Poll: Did Darlie Routier murder her children?

[beesy]

Geez. You are certainly right where you belong. Can't even read the damn testimony and get it straight. I think I'm gonna have to take a wee break from you folks. You wear a person down.

What in the world? Oh, that's real nice. How'd you know I was in a home for the mentally impaired? It's not nice to make fun of people

 

[deanws]

You bunch are such a hoot.

YOU did say it. Either you were lying then....or you are lying now?!? Either way...still puts you as a :liar: .

 

[beesy]

If you don't mind would you point out where in the testimony he said that they ran all around in the yard and sometimes they triggered it and sometimes they didn't. Let me ask you another question. Do you really want to know the truth about this matter or not? Sometimes I can't tell with you

14 the window back and forth and not set off the alarm --
15 set off the lights, was he not?
16 A. The only thing that I did when the
17 light came on, I stayed out of -- or at the entrance to
18 the yard. When the lights came on, I timed it to see how
19 long they were on.
20 Q. Okay. Were you there when the
21 experiment was conducted?
22 A. Yes, sir, I was.
23 Q. Okay. Well, you know then that he was
24 able to walk from the window, and run from the window --
25 both run and walk from the window to the gate without
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
558

1 setting off the light?
2 A. I'm not sure what path that he took.
3 Q. Okay. But you were there when that
4 experiment was conducted?
5 A. Yes, sir, I was. I timed it.

Did you even read the part where he said that he had to walk to the door of the spa before he triggered it? And that the spa is on the opposite side of the yard from the garage? I don't think he said that. I think you would have to know the layout of the yard. Do you? If you don't there are some photos in MTJD. Are you saying that he ran from the window to the door of the spa and then to turned around and ran back to the gate?

I know the layout of the yard. To me it looks like the intruder would have to mess up the mulch or trigger the light. That's what I think! The only way I would know for sure is to do it myself. If you'll notice in the testimony he says, "I don't know which path he took".
In the experiment, the officer doing the running, did it more than once. I'm not talking about that night.
I know the truth. The final truth is that Darlie did it. The light not being on is just a little odd, it does not prove her innocence. It does not prove her guilt. It was these little things which made LE curious enough to dig in deeper and find the killer.

That's the only way to turn that motion detector on. Can't you read this kind of testimony and get the facts that they are saying out of all the verbiage? You have to be able to do that to understand any testimony. There's more testimony about this. Are you even interested enough to find it for yourself? I find that I just don't really care that much what you think about this case. I know that your foundation for making your judgements is faulty because of where you got your information but that's your problem and not mine. So I shall butt out.

Yes, I can. It's just not as cut and dry as you're trying to make it. Did you see how many exhibits I posted for Jane to look at? It took me an hour, maybe longer to find all those damn pictures. Nobody else helped her, nobody else did it. Did you see the photos and research I posted about blood spatter? I started the darn thread. I did all of that research about the stupid LPPH for you! Goody had never even thought about it, so how could she have led me to think that? I had a foundation before I even came here. I came here because I read all 4 books in '99 when they were published and have kept up with Darlie on and off. I had TWO MTJD's. This past summer(June 6, as a matter of fact, spooky) I was looking for something under my bed. I pulled out all of the books and thought "hmm, I wonder if she and Darin are still together." When I did a search for that this site came up. I already knew alot about the case. Alot! I am not a lemming. You know that I have not been rude to you since you came back. I called you smart for christs sake. Then you thank me for the research I did by saying it's wrong and insulting me. Goody did not help me get my B.A. and then my M.S. Goody did not get me the job as Director of a historic house museum. I've asked for your help, as others have asked for mine. This is what I get? Whatever this thing is with you and Goody, I am not a part of. I don't even know Jeff or whoever you are. Thanks alot Snooty, what VENOM you spew

 

[G.I.RattlesnakeJane]

Darlie has had 9 years to earn a new trial. Things like this have been submitted. So by saying the prosecution misled the jury can't stand up after 9 years and all of her state appeals. I mentioned Tim Hennis before. Something would have turned up if there was something to turn up. His team refuted every piece of evidence with solid explanations. Darlie just has excuses. Darlie just says shoddy investigation. That is another reason I don't trust her. I think that is also a symptom of narcissitic disorder. You know, everybody else is an idiot. People who think she did it are idiots. The cops are idiots, the prosecution are idiots and mean, with a special hatred of her, the judges are idiots, the jurors are idiots. Everything was tainted, because the labs are filled with idiots. Forensic experts are idiots The only people who knows anything is the person who has this disorder. Mulder is an idiot. Jeff MacDonald is the same way. On the stand he even said "well if the CID can really type blood".


You're a colorful character, but you are a little scary. I respect life. I don't think I'm the appropriate person to say that to.

I do not have to be patient about anything. If you would consult something else besides Chris' book, you might not either
I see nothing in those tests which could prove anything. Give her a new trial, I don't care. The result would be the same which is a waste of your tax money

What makes me scary to you. :blushing: I'm embarrased and amused.

To those people, who still agree that Davis got a good solid conviction. a new trial would seem like a waste of money. To those who think grandstanding and silly string are what got Darlie convicted and not a good solid conviction-based on crime scene evidence, then a new trial is warranted.

You stand behind the work done, I don't think any conspiracy's existed, I do think Davis did a crappy job as well as Mulder.

Why does Judge Francis make denial, after denial, after denial, to the requests for access to the crime scene evidence, more than one lawyer friend I know agree on this point, he shouldnt have, and the federal courts may as well. If any evidence exists that shows Darlie's intruders exist the conviction will be thrown out. Thats why we should be patient more evidence testing and more information couldn't hurt could it. Like I said before it may prove Darlie guilty as sin. It may not prove anything at all- or anything different than we already know.

I found a mistake, or at least John Douglas has written differently in one of his books. In the appeals states brief it is stated RR .40: 3691-93 and it looks like it came also from the FBI that defendants bring knives to a crime scene. If my memory serves me the case John Douglas talks about in one of his books. The husband of the victim is suspect until he learns something. Criminals talk to each other in jail. They obviously have the time on their hands. They teach each other stuff, like don't break into a house with a weapon. If caught, and there is always a chance, you will get more time as you can say I only commited B AND E the state can say but with intent to do harm cause you brought a weapon with you. Logic tells you that every house in America has some kitchen knives. If you do break in, with your own knife, and eventually have a confrontation with the home owner and commit murder you get dp in some states cause it shows premeditated murder. If you were only there to rob why did you bring a weapon with you-clear intent. I swear it is in one of John Douglas's books. Since I use my public library I don't have a copy to quote. I can't remember the title either but I think the cover has his picture on it. Damm this sometimers.

My only point in this is and it may not apply in Darlie's case at all. Where you have a crime scene with multiple victims and multiple knifes, only one knife recovered, it is not unlogical to assume that not only are you dealing with 2 perps but one of them is a prior offender and has been in the jail house education system.


I'm not saying anyone else who thinks Darlie is guilty doesn't have respect for life. But my personal code of behaviour and judgement does make me want to know more. There is no way back if we made a mistake and I still have some doubts based more on not understanding how ALL the evidence fits together.

Are you saying that all the information on the DARLIE HOME SITE IS UNTRUE.

Or just so misleading it raises questions in any person's mind.

This blood cast off ,if correct is 100% proof that Darlie did it.

Blood cast off is how we nailed my husband's friends killer. Talk about a clean-up. Luminol couldn't detect anything. He messed up though and left behind just enough..........

 

[beesy]

What makes me scary to you. :blushing: I'm embarrased and amused

Oh, I was just teasing you. I'm sorry.

To those people, who still agree that Davis got a good solid conviction. a new trial would seem like a waste of money. To those who think grandstanding and silly string are what got Darlie convicted and not a good solid conviction-based on crime scene evidence, then a new trial is warranted.
You stand behind the work done, I don't think any conspiracy's existed, I do think Davis did a crappy job as well as Mulder

But the people who think the SS party nailed her don't know everything. So right I'm sure they'd think a new trial is a wonderful thing. You're right, Mulder was not at his best, but I do not think that warrents a new trial. But, like I say, bring it on. Did you hear than Andrea Yates is getting a new trial? It starts in March. Should be interesting.

Why does Judge Francis make denial, after denial, after denial, to the requests for access to the crime scene evidence

I'm not very familiar with this part. Are you talking about recently? I know they got everything during the trial. If the State was supressing evidence they screwed up because they entered pictures and documents. Fill me in on this. He's not the only one who's looked at her appeals and denied them. So I'm confused.

If any evidence exists that shows Darlie's intruders exist the conviction will be thrown out. Thats why we should be patient more evidence testing and more information couldn't hurt could it. Like I said before it may prove Darlie guilty as sin. It may not prove anything at all- or anything different than we already know.

What are they testing anyway? I can't remember. Test away, I say.

I found a mistake, or at least John Douglas has written differently in one of his books. In the appeals states brief it is stated RR .40: 3691-93 and it looks like it came also from the FBI that defendants bring knives to a crime scene. If my memory serves me the case John Douglas talks about in one of his books. The husband of the victim is suspect until he learns something. Criminals talk to each other in jail. They obviously have the time on their hands. They teach each other stuff, like don't break into a house with a weapon. If caught, and there is always a chance, you will get more time as you can say I only commited B AND E the state can say but with intent to do harm cause you brought a weapon with you. Logic tells you that every house in America has some kitchen knives. If you do break in, with your own knife, and eventually have a confrontation with the home owner and commit murder you get dp in some states cause it shows premeditated murder. If you were only there to rob why did you bring a weapon with you-clear intent. I swear it is in one of John Douglas's books. Since I use my public library I don't have a copy to quote. I can't remember the title either but I think the cover has his picture on it. Damm this sometimers

Again, I'm trusting John Douglas on this. Yes, criminals do talk. I don't think you could call what Douglas said a mistake. He's worked on alot of cases. Isn't he the man who coined "serial killer"? So if the intruder did not bring a weapon, what was he doing there? He didn't steal anything. Another thing, the kitchen was dark, except for the glow of the TV. Grantd, it was a huge TV, but still. The butcher block was in an area which would not have been lit up very well by the TV. Chris says something really stupid in MTJD, more than 1, but this is really stupid. He says the kitchen was too dark for the intruder to see Darlie's jewelry, but then we are expected to believe the guy found the butcher block in an unfamiliar house? The light was not on in the garage either. He ran through it blind as he tried to escape.

My only point in this is and it may not apply in Darlie's case at all. Where you have a crime scene with multiple victims and multiple knifes, only one knife recovered, it is not unlogical to assume that not only are you dealing with 2 perps but one of them is a prior offender and has been in the jail house education system

Why? There was only one knife. Same goes if there was another one though. How did they find the butcher block in the dark? He did they escape through the dark garage? Why did they go into the house, get the bread knife, cut the screen with the bread knife, PUT IT BACK, do their thing, then escape through the dark garage? You can't dismiss everything Darlie says as trauma. She is very clear that she followed one man through the kitchen, then stopped, realized the light was OFF, turned around, went back, turned it on, then picked up the knife. Huh? Does that make sense? . She turned her back on a man she had just sometimes been struggling with, sometimes seen up close, sometimes far away. Either way, this man was a stranger in her home in the middle of the night and she turned her back to him. Do you know why Darlie says she turned around? That part is never left out of her stories, the part about following him, then turning around to hit the light. She says that because she realized she couldn't get up all of her footprints. She saw that they went back and forth. Bingo! So her story is she goes over and comes back and so there, then that's covered. She did not say anything about the sink until she saw the sink had been taken.

Are you saying that all the information on the DARLIE HOME SITE IS UNTRUE.
Or just so misleading it raises questions in any person's mind.
This blood cast off ,if correct is 100% proof that Darlie did it

I think some of it is flat out lies. Bloody footprints leading away from the garage? Isn't that what you said? Most of it is misleading. They say there should have been cast-off on the ceiling. I don't think anybody even looked at the ceiling. How does that prove her innocence or her guilt? It's the blood on her that matters. We know people were being stabbed. So they don't say all of that. And the fingerprints, they don't say they are too smeared to get a clear look. They don't say that Darlie cannot be ruled out. I've read on one of the sites and they actually say it didn't match her. That's a lie. The expert even said it's indicative of an adult woman or small framed male, leaning more towards the woman. And don't ask me how he knows that.

Blood cast off is how we nailed my husband's friends killer. Talk about a clean-up. Luminol couldn't detect anything. He messed up though and left behind just enough

Then why are you having a hard time believing the cast-off in Damon's blood on Darlie's back shows she stabbed him?

 

[G.I.RattlesnakeJane]

Oh, I was just teasing you. I'm sorry.

But the people who think the SS party nailed her don't know everything. So right I'm sure they'd think a new trial is a wonderful thing. You're right, Mulder was not at his best, but I do not think that warrents a new trial. But, like I say, bring it on. Did you hear than Andrea Yates is getting a new trial? It starts in March. Should be interesting.
I'm not very familiar with this part. Are you talking about recently? I know they got everything during the trial. If the State was supressing evidence they screwed up because they entered pictures and documents. Fill me in on this. He's not the only one who's looked at her appeals and denied them. So I'm confused.

What are they testing anyway? I can't remember. Test away, I say.

Again, I'm trusting John Douglas on this. Yes, criminals do talk. I don't think you could call what Douglas said a mistake. He's worked on alot of cases. Isn't he the man who coined "serial killer"? So if the intruder did not bring a weapon, what was he doing there? He didn't steal anything. Another thing, the kitchen was dark, except for the glow of the TV. Grantd, it was a huge TV, but still. The butcher block was in an area which would not have been lit up very well by the TV. Chris says something really stupid in MTJD, more than 1, but this is really stupid. He says the kitchen was too dark for the intruder to see Darlie's jewelry, but then we are expected to believe the guy found the butcher block in an unfamiliar house? The light was not on in the garage either. He ran through it blind as he tried to escape.
Why? There was only one knife. Same goes if there was another one though. How did they find the butcher block in the dark? He did they escape through the dark garage? Why did they go into the house, get the bread knife, cut the screen with the bread knife, PUT IT BACK, do their thing, then escape through the dark garage? You can't dismiss everything Darlie says as trauma. She is very clear that she followed one man through the kitchen, then stopped, realized the light was OFF, turned around, went back, turned it on, then picked up the knife. Huh? Does that make sense? . She turned her back on a man she had just sometimes been struggling with, sometimes seen up close, sometimes far away. Either way, this man was a stranger in her home in the middle of the night and she turned her back to him. Do you know why Darlie says she turned around? That part is never left out of her stories, the part about following him, then turning around to hit the light. She says that because she realized she couldn't get up all of her footprints. She saw that they went back and forth. Bingo! So her story is she goes over and comes back and so there, then that's covered. She did not say anything about the sink until she saw the sink had been taken.

I think some of it is flat out lies. Bloody footprints leading away from the garage? Isn't that what you said? Most of it is misleading. They say there should have been cast-off on the ceiling. I don't think anybody even looked at the ceiling. How does that prove her innocence or her guilt? It's the blood on her that matters. We know people were being stabbed. So they don't say all of that. And the fingerprints, they don't say they are too smeared to get a clear look. They don't say that Darlie cannot be ruled out. I've read on one of the sites and they actually say it didn't match her. That's a lie. The expert even said it's indicative of an adult woman or small framed male, leaning more towards the woman. And don't ask me how he knows that.

Then why are you having a hard time believing the cast-off in Damon's blood on Darlie's back shows she stabbed him?

I'm NOT HAVING A Hard time with the cast off just show me more of it. In order for the knife to cast it off at the point of arc that she had to have had it would also leave cast off on something else too. As it is traveling upward. The furniture the wall. Where is the other cast off coming up. OTHER WISE WE GOT A VOID. It was your site got me thinking read it again about how voids are created when crime scenes show furniture moved after the bleeding starts, or people are standing in the way creating a void. An absence of blood.
This could actually end the debate for the was Darin involved and no forensic evidence points to him discussion.
If you have no other arcing pattern in front of the trajectory of the blade then you have a void proof someone was standing there. This piece of information is just something I observed I'll hand off to those better gifted than I in interpretation. It was your link that made me discover this. Or made me surmise it.

That's what I meant by a map here we have it on the wall going upward in a 90 degree angle. Do you find any pics in MTJD.

 

[beesy]

I'm NOT HAVING A Hard time with the cast off just show me more of it. In order for the knife to cast it off at the point of arc that she had to have had it would also leave cast off on something else too. As it is traveling upward. The furniture the wall. Where is the other cast off coming up. OTHER WISE WE GOT A VOID. It was your site got me thinking read it again about how voids are created when crime scenes show furniture moved after the bleeding starts, or people are standing in the way creating a void. An absence of blood.
This could actually end the debate for the was Darin involved and no forensic evidence points to him discussion.
If you have no other arcing pattern in front of the trajectory of the blade then you have a void proof someone was standing there. This piece of information is just something I observed I'll hand off to those better gifted than I in interpretation. It was your link that made me discover this. Or made me surmise it.

That's what I meant by a map here we have it on the wall going upward in a 90 degree angle. Do you find any pics in MTJD.

Ohhhhhh, I get it. Someone standing in the way, someone like Darin. Hmmm, interesting. There is cast-off on the wall near where Damon died. As I said, you'll just have to wait until cami returns or Dani. They are both very familiar with that. It won't end the debate. He already said he was in contact with both boys. He did not have a shirt on. He went to the Neals and supposedly washed his face and hands. It wouldn't take but a second to check his back. He lucked out IMO.
I think the timeline should end the debate. I find it very hard to believe that both attacks on Damon occured before Darin came downstairs. I hear that "Damon, Damon, Damon" on the 911 tape and get the shivers. It is possible that child is being killed right then. So, if Darlie stabbed Damon the 2nd time while Darin was downstairs, of course that means he knows. Because she was on the phone, he could have helped her hold him down. I don't know. Right after the 3 Damons on the tape, Darlie becomes very distracted, even very annoyed sounding. 911 is saying "ma'am, ma'am?" and Darlie says "what what WHAT?". It sounds like she is busy and 911 is interupting her. It's very creepy. Have you listened to the tape yet?

 

[deanws]

I agree beesy. I think him not having a shirt on might have been real lucky for him. The 911 tape didn't help her one bit did it!?!

 

[G.I.RattlesnakeJane]

Ohhhhhh, I get it. Someone standing in the way, someone like Darin. Hmmm, interesting. There is cast-off on the wall near where Damon died. As I said, you'll just have to wait until cami returns or Dani. They are both very familiar with that. It won't end the debate. He already said he was in contact with both boys. He did not have a shirt on. He went to the Neals and supposedly washed his face and hands. It wouldn't take but a second to check his back. He lucked out IMO.
I think the timeline should end the debate. I find it very hard to believe that both attacks on Damon occured before Darin came downstairs. I hear that "Damon, Damon, Damon" on the 911 tape and get the shivers. It is possible that child is being killed right then. So, if Darlie stabbed Damon the 2nd time while Darin was downstairs, of course that means he knows. Because she was on the phone, he could have helped her hold him down. I don't know. Right after the 3 Damons on the tape, Darlie becomes very distracted, even very annoyed sounding. 911 is saying "ma'am, ma'am?" and Darlie says "what what WHAT?". It sounds like she is busy and 911 is interupting her. It's very creepy. Have you listened to the tape yet?

Just for you I'll listen to it again but the last time I cried for over an hour. Got really depressed, it broke my heart to think I was listening to the last few minutes of Damons life.

 

[Goody]

Just for you I'll listen to it again but the last time I cried for over an hour. Got really depressed, it broke my heart to think I was listening to the last few minutes of Damons life.

How long do you think Devon was dead at that point?

 

[G.I.RattlesnakeJane]

How long do you think Devon was dead at that point?[/QUOT
Well I'd need a liver temp to be for sure. He was on the floor the coldest point of any room. Could he have been dead for a while? What does the time of death say. Do you think they overloooked something?

 

[michelle]

Ohhhhhh, I get it. Someone standing in the way, someone like Darin. Hmmm, interesting. There is cast-off on the wall near where Damon died. As I said, you'll just have to wait until cami returns or Dani. They are both very familiar with that. It won't end the debate. He already said he was in contact with both boys. He did not have a shirt on. He went to the Neals and supposedly washed his face and hands. It wouldn't take but a second to check his back. He lucked out IMO.
I think the timeline should end the debate. I find it very hard to believe that both attacks on Damon occured before Darin came downstairs. I hear that "Damon, Damon, Damon" on the 911 tape and get the shivers. It is possible that child is being killed right then. So, if Darlie stabbed Damon the 2nd time while Darin was downstairs, of course that means he knows. Because she was on the phone, he could have helped her hold him down. I don't know. Right after the 3 Damons on the tape, Darlie becomes very distracted, even very annoyed sounding. 911 is saying "ma'am, ma'am?" and Darlie says "what what WHAT?". It sounds like she is busy and 911 is interupting her. It's very creepy. Have you listened to the tape yet?

I remember specifically hearing her seem to get frustrated with the operator and thinking to myself " whats up with that" I mean if she isnt guilty of course she was flipping out, but that tape to me when i first heard it there was too many red flags, and i have always been a "fence sitter".

 

[Goody]

How long do you think Devon was dead at that point?[/QUOT
Well I'd need a liver temp to be for sure. He was on the floor the coldest point of any room. Could he have been dead for a while? What does the time of death say. Do you think they overloooked something?

There is no time of death recorded for Devon because he did not die in the presence of medical personnel.

The body temp decreases approx 1 to 1.5 degrees per hour after death. It was summer and the air was on. No one ever spoke about what the temp in the house was but I imagine it was quite cool since it was such a hot day...around 100 degrees, I think.

Devon was covered and not taken out of the house for some time. He was already in the beginning stages of rigor when autopsied. So truthfully there could be a variance there on time of death for him....as much as an hour, maybe more.

 

[G.I.RattlesnakeJane]

Can't figure out this link stuff so I entered in google search, star map june 6,1996 to find out what moon power we have going for illumination. The month of June had 2 full moons in it. One on the 30, and the other 28 days before. That means the moon was waning 3 days.

 

[beesy]

Can't figure out this link stuff so I entered in google search, star map june 6,1996 to find out what moon power we have going for illumination. The month of June had 2 full moons in it. One on the 30, and the other 28 days before. That means the moon was waning 3 days.

Does that mean an intruder could have run blind through a darkened garage or was there enough moonlight? You also have to take into consideration any structures or trees which could block the moonlight. As well as all of the junk piled up against the windows.

 

[Goody]

Can't figure out this link stuff so I entered in google search, star map june 6,1996 to find out what moon power we have going for illumination. The month of June had 2 full moons in it. One on the 30, and the other 28 days before. That means the moon was waning 3 days.

It also means there was no full moon on the 5/6th.

 

[txsvicki]

I remember specifically hearing her seem to get frustrated with the operator and thinking to myself " whats up with that" I mean if she isnt guilty of course she was flipping out, but that tape to me when i first heard it there was too many red flags, and i have always been a "fence sitter".

That tape does have some red flags. Darlie is really talking in the high pitched tones and hollering but there are a couple of times that her voice completely changes instantly and then goes back to the high pitch crying. It gives me the shivers to hear her ask "When is it (ambulance) going to get here?" and then when she says someone came in and intentionally did this "Darin". The way she said "Darrin". It was so cold and mean sounding.

 

[G.I.RattlesnakeJane]

How much love would you have for someone who did this. Wouldn't you feel some anger and hate towards someone too, if she is telling the truth the fact that she gets mad at the idea of someone violating her home, killing her children doesn't seem strange to me.

What does seem strange is the fact that Darin might have been asking her who did this. Right before she states, in her angry voice, you can hear Darin in the background. If he is the attacker, or hired someone he was afraid Darlie might recognize from the shop he might be trying to see how much she knew.

 

[Goody]

How much love would you have for someone who did this. Wouldn't you feel some anger and hate towards someone too, if she is telling the truth the fact that she gets mad at the idea of someone violating her home, killing her children doesn't seem strange to me.

What does seem strange is the fact that Darin might have been asking her who did this. Right before she states, in her angry voice, you can hear Darin in the background. If he is the attacker, or hired someone he was afraid Darlie might recognize from the shop he might be trying to see how much she knew.

The fist police officer was there at that time. I suspect Darin said something to him that made Darlie feel put her in a bad light so she got very defensive, almost as if she is reminding him about what he is supposed to say.

 

[beesy]

Can't figure out this link stuff so I entered in google search, star map june 6,1996 to find out what moon power we have going for illumination. The month of June had 2 full moons in it. One on the 30, and the other 28 days before. That means the moon was waning 3 days.

This is good research you're doing. Something a defense attorney would do on appeal. It might even be worth considering except that this moonlight factor in no way addresses all of the blood and other forensic evidence. If the garage being dark was the MAIN focus of her guilt, then good on ya, but it's not.