Did Darlie Routier murder her precious sons? Part 2

[whitywendy]

I believe either one of two things could have happened,

1.) Either Darlie and her hubby killed her sons for some type of monetary reason.
2.) Her hubby who was clearly into illegal stuff decided to kill the boys and threaten her by slashing her up a little and letting her live (maybe he lovd her too much to really kill her)and she is terrified to rat him out because of it. (hence the bruises all over her).

I def beleive Darin is involved, especially since that one investigator said he failed a lie detector tests. Darlie looks like she is heavily sedated from some type of psychotropic medications, which leads me to believe that is one of the reasons she went ahead with Darins cockamamie schemes to murder her sons for money, or perhaps she is drugged up to 'forget' or 'cope with' what he has threatened her with, so that she can maintain her story that Darin is not involved, you must remember , doesnt he have one of her surviving babies??? for all we know maybe he threatened her 'if you tell anyone Ill finish the last one off' so she refuses to rat him out. Also in one tv interview withher, you see a reporter ask her if Darin was involved and how she looks down and pauses, its almost as if she wants to say yes but she doesnt, but the hesitation in her answer is a definate yes he was involved, no way around that reaction. Anyone see the vid and know what I m talking about? anyway, Im wondering if he was the one who got her all doped up on meds to be compliant to him...so I cant totally blaim her for all this even if she was willingly involved, but I dont see how all the drugs in the world would make you want to kill your own kids, I think maybe Darin threatened her with the last inch of her life (after proving it to her by slashing her up) and she went to jail to protect her only surviving child. If she is a cruel heartless person, may God keep her in jail then.

Poly

Poly - Darlie ruled that household. Not Darin. Darlie was not doped up prior to 6/6/96. Check out the transcripts.

 

[PolyGraph]

Poly - Darlie ruled that household. Not Darin. Darlie was not doped up prior to 6/6/96. Check out the transcripts.

Lie detector tests do not lie, Darin failed his...especially when asked if he stabbed darlie...so Im inclined to believe even if darlie did it too, darin was still guilty as sin. I just cant see someone doing that to her sons unless she WAS dopped up on something or coerced into it by an abusive husband. Im not buying the whole darin was innocent thing, especially after seeing the vid with him smiling when told he stabbed his wife, that def did not sit right with me. moo

 

[Anais]

Lie detector tests do not lie, Darin failed his...especially when asked if he stabbed darlie...so Im inclined to believe even if darlie did it too, darin was still guilty as sin. I just cant see someone doing that to her sons unless she WAS dopped up on something or coerced into it by an abusive husband. Im not buying the whole darin was innocent thing, especially after seeing the vid with him smiling when told he stabbed his wife, that def did not sit right with me. moo

Above bolded by me...respectfully.

Darin was not asked if he had stabbed Darlie or the boys. Darin was asked only if he knew who had stabbed the boys. That was the only deceptive answer that he responded to.

 

[PolyGraph]

Above bolded by me...respectfully.

Darin was not asked if he had stabbed Darlie or the boys. Darin was asked only if he knew who had stabbed the boys. That was the only deceptive answer that he responded to.

I saw the video and I could have sworn the examiner said you stabbed your wife and it showed him smiling and saying no i didnt or something like that, and the examiner then goes to say that he was found to be lieing, I just find it hard to believe gthat he didnt hear anything and came down after all that had happened, and then him working for an insurance agency (he would know how to work schemes to get money) and then telling someone else to rob him etc etc the list goes on and on, I dont trust that man as far as I can throw him. I believe he probably hired someone to knock them all off, but maybe for some reason he didnt want Darlie to die or she woke up and the guy was not able to kill her (that would explain all the defense bruises on her arms) so he fled. That would also explain the bloody sock found far away from the house, I dont understand how one of them could have planted that there so far away in that little amount of time. I have another question, why would she stab herself first if she was planning on murdering the boys??? that makes no sense, the blood experts said her blood was first on her shirt before the boys, so how could that have been? why would she have slit her own throat first? makes no sense. I have a hard time believing she would have made all those defense wounds herself. MOO

 

[JaneInOz]

I saw the video and I could have sworn the examiner said you stabbed your wife and it showed him smiling and saying no i didnt or something like that, and the examiner then goes to say that he was found to be lieing, I just find it hard to believe gthat he didnt hear anything and came down after all that had happened, and then him working for an insurance agency (he would know how to work schemes to get money) and then telling someone else to rob him etc etc the list goes on and on, I dont trust that man as far as I can throw him. I believe he probably hired someone to knock them all off, but maybe for some reason he didnt want Darlie to die or she woke up and the guy was not able to kill her (that would explain all the defense bruises on her arms) so he fled. That would also explain the bloody sock found far away from the house, I dont understand how one of them could have planted that there so far away in that little amount of time. I have another question, why would she stab herself first if she was planning on murdering the boys??? that makes no sense, the blood experts said her blood was first on her shirt before the boys, so how could that have been? why would she have slit her own throat first? makes no sense. I have a hard time believing she would have made all those defense wounds herself. MOO

Bold by me

You and me both polygraph !

And what does MOO mean LOL

 

[PolyGraph]

Bold by me

You and me both polygraph !

And what does MOO mean LOL

It means Im a cow:cow: hahhahahaha rothf.....hahahaha just kidding, its means MY OPPINION ONLY LOL

 

[JaneInOz]

It means Im a cow:cow: hahhahahaha rothf.....hahahaha just kidding, its means MY OPPINION ONLY LOL

Oooohhhh I GET IT LOL how silly of me not to doh !
Thankyou for explaining :blowkiss:

Ive seen it a few times and though why are they making noises like a cow

 

[MomofBoys]

You know the thing that cinches it for me beyond the obvious weirdness, ie: why would a random killer with no other motive leave an adult alive and massacre two little boys, why didn't the dog go nuts, the blood evidence, the screen being cut, but not used as the point of entry, etc, etc?

I started to watch the slideshow of the crime scene photos the other day, but saw a repeat image and thought the presentation had started over.

I watched again tonight and had the unpleasant experience of viewing the boys' bodies.

There is nothing in me that can believe that anyone could leave plunging, deep, multiple, fatal wounds in two little boys while allowing the adult in the room to escape with what (in comparison) looks like a bunch of shallow cuts and bruises. I think the neck wound might have been adrenaline-augmented and maybe it went a little deeper than she anticipated. Either way, to see her standing in the hospital, flexing her arm to allow a better view of the wounds...it boggles the mind that she'd be able to do that after seeing how her boys never had a chance. She has to be the luckiest person ever to live, really.

Who takes out their rage on two little boys and lets the adult go with a clean cut to the throat, even if the attempt was to kill her? The boys underwent a horrible kind of overkill, and he/she didn't even incapacitate her. The murderer of those boys had some kind of proprietary interest in seeing them dead. If not Darlie, who? There was no sexual assault. No robbery. No hostage situation. And after all the effort on Darlie's behalf, and vaguely sympathetic TV specials, they haven't shown any reason to exonerate her.

Maybe I'm all verklempt because I didn't expect those photos, but the one shot where Damon is propped against the bedrail and the back wounds are fully visible? My God.

 

[JaneInOz]

You know the thing that cinches it for me beyond the obvious weirdness, ie: why would a random killer with no other motive leave an adult alive and massacre two little boys, why didn't the dog go nuts, the blood evidence, the screen being cut, but not used as the point of entry, etc, etc?

I started to watch the slideshow of the crime scene photos the other day, but saw a repeat image and thought the presentation had started over.

I watched again tonight and had the unpleasant experience of viewing the boys' bodies.

There is nothing in me that can believe that anyone could leave plunging, deep, multiple, fatal wounds in two little boys while allowing the adult in the room to escape with what (in comparison) looks like a bunch of shallow cuts and bruises. I think the neck wound might have been adrenaline-augmented and maybe it went a little deeper than she anticipated. Either way, to see her standing in the hospital, flexing her arm to allow a better view of the wounds...it boggles the mind that she'd be able to do that after seeing how her boys never had a chance. She has to be the luckiest person ever to live, really.

Who takes out their rage on two little boys and lets the adult go with a clean cut to the throat, even if the attempt was to kill her? The boys underwent a horrible kind of overkill, and he/she didn't even incapacitate her. The murderer of those boys had some kind of proprietary interest in seeing them dead. If not Darlie, who? There was no sexual assault. No robbery. No hostage situation. And after all the effort on Darlie's behalf, and vaguely sympathetic TV specials, they haven't shown any reason to exonerate her.

Maybe I'm all verklempt because I didn't expect those photos, but the one shot where Damon is propped against the bedrail and the back wounds are fully visible? My God.

Bold mine

That we know of

Her panties were missing. She said she felt pressure *there* but they never did a rape kit !

 

[MomofBoys]

Did they ever find the panties? The only reference to them that I ever see is when Darin asks where they were. I'm really surprised that Darlie or Darin didn't push for a rape kit. Missing panties could have been huge and evidence from an assault would have gone a long way to target someone else.

The odd thing is that no one seems to push that as a big part of a defense, either. My speculation would be that perhaps a large amount of blood had ran down her front and pooled in the front of her underwear/in the waistband. It would have saturated thin fabric quickly, gotten cold, even started to stiffen. All that would be quite uncomfortable down there, the creep factor of having someone's blood near your nether regions notwithstanding.

Like I said, speculation. But those panties have to be somewhere. Heck, the "real killer(s)" dropped the random sock. Why not the panties?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Did they ever find the panties? The only reference to them that I ever see is when Darin asks where they were. I'm really surprised that Darlie or Darin didn't push for a rape kit. Missing panties could have been huge and evidence from an assault would have gone a long way to target someone else.

The odd thing is that no one seems to push that as a big part of a defense, either. My speculation would be that perhaps a large amount of blood had ran down her front and pooled in the front of her underwear/in the waistband. It would have saturated thin fabric quickly, gotten cold, even started to stiffen. All that would be quite uncomfortable down there, the creep factor of having someone's blood near your nether regions notwithstanding.

Like I said, speculation. But those panties have to be somewhere. Heck, the "real killer(s)" dropped the random sock. Why not the panties?

Maybe she simply wasn't wearing any!

 

[Debbie Miller]

I was listening to a segment of one of those real crime shows last night or the night before and they are saying that Darlie's story isn't lining up with the forensic evidence.

That was the bottom line.

 

[MomofBoys]

Maybe she simply wasn't wearing any!

Also a consideration, LOL.

It's probably likely, as the panties haven't been found and Darlie didn't play up an attempt at rape in her story, probably because she couldn't recreate a sexual assault.No semen, the brusing might be off, etc. It seems like a rape kit would be SOP if Darlie claimed she had been the victim of a SA, so it makes me think that she didn't go there, at least with the medical staff.

Yet, she also didn't say "Oh, I didn't wear any!" when asked. How could the "Intruder(s)" have slipped her underwear off of an admitted light sleeper without her knowledge? Nowhere have I read an account where she said "He stood up, pulled his pants back up, and headed for the utility room with a point of egress that was never used."

The forenscs don't match up and the more I read, the more I'm convinced it just doesn't make common sense. The killer leaves a murder weapon the the floor, yet manages to escape out of a slit screen (heh) without leaving so much as a footprint? Why did Damon seem to be trying to escape? Did the dog have a hard night of drinking and didn't hear any of this?

I know this has all been talked about, but the case is relatively new to me and I'm just enthralled.

 

[MomofBoys]

Argh. Naughty server.

 

[JaneInOz]

Try this link http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/HerProof/CourtTV.html

Here is part that pertains to the rape kit ..that was done...or was it ...lost ...or was it .... ?

and some other pertinent info...

The key points not covered on Court TV "Wrong Man" 4/6/2007:

Only a short portion of the 911 tape was played. Listen to the complete 911 tape for yourself. This is a hysterical woman going on for 5 minutes pleading for help while Damon is still alive. She is telling him to hang on. He dies after paramedics arrive. You can hear Darin yell in the background early in the tape. Shortly after the police arrive, you hear Walling's radio through the phone when he enters. The 911 operator does not realize that an officer is in the house and Darlie is now talking to the officer and 911 for a minute before she hangs up. This is why she is not responding coherently to the 911 operator.

During one of the hearings, it was reported to the judge that a hair was found in the screen that looked like Darlie's. Later testing showed that this hair actually belonged to a female police officer who was not at the scene. Could someone have planted that hair to coerce a plea? or to force Darlie to come up with something on her husband?

During jury deliberations, the jury found it important enough to clarify a point of fact. They sent out a question. When the court reporter read back the testimony, she said the opposite of what the witness actually said and the jury subsequently voted guilty. During the appeal, this error in the read back was discovered by the witness. The defense discovered many other errors in the transcript. The court ordered the reporter to produce the tapes. She said there were no tapes because the microphone did not have a battery in it. Then she changed her story and said they are lost and took the Fifth amendment. After several attempts to get the court reporter to produce the tapes, the judge indicated that a new trial was imminent. The DA, faced with this disaster, made a last ditch heavy push on the reporter and she finally turned over the tapes. The error in the read back was confirmed as an error, as well as thousands of other errors. The Court eventually rejected this transcript and had another reporter edit it using the tapes. Once edited, the court accepted the transcript as a certified accurate record over the objections of the defense. The defense objected for several reasons including the fact that the reporter could not certify a record of a trial which she did not see. Especially when there is a tape missing for one of the volumes. And throughout the trial there are writings like, "nodding affirmatively" etc. There is no way the new court reporter can be sure if the witness is saying "a-ha" or "u-ua" since they sound so similar.

Also found on this list is DNA tests on the limb and facial hairs that were found on Darlie's body, and the pubic hair from the floor. The results did not match known persons in the house that night. At that point further testing was stopped. This was never disclosed to the defense during trial. Read the 2004 - 2006 motions at the bottom of the Legal page.

Darlie remembers getting a rape exam after arriving at the hospital. The State has claimed for years that there was never a rape exam. Long after the trial and after many appeal hearings, the DA was finally required to produce the evidence list they had generated at one time. On that list they show a rape kit. So why is it on the DA's evidence list if it was not done? Where is it? Did it get lost when they stopped the above DNA tests?

Bold is mine

Lol I started bolding all the important parts and then realized I practically bolded the whole thing !!

Seriously how anyone can not see the inconsistencies, and possible cover ups for *bad admin* is beyond me

Darlie Deserves a new Trial.


If she is sooooo guilty as everyone claims whats everyone worried about ???

There ARE inconsistencies, There is DOUBT

The Courts stuffed up.

The LE Stuffed up

Those are facts -

Why is it so hard to then give Darlie a new trial with ALL THE FACTS ?

because the crime is so horrific....

I DO, really DO understand that - I have children too....and Ive seen those crime photos and I cried for those two little boys...

But if Darlie really didnt do it , wouldn't you like the REAL KILLER caught ?

I believe someone is getting away with murder, a horrible gruesome murder of two innocent little boys, and if Darlie is put to death they will have got away with another murder

 

[JaneInOz]

More Reading here http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=218503&page=10

Particularly this part of a post of which I 100percent agree....and are some of the inconsistencies etc I spoke of

1) the scene was not secure and things were moved
2) bloody items were put in the same bags where evidence could have easily transferred blood from one item to another.
3) the prosecution did a rehearsal trial ,so the testimony of the evidence favored the prosecution
4)detective's notes were kept in his memory and not on a hard copy that could be referred to for the trial
5) investigators violated federal law at the gravesite, and then take the 5th to avoid prosecution themselves
6)DNA evidence and other evidence was refused to be reviewed by the Texas court system until the federal government became involved, why?
7) was there a rape test done or not, if so, what and where are the results?
8)why when over 1000 photos were taken was the defense only given 400?
9) why was Darlie only tried for ONE murder? Do they have evidence that maybe she did not kill one of the victims.

Her Lawyer had a conflict of interest (as I said earlier on)
Both The Chief investigator and court reporter had to take the 5th amendment

Don't you think thats all a little off?

 

[crystalmama]

In cases of multiple murder LE usually tries the defendant for only one murder in case they get off.Then they can try them for another.
In this case I believe the law in Texas is automatic DP for a child under 6 years.

Darlie's rape test was negative, she suffered no bruising, no semen was found.

It was eventually found that the police who hid the tape recorder at the gravesite did not commit a crime as it is legal to record a suspect without their knowledge.

There were over 900 photos presented in evidence.If the jury did not avail themselves of the opportunity to see them that is not the fault of anyone else.
Only so many can be presented in court.

I find it interesting that Barbara Davis who wrote Precious Angels wrote an almost perfect book in laying out Darlie's guilt, and then almost immediately changed her mind.
She raises literally hundreds of points in regard to the Routiers behaviour that one finishes the book completely overwhelmed with how clear cut the case was.Open and shut.You can't argue with logic and evidence.
If she says she decided on the basis of seeing Darlie's bruises for the first time that she is innocent, then MS Davis either has a serious memory problem, she is a liar, or she backed off for some other reason.
This is one of the very pecular aspects of this case.

 

[JaneInOz]

In cases of multiple murder LE usually tries the defendant for only one murder in case they get off.Then they can try them for another.
In this case I believe the law in Texas is automatic DP for a child under 6 years.

Darlie's rape test was negative, she suffered no bruising, no semen was found.

It was eventually found that the police who hid the tape recorder at the gravesite did not commit a crime as it is legal to record a suspect without their knowledge.

There were over 900 photos presented in evidence.If the jury did not avail themselves of the opportunity to see them that is not the fault of anyone else.
Only so many can be presented in court.

I find it interesting that Barbara Davis who wrote Precious Angels wrote an almost perfect book in laying out Darlie's guilt, and then almost immediately changed her mind.
She raises literally hundreds of points in regard to the Routiers behaviour that one finishes the book completely overwhelmed with how clear cut the case was.Open and shut.You can't argue with logic and evidence.
If she says she decided on the basis of seeing Darlie's bruises for the first time that she is innocent, then MS Davis either has a serious memory problem, she is a liar, or she backed off for some other reason.
This is one of the very pecular aspects of this case.

1) do you have links to that law ? Ive never heard that ? Ive heard many people be charged and convicted of multiple murders
2) where is the link to the rape test ? I was under the understanding it was a) lost b) never done (ive read both)
3) Over 1000 photos and I said the defence not the Jury. The Defence Were only given 400

And you missed all points 1 2 3 4 and 6

Also they were in violation of federal law and they took the 5th

 

[crystalmama]

I missed those points either because there is no argument or because I don't know.
I can only tell you what I know.
I am not American so I don't personally know their laws but I have read it on another thread here and also in many books that LE usually always charge the defendant for only one murder in a multiple murder case.
In a case where the accused gets 20 years for a murder they can then try him for the other murders.

 

[JaneInOz]

I missed those points either because there is no argument or because I don't know.
I can only tell you what I know.
I am not American so I don't personally know their laws but I have read it on another thread here and also in many books that LE usually always charge the defendant for only one murder in a multiple murder case.
In a case where the accused gets 20 years for a murder they can then try him for the other murders.

But where is the link to the results of the rape test ?