I have followed this case, and this forum for years. Up until recently, I was convinced of Darlie's innocence. At this point, I am not sure either way. Lots of questions in my mind.
1. Why not kill all the kids? Who leaves one child alive, if the motive is to rid their life of the burden of motherhood? And why leave the most demanding child (infant) alive. Life insurance is a weak motive, they did not gain financially. Furthermore, even though everyone implies they were broke, they weren't. Broke people cannot come up with the kind of money they did for Darlie's defense. How many of you honestly have 5k in savings today? They did, and had many items that they could have sold off rather than kill their kids.
I think this was a crime of opportunity more than anything. Yes, she did plan it but she was also waiting for a chance to kill her children. Drake was left out for practical reasons - she'd have to go through Darin.
Yes, the insurance money is a weak motive but since motive is not required to prove guilt, it's immaterial to me.
Darlie had court appointed lawyers at first. They went to Mulder and paid him money they had raised through selling possessions and borrowing from family.
2. Why call 911 when one of the victims is still living? Damon was alive when EMS arrived. Darlie had no way of knowing if he would die before they arrived, or tell on her if he was.
We don't know she did know Damon was still alive before she got on the phone.
3. There are reports of other crimes in the area that night. But none were really looked in to. The traffic stop in which the car was allowed to go because of Darlie's 911 call is the one that bothers me the most.
The teens in the car were allowed to go because there was no legal basis to detain them.
4. The timeline is shoddy. You cannot convince me that Darlie was able to pull off everything that needed to occur. The sock, the staging, the blood being wiped up, etc. Damon had up to 9 mins to live, and 6 mins were while D was on the phone with 911. Cutting herself up, knocking over furniture, getting blood on the sock, ripping her clothes, etc would have been LOUD and time consuming. And would she be brave enough to run down an alley full of motion lights in a white shirt and risk being seen?
The evidence clearly shows Damon was stabbed at two different times, two different areas. The timeline only starts after the second stabbing and we don't know how much she accomplished before the second stabbing.
5. I do believe she could have slept through the murders. People with collapsed lungs or lungs full of blood don't make much sound. You need air exchange for sound to occur. Sleeping children could have been silently killed.
Remember Darlie said, and evidence shows, Damon was sleeping right next to the couch. You would have to believe an intruder was able to squeeze in that space and stab a child. Not only that, Darlie also says Damon could speak and he was till alive after the initial attack. Given the small space where the crime had to happen and the vocal ability, the first attack on Damon that occurred inches away from a mother would have woken her up.
6. Darlie is not a smart gal. At best she is of average intelligence. Yet we are expected to believe that she was smart enough to inflict her neck wound using her left hand, she was smart enough to inflict near perfect defensive slices to her finger tips, thrust a knife into her arm bone, and even bite the insides of her own cheeks? She also managed to slice up her night shirt. She apparently is way smarter than she seems.
Intelligence has nothing to do with the strength of your non-dominant hand. We don't even know if she's ambidextrous.
The wounds on her fingers are not consistent with defensive wounds on the hands/fingers of victims of similar crimes. In fact they are an anomaly as a defensive wound. A search of defensive wounds on the hands is recommended.
Arm bone? Bites on the inside of her cheek? Nightshirt? I'm not sure I follow you
7. Her neck wound/breast wounds. This is a superficial woman. They spent a lot of money on her appearance. Would she really hack up her most prized possessions- her DD breasts? Furthermore, why cut her own throat, she would have inflicted her injuries in less obvious places.
As you said...average intelligence at best.
There is talk her breast size was not her choice.
8. The necklace- It was embedded in her neck wound. Common theory is that Darlie slit her throat over the sink. Her necklace would have been hanging down due to gravity, so we are to believe she stuffed the necklace into the wound? The necklace had knife damage on it. Given the fact that it was embedded into the wound, with knife damage on it, it is most likely she WAS lying down when her neck was cut.
I'm not a believer that Darlie's neck was sliced in one motion. I think there are clear hesitation marks and there was at least 2, possibly 3, swipes at her neck.
Scenario: Darlie goes to the sink and presses the knife into her neck and starts cutting. Pain hits her and she jerks back the knife, possibly jerking on the necklace at the same time but since the pain and determination is still in control she doesn't notice the necklace. Her next attempt she starts deep again but instinctively jerks her body back because she knows it's going to hurt. Ditto the third attempt if it happened. You'll notice the cuts went from deep to shallow at least twice, possibly three times.
To recap, she inflicts her neck damage and unwittingly damages her necklace. Later as she was pressing a towel to her neck the necklace worked its way into the wound.
11. Yep, there was blood under the vaccuum. You can't tell me in the chaos, that EMS, police, Darlie, etc didn't move anything. You cannot rely on that fact when it is clear that things were moved all over the place from one photo of the scene to the next.
The purpose of forensics is to determine what is valid evidence and what is not. That's why the observations of all the people at the scene is important for scene integrity. Nothing should be dismissed based on the assumption of things that have not been officially reported
12. No glass in her feet. We all have feet. They are tough, thick skinned, etc. to prevent cuts. Just because one wine glass broke does not automatically imply that her feet had to be cut. I've walked on broken glass and felt it, but not been cut by it. It didn't shatter into a million pieces.
It was a wine glass, typically thin glass or crystal. Yes it would shatter and, being thin, it would most likely penetrate her feet.
I've never seen statements that Darlie's feet were tough or thick skinned. However I do know the skin of the instep is soft and not as calloused.
13. No other crimes happen like this? Yes they do. Apparently people do not read as much as I do. Try looking up the Keddie murders (3 kids slept through that one, with 3 others murdered way more savagely than this case), Jaclyn Dowalaby was taken without anyone awakening, Julie Rea was railroaded in a case similar to Darlies. There are hundreds of cases of people randomly killing others in break ins.
I must say I've never seen anyone say there's never been other cases of children taken or killed in their sleep with the family home. However I don't remember one where the mother was inches from the
attack/murder and claims to not only hear nothing but didn't wake up.
14. There is the possibility of an intruder. While it is most likely the fingerprints are Darlie's, they factually remain unidentified, therefore we cannot 100% say they are not an intruders. There is also hair that hasn't been matched. Yes, a pubic hair could arrive at a crime scene a million different ways, but until we can prove the way, the intruder is still possible.
A possibility isn't enough to get Darlie another trial. There has to be clear proof, probably with a name attache, to overturn her sentence. Even if she gets that trial it won't be enough to point to a single print for acquittal, there's way too much evidence against her
15. The nurses. This makes my blood boil. I am an RN. You cannot chart one thing, and testify to another. They clearly indicated in their charting that Darlie was tearful, sad, and grieving appropriately. They did not use words like "fake" or "indifferent". Why were their licenses not called into question? Either the testimony was false, or the charting was false. One is perjury, one is a HIPAA violation.
Cleary because it wasn't a violation that would revoke their licenses.
16. Silly string. Dana's idea, that was made out to be way more than it is. Odd, yes, but not something Darlie had any part in planning. Also, as an RN, let me tell you, people become pretty silly when they are taking Valium, Ativan, etc. She was likely chewing gum because of the cotton mouth side effect of those medications. She was prescribed sedatives/antianxiety meds following the murders.
Dana's idea or not, Darlie participated in a celebration that was questionable. I've seen people on sedatives, painkillers and or anti anxiety meds go to the funerals of their children and are solemn.
Doubling down, the interview clearly showed Darlie's state of mind. The children were gone, they were good kids, Darlie and Darin were great parents because they took their kids to eat foreign food, etc.
17. Surgery. The neck and arm wound were serious. Doctors just don't do surgery for fun. The necklace had to be surgically removed because of its proximity to the carotid. In medical terminology, the word superficial implies that something is "above." Your skin is superficial to your carotid artery. Your platysma muscle is also superficial to your carotid artery. To the general public, superficial means "skin deep." The words should not be confused. Being within the carotid sheath is a BIG deal, that means she was a paper sheet thickness away from a very hasty death.
I'm not clear about your point. Inches from death does not clear her of self inflicting the wound. Like you said..not intelligent.
19. Before you ask, YES, I have read the transcripts. I find that the error's make me mistrust it, even though it has since been corrected. Yes, Darlie was a hot mess on the stand. Yes she changed her story many times. However, I think in a traumatic event that this is not that unusual. The psychologist who examined her did not feel she was capable of committing the crime and that she has some traumatic amnesia. Again, more common than you think, and something I see at times in my profession.
The mistakes are more frequent than would normally be in transcripts but in reality it was only about 3 mistakes per page. Also, it would be impossible to purposefully make those mistakes to influence the outcome of the trial. Remember, only a portion of the entire case was reconstructed from only notes. Everything else had tapes, notes and the transcripts for reference. The only case I can recall where a new trial was given based on transcripts was a trial where there was not actual court recording and the prosecutor and judge "reconstructed them from memory". It really has to be that blatant.
I'm going to call you on the traumatic amnesia stuff. It's well docmented there has never been a case of total amnesia that she claims without there being a physical injury to the head/brain.
20. The castoff. Darin has said many times, that he was attempting CPR on Devon. When you blow air into lungs full of holes, it will spurt out. It is possible that the blood came from this. Also, I challenge you to kneel down, and act out stabbing the floor below you, and realize how far over your head you need to weild that imaginary knife to get cast off down your back. These were small kids, the knife would never have needed to come way back over the head of the killer to re enter the victim, and these were little kids, it would not have needed a ton of force. Also, with all of the wet items being placed into paper bags together, it is hard to know what blood was transfer vs cast off. I have read that the blood is very questionable for cast off to being with.
I doubt Darlie had a dress rehearsal. So I think the possiblity she brought the knife over head that far is likely.
As for the blood, both on the shirt and in the bag, cast off blood and transfer is easily detected even by most laymen and in the event it is questionable I trust the blood expert that was called in this case knew what he was testifying to, especially after giving his testing parameters and methods in court.
21. The whole investigation stinks. Court reporters being removed, cops pleading the fifth, illegal taping, interviewing witnesses under the influence of sedation/anesthesia (should have been thrown out, you can't sign a consent for surgery if you have had Tylenol 3, but you can be interrogated after awakening from propofol?) Texas is known for their love of the death penalty. I don't want to see Darlie end up like Todd Willingham. Even if it means finding out for sure that she did do it, I think a new trial is owed to her.
Court reporters aren't part of the case.
The cops plead the Fifth because they were accused of a felony, in court, by an officer of the court. Not only is it their Right, they were required to do that.
There was no illegal taping. The cops had the permission of the owners of the property.
Actually, witnesses and persons of interest can be interviewed under the influence of everything. People under the influence of alcohol and drugs are interviewed and can legally waive their Rights every day. Now the state of mind can be called into question, but no court will ever allow a person of interest to wait until they're all better and off all meds to be interviewed in a case where they are a suspect.
