Did Darlie Routier murder her precious sons? Part 2

[crystalmama]

I have read about the rape test a number of times but the most recently was in Precious Angels by Barbara Davis.
It is probably also in Media Tried Justice Denied.I will try to borrow that book.

 

[JaneInOz]

I have read about the rape test a number of times but the most recently was in Precious Angels by Barbara Davis.
It is probably also in Media Tried Justice Denied.I will try to borrow that book.

Page 11 12 and 13

Dodgy at best!

Partial Rape test
Very um ah testimony
And petitioner never got to see the test


ETA And also on here http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/HerProof/CourtTV.html

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?

 

[Daphne69]

The police video was never entered as evidence because they would've had to take the fifth in regard to how they obtained it. The police video was not the silly string video, but the one of the earlier, more solemn ceremony. Sure, it may have balanced the silly string video, but Darlie herself is the one who had the silly string video made. Plus she could have pointed out that the silly string video was only half of what happened there that day. Unfortunate for Darlie, but as far as I know, not illegal. After all, the police video did not really contain exculpatory evidence.

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

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.

FWIW, I have also heard many times that they will charge with only some of the murders and save others in case the verdict is not what they had hoped for. I don't believe it's a law of any type and I don't know if there are cases in which it is always done or is never done but I know you are right about them not charging for at least one murder so that they can have it as a back-up, so to speak. And I can't recall ... when one murder charge is more solid than the other(s), is the more solid one the one they will save for later?

 

[Crow_Ascending]

To Jane: I can't address all your questions in one post, so I'll start with the easiest first - the supposed 'bundling of evidence.' Darlie's wore her nightshirt to the hospital, where it was collected and bagged by itself. Darin's jeans and underwear were collected from a neighbor's house after he showered there. These were also separately bagged. If you read Devon's autopsy report, it states that Devon was brought directly to the coroner's office in a black body bag. (Remember he was dead at the scene) The report states that Devon was still wearing his t-shirt and shorts. Inside the bag were his pillow and pillowcase and the black and white blanket/comforter on which he died. Damon was brought to the coroner's office from the hospital, also in a black bag. His T-shirt and underwear were in the bag, also. No mention of his blanket. The murdeer weapon was photographed in place on the counter and also separately bagged. The slightly bloodstained sock (I won't call it the 'bloody sock') was found later and also bagged by itself as evidence. The sofa was taken out the following afternoon, along with the pillows. It wasn't bagged with anything else, obviously. The sink was removed that day also. So what does that leave for evidence to be bundled together? Damon's blanket and (maybe) some bloodied towels. The investigators took two brown paper bags out of the house after 11:00am. Since the murders took place at 2:30am, there was ample time for the blood to dry and not still be in the dripping or smeary stage.

 

[Crow_Ascending]

Now, as far as a mock trial, the prosecutor did meet with some of the witnesses, mainly to tell them what to expect as they had never had to testify in court. This is a very common practice and Doug Mulder, Darlie's attorney used the same method when he was a prosecutor. Almost every defense attorney starts out as a prosecutor because they want to learn the methods prosecutors use when they themselves become defense attorneys. But, even doing an overview of the prosecutor's witnesses does not benefit the witnesses because there is no way of knowing what questions the defense attorneys ask or what tactics they are going to use. So, there is no way to truly prepare a prosecution witness for the questions they will be asked.

 

[cami]

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

What video are you talking about Poly? I have everything ever televized about Darlie on vhs and I've never seen a video of Darin hooked up to a polygraph machine. Well I don't have the women on death row episode as we don't get that in Canada.

No you're wrong about the blood on her nightshirt. Her blood is over the boys and then since Damon was stabbed twice and after she was already bleeding, his blood is over her's.

The hiring a hitman is the most ridiculous scenario going. Hired killers don't break into people's houses in the middle of the night and forget to bring their own weapon. If he is in that house to kill, he's going to neutralize the adult, not immediately kill two little sleeping boys..not in a dp state anyway.

Darin and Darlie were broke so where is he getting the money to hire someone to kill his family.

Darin never worked for an insurance agency and there is absolutely no evidence he hired anyone to rob his house....that was just a scheme designed to get Darlie a new trial.

 

[cami]

Bold mine

That we know of

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

And once again, they did a partial rape kit at Baylor. How do we even know she had panties on?

 

[cami]

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

It's right in the trial transcripts Jane, read the medical testimony.

The photos were doubled so there were only 500 photos but double copies.

No, they weren't in violation of federal law...why don't you read the court documents instead of reading that crap from Darlie's website.

Here I'll answer your 123 and 6

1.The crime scene was secured immediately, even the chief of police was not allowed in. An officer was posted at the door and yellow crime scene tape was up immediately. No proof that the cs was not secured.

2. Two towels were touching each other at the crime scene so they were collected as one item. That's usually standard operating procedure.

3. already discussed. It's not unusal especially when prepping medical personnel to testify..they live by the patient/doctor confidentiality.

6. aaaaaaaaaahahahahah I love this one. They're trying to make something of the state court backlog, aahahahahahaha yeah Darlie you're so special and important that it was a big conspiracy on the part of the courts not to allow you dna testing.

 

[cami]

To Jane: I can't address all your questions in one post, so I'll start with the easiest first - the supposed 'bundling of evidence.' Darlie's wore her nightshirt to the hospital, where it was collected and bagged by itself. Darin's jeans and underwear were collected from a neighbor's house after he showered there. These were also separately bagged. If you read Devon's autopsy report, it states that Devon was brought directly to the coroner's office in a black body bag. (Remember he was dead at the scene) The report states that Devon was still wearing his t-shirt and shorts. Inside the bag were his pillow and pillowcase and the black and white blanket/comforter on which he died. Damon was brought to the coroner's office from the hospital, also in a black bag. His T-shirt and underwear were in the bag, also. No mention of his blanket. The murdeer weapon was photographed in place on the counter and also separately bagged. The slightly bloodstained sock (I won't call it the 'bloody sock') was found later and also bagged by itself as evidence. The sofa was taken out the following afternoon, along with the pillows. It wasn't bagged with anything else, obviously. The sink was removed that day also. So what does that leave for evidence to be bundled together? Damon's blanket and (maybe) some bloodied towels. The investigators took two brown paper bags out of the house after 11:00am. Since the murders took place at 2:30am, there was ample time for the blood to dry and not still be in the dripping or smeary stage.

Actually darin's clothes were collected at the hospital. He did not shower at a neighbours, he was given scrubs to wear after he was photographed naked by the cops.

Yes, there were two towels touching each other so they were bagged together.

 

[cami]

The police video was never entered as evidence because they would've had to take the fifth in regard to how they obtained it. The police video was not the silly string video, but the one of the earlier, more solemn ceremony. Sure, it may have balanced the silly string video, but Darlie herself is the one who had the silly string video made. Plus she could have pointed out that the silly string video was only half of what happened there that day. Unfortunate for Darlie, but as far as I know, not illegal. After all, the police video did not really contain exculpatory evidence.

the police surveillance tape was not offered into evidence. There's nothing probative or prejudicial with the surveillance tape. Most police departments do it in order to possible catch a confession or some incriminating info from the suspect and since Darlie was the suspect.....it only follows that she would be under surveillance once released from the hospital.

I don't know if posters know this, but a microphone and someone video taping was hidden at JonBenet Ramsey's gravesite in Atlanta..by the Colorado detectives investigating her case...for exactly the same purpose..hopes of catching a confession. It's usually sop.

 

[beckaroozie]

The screen cut was inconsistent with most cuts by any burglar. According to investigators it was a T-shaped cut which made your opening to step through the narrow part.

Also a forensic expert testified @ trial that fragments from that garage window screen which had been cut were found on a 2nd knife in the Router kitchen.

The murder weapon was an 8-inch butcher knife, which came from their kitchen. Why would an intruder go through the trouble of looking for a murder weapon, wouldn't they bring their own murder weapon?

My question is: Why would an intruder need to get a SECOND knife from the kitchen to kill them? Supposedly, he CUT the screen to enter the home, so wouldn't he already HAVE a knife in his possession upon entry? If he was there intent on murder and rape, why would he need a SECOND knife to do the deeds? Why would he waste time and the possibility of getting caught by stopping to grab another knife before he killed them? It doesn't make sense.

 

[cami]

Weasel I should post the video where Darin is hooked up to a lite detector test and smiles when asked if he had anything to do with the stabbing of his wife and kids...you would surely change your mind, he failed so badly by the way, that the investigator that was hired to help him turned agaisnt him...that should tell you something right. I dont trust that dude as far as I could throw him, he had planned for a long time crazy schemes to make money, I think this was one of his insane ideas.

Please post it you we can see what you are talking about.

 

[cami]

My question is: Why would an intruder need to get a SECOND knife from the kitchen to kill them? Supposedly, he CUT the screen to enter the home, so wouldn't he already HAVE a knife in his possession upon entry? If he was there intent on murder and rape, why would he need a SECOND knife to do the deeds? Why would he waste time and the possibility of getting caught by stopping to grab another knife before he killed them? It doesn't make sense.

You know what? I saw one of the jurors on the Leeza show many years ago and she stated almost exactly what you have posted here. This would lead me to believe the jury deliberated on this point..they didn't just watch the SS tape and say "okay, she's guilty."


Anyone can verify this by going to www.justicefordarlie.net/media and watching the show. Although, there is one part missing. I wonder why?

 

[cami]

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.

I went to that link you posted...most of those poster believe in DArlie's guilt from what I read so don't know what we're supposed to see there.

 

[claudicici]

...this is my first time posting...so bear with me..I live in Tx and vividly remember the "silly string" episode and it has haunted me ever since.
Do I believe Darlie murdered her children?...I tend not to.I understand she was depressed and about to go through a divorce.If she would have been under the influence of drugs that night,maybe I could believe she would have been capable of this horrendous,BRUTAL attack on her children and herself...what I can't believe is her going to sleep ,sober,then waking up in the middle of the night and with no history of a violent temper going into a rage....considering the depression,maybe I would believe a soft death but not the violent attack.
I understand how all the evidence points to her but there are some things I do not believe I saw mentioned in the thread before like the other break ins in the area,the other screens that were cut and foremost the sock that was found 75 yards away containing the boy's blood and darlie's DNA,how can this be explained?...and wasn't it now proven,that the screen was indeed cut from the outside and not the inside?
The 16 versions of her testimony also makes me tend to believe her.If she was trying to sound innocent wouldn't she have stuck to one story? IMO that lady was out of her mind after the aussault.I also see her as being in total denial during the silly string episode...if she wanted to look innocent wouldn't she have "pretended" to grieve?...she just seems completely out of it during the taping IMO.
no matter if she is indeed guilty or not I believe she deserves a re-trial.This is a young woman on Death row and there ARE doubts...

 

[JaneInOz]

...this is my first time posting...so bear with me..I live in Tx and vividly remember the "silly string" episode and it has haunted me ever since.
Do I believe Darlie murdered her children?...I tend not to.I understand she was depressed and about to go through a divorce.If she would have been under the influence of drugs that night,maybe I could believe she would have been capable of this horrendous,BRUTAL attack on her children and herself...what I can't believe is her going to sleep ,sober,then waking up in the middle of the night and with no history of a violent temper going into a rage....considering the depression,maybe I would believe a soft death but not the violent attack.
I understand how all the evidence points to her but there are some things I do not believe I saw mentioned in the thread before like the other break ins in the area,the other screens that were cut and foremost the sock that was found 75 yards away containing the boy's blood and darlie's DNA,how can this be explained?...and wasn't it now proven,that the screen was indeed cut from the outside and not the inside?
The 16 versions of her testimony also makes me tend to believe her.If she was trying to sound innocent wouldn't she have stuck to one story? IMO that lady was out of her mind after the aussault.I also see her as being in total denial during the silly string episode...if she wanted to look innocent wouldn't she have "pretended" to grieve?...she just seems completely out of it during the taping IMO.
no matter if she is indeed guilty or not I believe she deserves a re-trial.This is a young woman on Death row and there ARE doubts...

Welcome to WS

Interesting first post as in case to brave your toes in LOL

I hope you are tough ! There are not many Darlie didn't do it supporters in here

 

[claudicici]

...yes,I have noticed that reading the thread....and I do appreciate how you kept arguing your point of view ,Jane !

 

[accordn2me]

...this is my first time posting...<respectfully snipped>

:balloons::Welcome-12-june:

 

[accordn2me]

<snip>
Yes, there were two towels touching each other so they were bagged together.

There were some other towels too.

BY MR. RICHARD MOSTY:
7 Q. Okay. And 30 is taken during your
8 very first walk-through of the house?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. Okay. And that is the cover that is
11 over Devon's body?
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. Okay. Does it show a rag in it?
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. Does it show a bloody rag in it?
16 A. Yes, sir.
17 Q. And it is -- there is a yellow figure
18 on that -- I guess, that underside blanket?
19 A. Yes, sir.
20 Q. Okay. And that rag is not quite
21 touching that yellow figure?
22 A. Yes, sir.
23 Q. Okay. Let me show you Exhibit No. 31,
24 and ask you if you can identify that?
25 A. That is the covers.
1 Q. Similar photo?
2 A. Yes, sir.
3
4 THE COURT: We will offer No. 31.
5 MR. GREG DAVIS: No objection.
6 THE COURT: Defendant's Exhibit No. 31
7 is admitted.

18 BY MR. RICHARD MOSTY:
19 Q. Is that also taken on the 6th?
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. Does that depict -- is the rag in the
22 same location as it was in the picture immediately before
23 it?
24 A. It's in the same vicinity.
25 Q. Same vicinity?

1 A. Um-hum. (Witness nodding head
2 affirmatively).
3 Q. Okay. But not the same place?
4 A. Yes, sir.
5 Q. Care to explain? Yes, sir, it's not
6 in the same place?
7 A. Yes, sir, it is.
8 Q. Yes, sir, it is in the same place?
9 A. Yes, it is.
10 Q. How do you account for the way that
11 looks?
12 A. From the angle that I took the
13 photograph.
14 Q. Okay. Well, yesterday when I said,
15 remember when I stood right here and said, if you take --
16 that sometimes photographs are distorted by the angle.
17 Do you remember me asking you that yesterday?
18 A. I remember.
19 Q. And you didn't agree with me, did you?
20 A. Well, I don't recall.
21 Q. Don't you remember when I was talking
22 about taking 90 degree photographs? The reason is so
23 that if you get at an angle it distorts the photograph.
24 You don't remember that line of questioning yesterday?
25 A. I remember you saying something about


1 it.
2 Q. And you didn't agree with me, did you?
3 A. To be honest with you, I don't recall.
4 Q. But now your story is that there is a
5 difference between 30 and 31, is because it's a different
6 camera angle?
7 A. Yes, it is.
8 Q. But that the -- but that the rag is
9 not moved?
10 A. No.
11 Q. All right. Now, shortly after this,
12 these photos are taken, the medical examiner came in,
13 right?
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. And you saw that rag again?
16 A. Yes, sir.
17 Q. Didn't you?
18 A. Yes, sir.
19 Q. And you photographed it again?
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. Okay. And then you stayed at that
22 house and started collecting rags about 9 -- or you were
23 collecting in the 9:00 o'clock range?
24 A. 8:00 o'clock, in that area.
25 Q. Okay. And you didn't collect this

1 rag, did you?
2 A. No, sir.
3 Q. It had blood on it, didn't it?
4 A. Yes, sir.
5 Q. It was next to the body of Devon
6 Routier, wasn't it?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. It was -- you knew that the paramedics
9 had been in there and had done something in that area,
10 didn't you?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. You knew that the paramedics had
13 covered up the body, didn't you?
14 A. Well, I wasn't aware of that. I
15 wasn't there.
16 Q. Well, you knew that the medical
17 examiner, for instance, picked up the -- some of those
18 things around Devon Routier and took them to the medical
19 examiner's office, didn't you?
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. You saw that happen?
22 A. Yes, sir.
23 Q. So you knew that what was next to that
24 body was important, didn't you?
25 A. Well, the blankets, yes, sir.

1 Q. But the rag wasn't important?
2 A. I didn't say that.
3 Q. It was important, wasn't it?
4 A. Well, it could be.
5 Q. It should have been collected,
6 shouldn't it?
7 A. I didn't collect it.
8 Q. It should have been collected,
9 shouldn't it?
10 A. I gave at that point where I didn't
11 determine that it needed to be collected.
12 Q. You made that decision that it wasn't
13 important enough to collect?
14 A. I made that decision.
15 Q. And that was a conscious decision?
16 A. That was my decision.
17 Q. That was your decision that that rag
18 which has blood on it and it is next to Devon Routier's
19 body is not important enough to have forensics look at
20 it?
21 A. I made that decision.