigation. Not perfect but well within the boundary of "good". No investigation is perfect.
Have you ever had a bruise? Did you not notice the way the bruise was larger than the actual injury you received. Did you notice the bruises got bigger the more time elapsed. That is how they heal. The blood is carried away by capillary action not arterial or venous flow. That is why they appear at the surface of the skin.
Of course I've had a bruise, but we're talking about a good 6 inches of arms that would have had to have the "spread". In my experience, backed by pictures I've taken of my bruises from surgeries, the bruise only spreads about 2 inches diameter from the wound.
Consider the direction of the throat slice, was it made from behind or from the front. Is the perp right or left handed?
It couldn't have been from the back, not deep enough and too awkward an angle.
The angle, the depth and the fact that it is two slashes, like I said, is consistent with self infliction. Imagine her in front of a mirror. She starts to cut, the pain hits and she pulls the knife away. She bucks up her courage, starts another slash right by the end of the other slash and slashes fast while instinctively yanking back her head and pulling away the knife, which makes for the shallow cut and downward angle.
In your first post you stated that the lack of facial injuries was suspicious. If you don't want to strike someone in the face because you have a knife in your hand and stabbing them seems like a better way to kill them than hitting them what are you going to use a knife or your fist? Do you want to fight them or kill them?
That's not actually what I said. I clearly implied I didn't buy that the intruder hit Darlie on the arms to cause the bruising. I didn't buy it because it's an ineffective place to violently attack someone you are supposedly trying to kill. A far more effective place would be the face and head where you can actually cause unconsciousness.
On an unrelated topic I also opined that slashing Darlie was an awkward and ineffective way to kill Darlie. A person with a large knife and a prone body will hardly slash instead of stabbing if the purpose was murder.
Two distinct arguments against two distinct points. If you want my opinion, I don't think there was an intruder at all. I think Darlie may have sustained some bruising from either Devon or Darin during the attack and later expanded on it either alone or with Darin. I think the throat wound is self inflicted in the way I described. The crime scene supports this opinion far more than the story Darlie told, which is why I believe the evidence and not the stories.
What about the slices on her fingers? Those are known as defense wounds.
No, those shallow cuts with no evidence of bleeding are in no way defensive wounds against a knife that size, a simple search on Google will show you that. It's far more likely she sustained them by putting the knife down at some point (knife print on carpet) and picking it back up but grabbing the blade instead of the handle and dropping it immediately after she felt pain.
Why is there no blood from a 3rd victim on the knife?
Yep, definitely a game....I've heard this broken record before.
But I'm assuming you are referring to the lack of Devon's blood on the knife? Remember the blood found in the sink, all three blood types found? Obvious watered down blood on towels? Pretty easy leap from there.
Mama Darlie is a victim too. She lost 2 grandsons she adored and I get the opinion from reading about her and seeing her pleas on the internet that she would not be standing behind Darlie if she thought she did it.
Hmmmm :floorlaugh:
For someone who was cutting herself up Darlie came dangerously close to killing herself as the neck wound was not superficial and that has been proven with the publishing of her medical records.
So your argument is that Darlie wouldn't risk possibly killing herself to stage an injury? I don't see how you can prove that since so many people through history have done just that, risked death to inflict an injury for either attention or to support a story they are telling. If I had any confidence that Darlie knew her injury was possibly so serious, I would support the theory she wouldn't do it. But I don't think she knew and doubt she was worried about anything more than convincingly floating her story.
The prosecution used a game of wordplay. Superficial to the carotid artery does not mean her wounds were superficial. Same as I have had a spontaneous abortion does not mean I killed my baby but that I had a miscarriage. Superficial to the carotid means it came close but did not cut it.
And the defense engaged in wordplay with the open/unlocked gate.
So?
The EXACT order of the photographs taken cannot be determined.
This mistake was admitted to in open court and argued in front of the jury and they obviously didn't find it to be enough for reasonable doubt. Why? Because it basically means very little except the carelessness of the photographer. This is another reason you have blown your cover high and wide, this argument of mistakes in the investigation that don't amount to much in the way of evidence is the last resort of supporters.
If I had been on the jury I would have discounted it too unless it had had a real impact on the accuracy or truthfulness of the photographic evidence.
But which conclusions are you talking about? Which conclusions came solely from the photos that were seriously impacted by a timeline not being accurately produced?
The conclusions that she murdered for profit are not born out by the amount of insurance money they collected and the amount the spent on the funeral.
That was motive. You don't have to prove motive so whether they proved it or not is irrelevant.
However, we have no independent evidence that Darlie knew how much a funeral cost. For all you know she thought 10K was more than enough for the funerals with a little left over for a vacation.
The conclusion that she felt over whelmed by caring for an infant and 2 older children makes no sense.
You're applying your own actions on Darlie's situation. Given the depression and suicide attempt earlier and the fact that she had someone coming in to clean and had both the neighbor and her sister come over to help with the kids, it's pretty clear she was overwhelmed. Anyone with kids knows THAT.
The lies they both told did Darlie no good but Darin has yet to be prosecuted for insurance fraud.
If he did contract for the house to be robbed then getting a knife from the butcher block to cut loose the wires from all that electronic equipment makes perfect sense and sure looks more like robbery than fraud. Why would you have your robbers unplug everything and neatly roll up the wires. No he wanted a Slash and Stash type robbery as it looks more real.
Darin can't be prosecuted for insurance fraud because there was no fraud committed. An affidavit does not a crime make.
I do not like to accuse anyone of doing this without some pretty strong evidence but if Darin was involved and he did this I imagine he was smart enough to have someone else do it for him.
Wow, that's a heck of a leap you're taking based on affidavits alone. I've always found that following evidence, not stories, to be a better way to assess guilt and innocence.
I would like to see a new trial or at least further investigation by a better qualified department than the Rowlett PD.
That's a slander on a police department with no proof of incompetence. They made mistakes but to say they were unqualified is going too far.
Since we are going to put her to Death I want to make sure this isn't another case like the Timothy Cole family has had to endure.
The crime determines the sentence, not the quality of evidence. Darlie got the death penalty because she was convicted of murdering a child under 5, not because of the quality of the proof against her.
If you believe she is guilty there is nothing to lose by her getting a new trial.
Intellectually I don't care if they retry her, she'd be convicted again.
Practically I see no reason why she should get a new trial based on nothing more than to assuage anyone's feelings she may have been wrongfully convicted. We have an appeals system that will protect her.
Crow_Ascending
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2006
- Messages
- 195
- Reaction score
- 14
2 percenter, Thanks for replying to each of CathyR's statements. I just didn't have the will to go thru this again with a 'newish' poster!
the part of that scenerio that is hard for me to understand is this...why whould perp pin her down and not stab her in the chest like he did the boys? why just maim her neck and then run while leaving her alive?
PassTheMotrin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 2,297
- Reaction score
- 42
Exactly. Why would a grown man stab two innocent children, instead of taking out the grown woman first? After all, she would pose a bigger threat.
The dog didn't bark, either. And let's not forget the blood spatter evidence or the staged crime scene.
CathyR
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 398
- Reaction score
- 9
There is a shoulder wound to Darlie's left shoulder with the entry being from the front.
The deep arm injury is evidence she blocked some of the blows aimed at her chest.
The prosecution did not rely heavily on the clues left behind. They took facts and twisted them to fit their idea of what happened while ignoring or outright lying to a jury that ANY evidence of an intruder existed.
A bloody fingerprint on door leading to garage.
A sock found down the alley with both boys blood and Darlie's DNA on it.
Reports of a strange car in neighborhood by neighbor.
The absence of any trace of blood of one of the murder victims on the weapon supposed used to kill him. [Possible proof of a second perp and knife].
Assuming another bloody fingerprint found on an overturned table is that of a child instead of a partial from an adult.
The report of the victim that her underwear was missing.
Failing to tape record all interviews with suspects. Best way to prove beyond reasonable doubt is to have complete and accurate records. Otherwise all you have is one persons words against anothers.
Much was said about Darlie sending her boys out to play alot. It was used as "proof" she was not a good mother and did not want her children. Considering the rate of obesity in the US this is now considered a fantastic thing for a mom to do. Limit the amount of time they spend in front of a TV watching or playing video games and make them get out and exercise.
I don't like the games that both prosecutors and defense attorneys use in our American courts. Not just this case. They are allowed to leave false impressions with no evidence to back up their claims. This practice should be stopped on ALL sides.
I listed 6 pieces of evidence and at least 3 of them do not fit into the scenario put forth from the DA. Ignoring them does not make them go away. we cannot act like ostriches and bury our heads in the sand when confronted with evidence like this.
A new trial would help to put to final rest to the 2 questions the unanswered clues left behind make me ask.
If Darlie did it did she act alone?
If Darlie didn't do it then we need to find out who did.
The deep arm injury is evidence she blocked some of the blows aimed at her chest.
The prosecution did not rely heavily on the clues left behind. They took facts and twisted them to fit their idea of what happened while ignoring or outright lying to a jury that ANY evidence of an intruder existed.
A bloody fingerprint on door leading to garage.
A sock found down the alley with both boys blood and Darlie's DNA on it.
Reports of a strange car in neighborhood by neighbor.
The absence of any trace of blood of one of the murder victims on the weapon supposed used to kill him. [Possible proof of a second perp and knife].
Assuming another bloody fingerprint found on an overturned table is that of a child instead of a partial from an adult.
The report of the victim that her underwear was missing.
Failing to tape record all interviews with suspects. Best way to prove beyond reasonable doubt is to have complete and accurate records. Otherwise all you have is one persons words against anothers.
Much was said about Darlie sending her boys out to play alot. It was used as "proof" she was not a good mother and did not want her children. Considering the rate of obesity in the US this is now considered a fantastic thing for a mom to do. Limit the amount of time they spend in front of a TV watching or playing video games and make them get out and exercise.
I don't like the games that both prosecutors and defense attorneys use in our American courts. Not just this case. They are allowed to leave false impressions with no evidence to back up their claims. This practice should be stopped on ALL sides.
I listed 6 pieces of evidence and at least 3 of them do not fit into the scenario put forth from the DA. Ignoring them does not make them go away. we cannot act like ostriches and bury our heads in the sand when confronted with evidence like this.
A new trial would help to put to final rest to the 2 questions the unanswered clues left behind make me ask.
If Darlie did it did she act alone?
If Darlie didn't do it then we need to find out who did.
Trooper514
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2011
- Messages
- 63
- Reaction score
- 11
If she gets a new trial, I'm VERY confident that she will be found guilty again. If she didn't do this, then why did her story change? She said her son Damon woke her up and she claims he walked behind her and she told him to lie down, but if she TRULY did not do this, then her statement DOES NOT correlate with Damon's autopsy report. BOTH of his lungs were punctured. If she didn't do this, why were her epithelial cells found inside the sock? Epithelial cells are fascinating because we shed them daily. However, to get live epithelial cells you have to rub your skin hard or doing something like grabbing someone's shirt. In this case, her hand being in the sock made it move on the knife handle in which good epithelials were deposited. Afterall, these were violent stabbings.
cami
Keep your fork......
me neither considering we've been through this with CathyR before.
Darlie isn't going anywhere, she won't get a new trial, she won't win an appeal, the dna tests won't help her.
It's been 15 years. there has yet to be any evidence submitted by the defence that Darlie was wrongly convicted.
All of her appeals have failed.
And never forget they will be waiting for her at the jailhouse door with an arrest warrant for Devon's murder if she ever wins a appeal.
cami
Keep your fork......
Oh all of this has been hashed and rehashed Cathy.
There was a slash wound to her arm, an inch deep. Okay it's not life threatening Cathy. Also, there is a hesitation wound above it, just like the hesitation wound on her neck. She very easily could have self-inflicted that neck wound. When she felt pain, she flinched, the knife bounces and then slashes her on the shoulder.
You're making too much of Darlie's wounds. Obviously she's alive, nor were the wounds life threatening. The doctor who treated her said in normal circumstances he would have treated her in the ER and then sent her home.
Now do you know more than the doctors who treated Darlie? Did you observe the wound personally whilst Darlie was being treated?
As far as the arm bruises, there is no weapon pattern in those bruises, jean seams or anything else. The fact she has no broken bones, no facial injuries, no head injuries, nothing like that means she wasn't up and fighting anyone.
Plus the room was not consistant with a fight, there was no damage, nothing broken, etc.
You're arguments amount to a whole lot of nothing. It's all been said before.
The print on the back door is a partial print, not identifiable, but can be used to exclude...Darlie has not been excluded as the bearer or this print or the print on the sofa back table. These prints are partials and cannot be indentified.
But Cathy let's look at these bloody prints. The print on the coffee table was on one side of the room and the print on the door is on the other side of the room...but there's no blood trail in between except Darlie's. There is blood running down that door yet the only blood leading up to it and away from it is from Darlie and she puts herself in that area. If an intruder had that much blood on his hands, why didn't it drop to the floor? Why did it end at the kitchen door? Darlie saw the guy leave, she doesn't mention his wiping his hands on anything.
Darlie's dna was in the toe of that sock from shed skin cells. You figure it out.
There is only one murder weapon. Devon's blood is on Damon, obviously his blood was removed from the knife when it was used on Damon, or was washed at the kitchen sink. Lastly, only four stains on that knife were tested. Since she was on trial for Damon's murder and not Devon's I believe his blood on the knife was a hold back in case they had to try her for his murder. The sock tells this story, IMO, three stains pure Devon, two mixed stains Devon/Damon.
Nobody assumed the fingerprints were from children. "It's possible" was all that was testified to by the fingerprint experts. That's why Dr. Jantz was hired by the defence.
LOL, who gives a crap her underwear was missing? Why would an intruder take her knickers and leave the murder weapon? What rapist breaks into a house to rape a woman when her husband is home? Why would he automatically murder those children if he wanted to rape Darlie? The rape is the most ridiculous excuse offered. Where are the bruises and scratches on her legs and thighs? Someone kneeling on her arms if they wanted to rape her? Totally ridiculous.
I just have to interject this here because I don't know where else too. I am Canadian, but I've been watching all the US coverage on the Navy Seals killed last week. I've been crying today as they scroll through the pictures of the men and their names. May I offer my deepest sympathy and condolences to all those affected. Damn war
cami
Keep your fork......
Darlie will never get a new trial Cathy. The onus is on her to provide evidence that no reasonable jury would convict her with this new evidence. It's been 15 years, and no evidence yet has been offered to even hint at a new trial. YOu mentioned in another post that Darin may have used the bread knife to cut wires, etc. to the electronics. LOL, that is pure supporter fantasy promoted by Jefe and Rachel from the old supporter board. Considering none of the electronics were damaged, I think we can safely say the fibre and rubber dust on the knife are from the window screen.
Maybe you should rethink the things you've learned from Darlie and the supporters. They aren't going to tell you the truth. The truth lies in the trial transcripts.
No insult and no sarcasm intended.
oops, those are my bolds in the quoted part of the post
im even willing to to allow for the quiet perp to kill both boys 1st. quick and easy. everyone slept soundly thru his entry ..so he kills the boys as they may have screamed if awakened and he knew the death would be silent since he attacked their lungs cutting off their air to yell. then he appraoched a still soundly sleeping darlie. why not just go for the plunge? ok now lets say he decided he wanted to rape her. he didnt.. ok, he wanted to toy with her and see her fear? fine..still does not explain why he wouldnt kill her. why little darlie was enough of a force to cause him to flee the scene still doesnt make sense to me in that scenerio. if he is crazy enough to kill 2 children he is not going to stop now. adrenaline would be high and he would have no trouble ending darlies life. even if she woke up and fought he still would have overpowered her with thrusts to the chest. if he had moved into a slicing mode he would be slicing at whatever he could hit and that would be her supposedly upward arms warding off his attack. i would expect to see slashes and cuts all over her arms and even couch if thats what he was doing. darlies testimony is she did not fight. so now we are at the scenerio that he crept over and just sliced her throat lighty. all of his rage finally dissapted? now he's gentle and hesitant? i mean this is a guy whose sole purpose was to come in and stab people. why leave the adult alive to testify? he obviously knew his slice to the neck didnt kill her since she followed him to the garage.
does any of this make sense? im not knocking anyone's theory. just offering mine by trying to replaying possible scenerios if there was an intruder.
and motrin, this post isnt directed at you. your observation of him killing darlie first gave me the idea to imagine he intended to kill the boys first for whatever reason...yet i still cant find a reason darlie would be alive. just used your post as a jumping off of thought.
cami
Keep your fork......
The only person I can think of is Tommy Lynn Sells. He's the only nut who broke into houses for no reason. But since he was in jail when the murders happen, it wasn't him. And he would have killed Darlie. IMO.
Given the evidence in the house, the whole intruder story for me, is just stupid. And I did think at one time she was innocent!
Starting with the window. When you see the junk piled in front of that window and in the garage, it's hard to believe anyone could have gotten in there quietly.
Then you have to believe he killed two sleeping boys for no reason and slashed up their mother for no reason and then left. Nothing stolen, nothing broken. Cash and cheques in the wallet left untouched. Gold jewellery left untouched.
Darlie won't admit to fighting with anyone since that would mean she was face to face with the killer. Since she can't describe anything but his back that is. I too think we can safely say Darin would have heard a fight had there been one.
There is a shoulder wound to Darlie's left shoulder with the entry being from the front.
That's a slash and supports my self inflicted neck wound theory. After the initial slash to her throat she tried it again but knew it would be painful this time so she instinctively drew away from the knife. In doing that her shoulder would have thrust forward so when she hurriedly slashed the second time the knife caught her shoulder.
The deep arm injury is evidence she blocked some of the blows aimed at her chest.
It's no such thing! It is a stab wound, period. There is nothing in its nature that makes it defensive or self inflicted.
The prosecution did not rely heavily on the clues left behind. They took facts and twisted them to fit their idea of what happened while ignoring or outright lying to a jury that ANY evidence of an intruder existed.
A bloody fingerprint on door leading to garage.
It's a partial print and useless at trial. Most courts won't allow less than 12 point match and if I remember right less than 12 could be identified at all. Do I understand you to say that you think the cops ignored the print but allowed it to see the light of day in court? Illogical
A sock found down the alley with both boys blood and Darlie's DNA on it.
This wasn't ignored either. It was mentioned at trial, DNA tested and testified to. What was twisted and lied about?
Reports of a strange car in neighborhood by neighbor.
Again, mentioned at trial. But since the neighbor couldn't say more than that it was black, it was useless as evidence. A make/model and license plate would have helped.
Read the Bond testimony of Patterson, he named the two detectives that were investigating the car. The defense could have called those detectives but even they knew there was no way to identify the car much less tie them to the crime.
The absence of any trace of blood of one of the murder victims on the weapon supposed used to kill him. [Possible proof of a second perp and knife].
She wasn't tried for Devon's murder, it's not legally pertinent to this trial whether his blood was on the knife or not. Nothing was twisted and a second knife was mentioned as a possibility at trial. I think you don't appreciate Mulder's knowledge that most of these arguments didn't pass the smell test.
Assuming another bloody fingerprint found on an overturned table is that of a child instead of a partial from an adult.
Again, this was discussed in court and Cron was challenged on his opinion the fingerprint was the size of a child's fingerprint. No lies and no twisting, just a theory by an expert that was challenged in court at the proper place and time.
The report of the victim that her underwear was missing.
She also claimed some things about Mize that turned out untrue. Just because Darlie says it, doesn't make it true. I suspect that's the problem here, you think Darlie is telling the truth with no proof to back her stories but you think the logical conclusions testified to in court by experts are lies or twisted stories because they are just that, theories. I think you need a more balanced approach to this case.
Failing to tape record all interviews with suspects. Best way to prove beyond reasonable doubt is to have complete and accurate records. Otherwise all you have is one persons words against anothers.
Once again, this was discussed in court and reasons were given. Nothing was twisted or lied about.
I just have to say here, most people believe the cops over suspects for the very reason that the cops typically have no reason to lie. This interviewer certainly didn't. If he wanted to lie he should have said she confessed instead of saying she steadfastly denied doing it or said "if I did it I don't remember".
I don't like the games that both prosecutors and defense attorneys use in our American courts. Not just this case. They are allowed to leave false impressions with no evidence to back up their claims. This practice should be stopped on ALL sides.
I absolutely agree but I'm not sure you understand where that line is.
What you are calling lies are theories that were legally argued in court and could have been refuted or challenged at any time.
I listed 6 pieces of evidence and at least 3 of them do not fit into the scenario put forth from the DA. Ignoring them does not make them go away. we cannot act like ostriches and bury our heads in the sand when confronted with evidence like this.
The underwear is not evidence. Not only is the absence of something not usually evidence, the fact that it's existence has never even been proven means it's not evidence.
The other two pieces of evidence, the table fingerprint and the second knife theory, were mentioned in court. The second knife theory has not been proven so it doesn't have to be part of the prosecution theory and the partial print on the table suffers the same problem as the other fingerprint, not enough points for comparison.
A new trial would help to put to final rest to the 2 questions the unanswered clues left behind make me ask.
If Darlie did it did she act alone?
If Darlie didn't do it then we need to find out who did.
That's not the way this works, though. You don't get new trials to tie up loose ends, you get new trials because it has been proven that a serious legal mistake has been made and the only way to rectify it is to retry the case.
That's a slash and supports my self inflicted neck wound theory. After the initial slash to her throat she tried it again but knew it would be painful this time so she instinctively drew away from the knife. In doing that her shoulder would have thrust forward so when she hurriedly slashed the second time the knife caught her shoulder.
The deep arm injury is evidence she blocked some of the blows aimed at her chest.
It's no such thing! It is a stab wound, period. There is nothing in its nature that makes it defensive or self inflicted.
The prosecution did not rely heavily on the clues left behind. They took facts and twisted them to fit their idea of what happened while ignoring or outright lying to a jury that ANY evidence of an intruder existed.
A bloody fingerprint on door leading to garage.
It's a partial print and useless at trial. Most courts won't allow less than 12 point match and if I remember right less than 12 could be identified at all. Do I understand you to say that you think the cops ignored the print but allowed it to see the light of day in court? Illogical
A sock found down the alley with both boys blood and Darlie's DNA on it.
This wasn't ignored either. It was mentioned at trial, DNA tested and testified to. What was twisted and lied about?
Reports of a strange car in neighborhood by neighbor.
Again, mentioned at trial. But since the neighbor couldn't say more than that it was black, it was useless as evidence. A make/model and license plate would have helped.
Read the Bond testimony of Patterson, he named the two detectives that were investigating the car. The defense could have called those detectives but even they knew there was no way to identify the car much less tie them to the crime.
The absence of any trace of blood of one of the murder victims on the weapon supposed used to kill him. [Possible proof of a second perp and knife].
She wasn't tried for Devon's murder, it's not legally pertinent to this trial whether his blood was on the knife or not. Nothing was twisted and a second knife was mentioned as a possibility at trial. I think you don't appreciate Mulder's knowledge that most of these arguments didn't pass the smell test.
Assuming another bloody fingerprint found on an overturned table is that of a child instead of a partial from an adult.
Again, this was discussed in court and Cron was challenged on his opinion the fingerprint was the size of a child's fingerprint. No lies and no twisting, just a theory by an expert that was challenged in court at the proper place and time.
The report of the victim that her underwear was missing.
She also claimed some things about Mize that turned out untrue. Just because Darlie says it, doesn't make it true. I suspect that's the problem here, you think Darlie is telling the truth with no proof to back her stories but you think the logical conclusions testified to in court by experts are lies or twisted stories because they are just that, theories. I think you need a more balanced approach to this case.
Failing to tape record all interviews with suspects. Best way to prove beyond reasonable doubt is to have complete and accurate records. Otherwise all you have is one persons words against anothers.
Once again, this was discussed in court and reasons were given. Nothing was twisted or lied about.
I just have to say here, most people believe the cops over suspects for the very reason that the cops typically have no reason to lie. This interviewer certainly didn't. If he wanted to lie he should have said she confessed instead of saying she steadfastly denied doing it or said "if I did it I don't remember".
I don't like the games that both prosecutors and defense attorneys use in our American courts. Not just this case. They are allowed to leave false impressions with no evidence to back up their claims. This practice should be stopped on ALL sides.
I absolutely agree but I'm not sure you understand where that line is.
What you are calling lies are theories that were legally argued in court and could have been refuted or challenged at any time.
I listed 6 pieces of evidence and at least 3 of them do not fit into the scenario put forth from the DA. Ignoring them does not make them go away. we cannot act like ostriches and bury our heads in the sand when confronted with evidence like this.
The underwear is not evidence. Not only is the absence of something not usually evidence, the fact that it's existence has never even been proven means it's not evidence.
The other two pieces of evidence, the table fingerprint and the second knife theory, were mentioned in court. The second knife theory has not been proven so it doesn't have to be part of the prosecution theory and the partial print on the table suffers the same problem as the other fingerprint, not enough points for comparison.
A new trial would help to put to final rest to the 2 questions the unanswered clues left behind make me ask.
If Darlie did it did she act alone?
If Darlie didn't do it then we need to find out who did.
That's not the way this works, though. You don't get new trials to tie up loose ends, you get new trials because it has been proven that a serious legal mistake has been made and the only way to rectify it is to retry the case.
cami
Keep your fork......
The deep arm injury is evidence she blocked some of the blows aimed at her chest.
It's no such thing! It is a stab wound, period. There is nothing in its nature that makes it defensive or self inflicted.
______________________
It's not even a stab wound 2 percent, it's an incised wound, which means it's longer than it is deep.
It's no such thing! It is a stab wound, period. There is nothing in its nature that makes it defensive or self inflicted.
______________________
It's not even a stab wound 2 percent, it's an incised wound, which means it's longer than it is deep.
Trooper514
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2011
- Messages
- 63
- Reaction score
- 11
The deep arm injury is blunt force trauma. The bruises do not correlate with a struggle. Read the transcripts.
---
I am here: [ame="http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=32.914094,-96.772412"]Google Maps[/ame]
---
I am here: [ame="http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=32.914094,-96.772412"]Google Maps[/ame]
Peiper72
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2013
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 1
Dog was a Pomeranian I believe. Love them.
Peiper72
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2013
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 1
I had 2 Pomeranians in the past and they are noisy, feisty little buggers. I am certain that he/she was not downstairs when the little boys were murdered.