My husband is close friends with all of the medics that went on the call and we have all sat around and talked extensively about the crime scene and this case and believe me no one in the pd or fd has any doubt about her guilt.
Sure, I understand what its like to feel passionately about something.Its especially difficult when your viewpoint is in the minority.
The case is very complicated. I have no problem with any evidence new or old being retested.However it will cost the County and State.But a woman's life is priceless especially if there is a chance that evidence was missed and she was wrongly convicted.I do know the crime scene was horrific and many of the medics and officers on call that day required extensive debriefing and counseling to deal with what they had seen at the Routier house.
It makes me want to find out who did this and strangle/beat the crap out of them:furious: I cant even read your statement all the way throught that is how awful this case is....just infuriating to no limit!!!! I hope this person is found and caught and my good lord above if its Darlie may she rot in you knew where!!!I was under the impression that the reason the blood appeared this way, was because of the wet towels that Darlie kept getting from the kitchen. Too me it does look like the blood has come in contact with some water which caused it to "pool" the way it did. I honestly believe that both boys were attacked in their sleep and that Devon never moved from the spot he fell asleep at, which is why his blood was primarily found in this spot. Damon might not of awaken during the 1st stabbing but did waken shortly after, which is why there is a "blood trail" from Damon. I believe when he woke up was when Darlie saw him moving and stabbed him again, this is when he realized his mother was trying to kill him and was trying to get away from her. I CAN'T IMAGINE THE CONFUSION THIS POOR LITTLE 5 YEAR OLD HAD AT THIS TIME. IT MAKES ME WANT TO CRY!!!!
I am so glad these DR forums are back!
I absolutely believe Darlie should have a new trial. The more I read the more I know that a miscarriage of justice was done - as in the crime scene , as in the Ability of the Defence Lawyer to adequately defend Darlie and present the facts properly, as in the evidence having a slanted view.
NO in my mind, people made their mind up that Darlie did it. Lets face it it was going to be a LONG haul to try and find the person that did do it, and here we have a woman , hysterical woman, not getting all her facts out STRAIGHT, and a few things seemingly to be a bit off, not in the right place, a blood spot here not how it should be , a vacumn cleaner with her blood on, things just not the way it should be and Voila we have ourselves a little murderer - Lets fry her.
Two little boys carved up, And A jury sees a mother throwing a party at a grave site of them..Yup I can understand, and without having looked into things a bit deeper I certainly would be saying GUILTY. Because I am a mother and WHO does that at a grave - one week after their child is dead ?
Plenty of people do similar things when they lose loved ones. Grief does unbelievable things.
I remember Laughing at my Mothers funeral, ridiculously laughing - it was the total giggles and I was beside myself because I couldn't understand how I could possibly giggle but - then I dissolved into tears not too long after
Grief does inexplicable things.
I do not believe Darlie Routier killed her two baby boys. WHAT FOR ? there is NO REASON on this earth for her to do it. And I do not believe that " they were in her way , her life " was a reason to kill them.
Sadly I think the world is made up of mob mentality and its only the very few brave that are willing to look at the other possibilities and not follow the flock
This is JUST MY OPINION![]()
My husband is close friends with all of the medics that went on the call and we have all sat around and talked extensively about the crime scene and this case and believe me no one in the pd or fd has any doubt about her guilt.
Speaking of which, the only thing to me that makes me think that she is totally guilty was the officer's statement that he told her to go to her son and stop the bleeding and she did not! That makes no sense what soever, unless she was dopped up on some kind of pills and was out of her mind at the time...still makes her guilty in that sense anyway....
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitywendy View Post
I was under the impression that the reason the blood appeared this way, was because of the wet towels that Darlie kept getting from the kitchen. Too me it does look like the blood has come in contact with some water which caused it to "pool" the way it did. I honestly believe that both boys were attacked in their sleep and that Devon never moved from the spot he fell asleep at, which is why his blood was primarily found in this spot. Damon might not of awaken during the 1st stabbing but did waken shortly after, which is why there is a "blood trail" from Damon. I believe when he woke up was when Darlie saw him moving and stabbed him again, this is when he realized his mother was trying to kill him and was trying to get away from her. I CAN'T IMAGINE THE CONFUSION THIS POOR LITTLE 5 YEAR OLD HAD AT THIS TIME. IT MAKES ME WANT TO CRY!!!!
It makes me want to find out who did this and strangle/beat the crap out of them I cant even read your statement all the way throught that is how awful this case is....just infuriating to no limit!!!! I hope this person is found and caught and my good lord above if its Darlie may she rot in you knew where!!!
And then of course there is the statements that she was possibly sexually interfered with (no panties) but where was the rape kit ?
Oh woops they FORGOT TO DO ONE !
The office could have been confused with all the chaos going on. It happens
That crime scene was NOT like a normal crime scent - people were all over it making a big ole mess through it all.
How is that fair ?
In regards to here
This particular case is SO very emotive that it is very easy to understand WHY everyone pointed the finger at her and convicted her
If you were a Juror you would have convicted her too right ?
Trouble is I do not believe all the facts and evidence was properly presented
Why is everyone afraid of a new trial ?
Things that make you go hmmmmmmm
1- no I dontSo I take it you don't think there is a possibility that she is innocent ?
And that anyone who disagrees with your opinion should do a lot more research ?
Its my opinion as I stated. Why don't you state your opinion instead of telling me to do more research ?![]()
In MOO hahahaha, (joke from my last post youll get it if you see it),
They do not want to give her a new trial (I mean all that dont want her to have one) because they are so angered by all of this and strongly feel that she is guilty, so I understand completely how they feel, they do not want to waste time for something they feel she will be convicted with all over again, I say test the DNA and if it comes out that the fingerprint was someone else's aside from the boys, give her a new trial, its only fair, if the dna comes back that its the boys and they find no outsider dna Im not sure what to think. I am totally on the fence on the question of whether or not she should get a new trial, heres my fear WHAT IF SHE IS DEF GUILTY OF DOING THAT TO THOSE POOR LITTLE GUYS..AND SHE GETS SET FREE??? uggggghhhh I dont know what to think , I need to go find those transcripts....:read:
The attorney that represented Darlie Routier at trial had an apparent conflict of interest, because he reportedly had a pre-arrangement with Darin Routier and other family members not to pursue any defense that could implicate Darin. This attorney allegedly stopped key experts for the defense from completing forensic examinations.
Other areas of concern which were never brought to the attention of the jury include the pictures of Darlie's cut's and bruises on her arms which were taken when she was hospitalized the night of the murders. At least one juror told reporters he would never have voted to convict if he had seen the photographs.
Bloody fingerprints have been found that do not belong to Darlie, Darin, the children or any of the police or other people in the Routier house the night of the murder. This contradicts testimony given during her trial that there were no fingerprints found outside the home.
Questions her defense team want answered:
* A bloody fingerprint was found on the living room table. Who does it belong to?
* There was a bloody fingerprint on the door of the garage. Who does it belong to?
* Darin Routier's jeans had blood on them. Whose blood is it?
* A pubic hair was found in the Routier living room. Who does it belong to?
* How did the blood on Darlie's nightshirt get there and whose is it?
* Did the police get debris on the knife in the kitchen while investigating the murder or did it come from the screen door?
Darin Routier has admitted to trying to arrange an insurance scam, which included someone breaking into their home. He has admitted that he had begun the initial steps to arrange a break-in, but that it was to be done when no one was at home. No jury has heard this admission.
The incriminating Birthday Party film that was viewed by the jury showed Darlie dancing on the graves of her son along with other family members, but did not include the filming of the hours previous to that scene when Darlie sobbed and grieved over the graves with her husband Darin. Why was the additional footage not shown to the jury?
Neighbors reported seeing a black car sitting in front of the Routier home a week before the murders took place. Other neighbors reported seeing the same car leaving the area on the night of the murders. Were these reports investigated by police?
Investigators during her trial invoked their fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination during cross examination, preventing the defense from rebuting their testimony. What did these investigators fear by being cross-examined?
There was discussion of the police not protecting the evidence as they collected it which could have possibly damaged it's origins. Did this really occur?
More Questions that Need Answers
* The screen which investigators reported to the press as being cut from the inside was later proven in court to be cut from the outside.
* When the paramedics arrived at the scene they said that Darin Routier was outside, but Darin was inside trying to save his children. Who was the man outside?
* Was the testimony from the nurses in the hospital coached and rehearsed in mock trials by the prosecution prior to their testimony, as it has been reported?
* The surgeon who operated on Darlie said that the cut in her neck was 2mm of the carotid sheath but was superficial to the carotid artery. The necklace she was wearing was damaged as a result of the wound but it also blocked the knife from going deeper into her neck. Did the jury get a clear understanding as to the seriousness of her wounds?
* Was there an improper read-back of testimony to the jury by the court reporter, due to mistakes she made in the transcript?
* The prosecution has reportedly refused to provide access to any evidence in their custody in the case. Why is it not readily available to all interested parties?
* The advancements in DNA testing could put many of these questions to rest. Why is there such a reluctance to do the testing?
* Some writers who have interviewed Darlie Routier have decided to help her fight to get a new trial. Since reporting their opinions on her situation, they report that their ability to visit her has been blocked or made so inconvenient that little can be accomplished.
Hello I just posted a long piece here about what I believe Darlie's motive was and the whole thing got lost.
Britlaw,thanks for posting that info.I didn't know all of that,and I would like to see more testing of evidence;for one,if Darlie were to be put to death,then at least no one can say it all wasn't tested.
From the first time I saw Darin on Unsolved Mysteries,I felt he was involved in some way.His comments didn't fit the evidence (such as him being insistent they had no financial problems),and it was obvious he had something to hide.If his wife killed their boys,why would he defend her,there had to be good reason for that,and he appeared to be desperate to have her appear innocent.