Gary Austin

[TellTheTruth]

Anyone have more information on this guy?

According to Darlie's testimony, the sock was found "directly in the path towards his home". She also states "We know he was outside his home at 2:30 that morning"

And as of Darlie's take on Gary's wife's statements that she found her husband coming into their residence at about 2.30am - 2.45pm fully clothed.

Certainly seems like there's something there worth following up - how far did the police investigate?

Anyone know?

 

[Salem]

Link me to the MSM or LE reports that would allow for sleuthing of this person, please?

If he is not a POI or Suspect, all discussion is limited to anything in MSM - with no sleuthing.

Salem

 

[TellTheTruth]

Link me to the MSM or LE reports that would allow for sleuthing of this person, please?

If he is not a POI or Suspect, all discussion is limited to anything in MSM - with no sleuthing.

Salem

http://darliefacts.files.wordpress.c...nn-routier.pdf

Page 126 - start from (1).

 

[Madeleine74]

The sock found in the alley has, as far as we know, the DNA of exactly 3 people on it: Damon, Devin, and Darlie. The sock came from the Routier home and Darin said it was one of his socks.

Red Herring.

 

[TellTheTruth]

The sock found in the alley has, as far as we know, the DNA of exactly 3 people on it: Damon, Devin, and Darlie. The sock came from the Routier home and Darin said it was one of his socks.

Red Herring.

I think we are discussing Gary Austin here.

 

[Madeleine74]

I think we are discussing Gary Austin here.

Did you not post the following at the beginning of this new thread?

"According to Darlie's testimony, the sock was found "directly in the path towards his home". She also states "We know he was outside his home at 2:30 that morning"

The sock (IMO) is a red herring. Gary's DNA is not on the sock.

 

[Paysee]

Anyone have more information on this guy?

According to Darlie's testimony, the sock was found "directly in the path towards his home". She also states "We know he was outside his home at 2:30 that morning"

And as of Darlie's take on Gary's wife's statements that she found her husband coming into their residence at about 2.30am - 2.45pm fully clothed.

Certainly seems like there's something there worth following up - how far did the police investigate?

Anyone know?

You are forgetting about how Darlie claimed Gary Austin could stand in his balcony almost a block away from her house, and watch her in her hot tub, which happened to be covered all the way round :floorlaugh:

 

[TellTheTruth]

You are forgetting about how Darlie claimed Gary Austin could stand in his balcony almost a block away from her house, and watch her in her hot tub, which happened to be covered all the way round :floorlaugh:

That's what I can't understand. The sock was three doors down - not a block away. There seems to be some bad information here.

 

[Paysee]

That's what I can't understand. The sock was three doors down - not a block away. There seems to be some bad information here.

Bad information? Darlie was just playing the SODDI game. There wasn't a bit of evidence against either Gary Austin or Glen Mize.

 

[TellTheTruth]

Bad information? Darlie was just playing the SODDI game. There wasn't a bit of evidence against either Gary Austin or Glen Mize.

I find it interesting that Gary's wife suggests he was coming back into the house around 2.30-2.45am fully clothed.

I can't find where this has been investigated.

 

[Paysee]

I find it interesting that Gary's wife suggests he was coming back into the house around 2.30-2.45am fully clothed.

I can't find where this has been investigated.

I believe Austin said he went out to get in the laundry. Yes, it was an odd time to get in the laundry, and odd to get dressed at that time just to get in the laundry, but not incriminating.

It would have been interesting if there was any other material evidence to show Gary Austin even went near the Routier house that night. An eyewitness, a fingerprint, DNA, hair fibres... something?

I think it would be easier for the police to investigate a named person of interest than an unidentified intruder. But, there was nothing to link him to the crime scene.

Off topic, but I wonder how good was the marital relationship between Gary Austin and his wife.

 

[TellTheTruth]

I believe Austin said he went out to get in the laundry. Yes, it was an odd time to get in the laundry, and odd to get dressed at that time just to get in the laundry, but not incriminating.

It would have been interesting if there was any other material evidence to show Gary Austin even went near the Routier house that night. An eyewitness, a fingerprint, DNA, hair fibres... something?

I think it would be easier for the police to investigate a named person of interest than an unidentified intruder. But, there was nothing to link him to the crime scene.

Off topic, but I wonder how good was the marital relationship between Gary Austin and his wife.

All good points - the consensus is that nobody else was considered a suspect from quite early on so nobody was actively pursued. I remember reading this on Darlie's website and my immediate thought was it must be an excuse on her behalf, but the more I look into it, the truer it becomes.

For Darin to be out the frame at such an early stage also brings up questions.

I'm not for one second suggesting Darlie was railroaded here as the evidence coupled with her testimony and statements running up to the trial does indeed point to her being the likely perpetrator.

That said, there are just too many unanswered questions and there also seems to be a dire lack of investigation other than that focusing on Darlie.

 

[Paysee]

All good points - the consensus is that nobody else was considered a suspect from quite early on so nobody was actively pursued. I remember reading this on Darlie's website and my immediate thought was it must be an excuse on her behalf, but the more I look into it, the truer it becomes.

For Darin to be out the frame at such an early stage also brings up questions.

I'm not for one second suggesting Darlie was railroaded here as the evidence coupled with her testimony and statements running up to the trial does indeed point to her being the likely perpetrator.

That said, there are just too many unanswered questions and there also seems to be a dire lack of investigation other than that focusing on Darlie.

1) Consensus among who? Darlie's friends and family?

2) "More I look into it, the truer it becomes?"

From your posts here, it appears you have looked into Gary Austin and find him a likely murderer. After all, he was outside his house at 2 A.M. Anything else or anyone else you have looked into?

What you need to consider is that, only Darlie Routier was brought to trial. So we only heard the evidence against her. Darin Routier, Glenn Mize and Gary Austin were not charged with anything. The state had no reason to make public what investigations were done to rule them out.

3) Darlie herself said over and over again that Darin was not the murderer. According to her testimony, the murderer ran out the garage window, and Darin came down down the stair not more than a few minutes later. Physically impossible for Darin to be in both places at once. Was Darlie lying about the intruder going out the garage, or about Darin coming down the stairs? Was she lying about her traumatic amnesia?

4) What other investigations would you have done, were you the prosecutor in this case? Who else would you have considered suspects? Seriously asking.

 

[Chuck_Wagon]

While in jail, Darlie wrote letters to various people implicating Glenn Mize or Gary Austin as the intruder. Shook questioned Darlie about those letters and the accusations contained in them. In response, Mulder questioned Darlie about two private investigators working on her behalf, and the information they obtained (Defendants Exhibit No. 97). Per Darlie's testimony, she learned that Gary Austin had returned to his home from outside fully clothed and breathing heavy around 2:30 - 2:45 am, Gary Austin's house had the same floor plan the Darlie's residence, and that Gary Austin had been prowling around. Obviously some effort was made to investigate Gary Austin (videotaped interview), and based on this, I think its safe to say that if there was anything that implicated Gary Austin as being the intruder, Mulder would have pursued that issue further.


20 Q. Let me show what has been marked for
21 identification for record purpose as Defendant's Exhibit
22 No. 97?
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. Okay. Is that a report about the
25 Austins?
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
5019
1 A. Yes, sir.
2 Q. All right. And I'll ask you if, prior
3 to the time that you wrote that letter, you received
4 information from this private investigator, that he had
5 gone down to the Austins' residence, he had heard about
6 it through the neighborhood?

 

[TellTheTruth]

1) Consensus among who? Darlie's friends and family?

2) "More I look into it, the truer it becomes?"

From your posts here, it appears you have looked into Gary Austin and find him a likely murderer. After all, he was outside his house at 2 A.M. Anything else or anyone else you have looked into?

Have a read of my opening post. I'm asking for opinions.

 

[pufnstuf]

Opinion: I can't believe that people are still sleuthing Gary Austin. He had nothing to do with the crime, no matter how desperately Darlie tried to scapegoat him with innuendo in her jailhouse letters.

Another opinion: It's pretty silly that some people try to give themselves the facade of objectivity by proclaiming themselves as "fence sitters," when evidence proves that they are are anything but "undecided" on Darlie's guilt. That's my observation, anyway.

 

[Madeleine74]

What's interesting in addition is that if one starts with the crime scene itself and the evidence found (and evidence not found), there is no reason to point a finger at some neighbor 3 houses down.

It's important to first ask:

- What DNA exists in this case?
- What hair, fibers, footprints or other physical evidence exists?
- Where were the weapons found? What evidence do they contain?
- What other evidence was found and what forensics are contained on those items (if anything)...like the sock.

Who does the evidence at the scene match, if anyone?

Investigators always start with the crime scene and see where it leads them, if anywhere.

 

[TellTheTruth]

Opinion: I can't believe that people are still sleuthing Gary Austin. He had nothing to do with the crime, no matter how desperately Darlie tried to scapegoat him with innuendo in her jailhouse letters.

Another opinion: It's pretty silly that some people try to give themselves the facade of objectivity by proclaiming themselves as "fence sitters," when evidence proves that they are are anything but "undecided" on Darlie's guilt. That's my observation, anyway.

Well, that's the truth I'm afraid. I'm not here to argue with anyone, or express my opinion that demeans anyone.

I'm just asking if these avenues have been looked into.

 

[TellTheTruth]

What's interesting in addition is that if one starts with the crime scene itself and the evidence found (and evidence not found), there is no reason to point a finger at some neighbor 3 houses down.

It's important to first ask:

- What DNA exists in this case?
- What hair, fibers, footprints or other physical evidence exists?
- Where were the weapons found? What evidence do they contain?
- What other evidence was found and what forensics are contained on those items (if anything)...like the sock.

Who does the evidence at the scene match, if anyone?

Investigators always start with the crime scene and see where it leads them, if anywhere.

I quite agree. As I've said numerous times before, all the evidence at the scene points to Darlie (or Darin) - more than not Darlie though.

I think the fact the sock was found near to Austin's house coupled with the testimony of his wife about him being fully dressed and coming in from outside at around 2.30am would warrant a path of investigation however - hence my original post which kindly asks if anyone here has anymore information pertaining to a line of enquiry.

 

[PamelaC123]

I quite agree. As I've said numerous times before, all the evidence at the scene points to Darlie (or Darin) - more than not Darlie though.

What points to Darin?