The comments Waddell made about Darin being outside when he arrived is false.
The comments that Darlie did nothing to help her children is false.
The comments about the knife going through the body and nicking the concrete is also false. This officer cannot tell the truth because he doesn't know it. He has been coached so much on the case he can't even recall what he actually did do at the crime scene. This makes me wonder if maybe he got so sick of the police force and DA'S that he left the Rowlett force to join another one in a different city.
The comments made by Davis about the vacuum are untrue.
Davis made some comments about the silly string party that show he made up his mind that she was guilty based on that behavior.
It was Darlie's sister Dana that brought the silly string. The tape of the memorial show Darlie grieving and near collapse. She was told to get it together as her behavior was going to frighten the small children soon to arrive for the party. Darlie was told to act joyful and celebrate the birth of her oldest son.
The legal system is fickle. Mulder her attorney objected to the tape and because he objected it he could not show the parts of the tape to the jurors that show a very distraught mother. The DA ONLY SHOWED THE PORTION THAT PAINTED HER IN A BAD LIGHT. The memorial service was considered private while the party was public. The grave site was bugged and taped yet that tape was not allowed to be seen by the jurors because Mulder objected to the silly string portion. HOW IS THAT FAIR?
THE OATH TAKEN BY WITNESSES IS TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH. The DA DOESN'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE SAME RULE WHEN PRESENTING EVIDENCE. Despite the fact that he viewed the memorial tape and saw with his own 2 eyes a grieving mother. TO ME THAT IS PROOF HE LIED. He knew the truth that Darlie did grieve at the memorial service, he heard others telling her to "buck up" and act happy. HE CHOSE TO USE ONLY THE PORTION OF THE TAPE THAT SUPPORTED HIS CASE. When you tell a jury that this tape shows a callous self absorbed woman but you have seen a tape that disproves what you just said that is a lie, or at the very least a huge lack of integrity.
Mulder did the right thing to object but the judge should have allowed the memorial service portion to be shown as it disproved what the DA was presenting as evidence that she was not unhappy with the death of her sons.
IMO SHE DESERVES A NEW TRIAL where all the evidence can be seen.
DA Davis also commented that every few years something "new" is presented by the family yet none of it is true. That is false as well.
It is very difficult to get an appeal of a conviction. There are only a few ways a lawyer can do so. The lawyers working on Darlie's case have tried the many ways allowed. Almost all have been denied. What gets me is the Judge who is ruling on these motions was the same Judge who presided over her trial. How can the State of Texas consider that to be fair blows my mind. Of course a presiding judge is never going to want a conviction overturned on a trial they sat on. It is a slap in the face of good reason why any presiding judge would be allowed to make those decisions. While emotions run high here there is a better chance of all the evidence being seen on Web sleuths than there is an an actual trial. While I don't agree with the acquittal of Casey Anthony the judge in that trial made sure the defense and the prosecution were allowed to present a full case. He sought after truth and did everything possible to allow the light of truth to be shown in his courtroom. I don't think Judge Francis did the same.
Davis also engaged in inappropriate behavior when he called the family trailer trash.
Those asking the questions about why the DNA tests have not been released is answered in the show, further tests to back up the results of the first ones done and further testing of other evidence has to be done before the results will be released. When DNA results are in Darlie's favor they have to notify the courts and then the courts will have DNA tests done again to see if they come up with the same results. Based on some of the results the courts will allow further testing to be done on additional evidence. Based on some of the results the courts may allow the fingerprints to be submitted to AFIS if some proof of a unknown person comes back from the dual testing done.
I'LL GIVE AN EXAMPLE... Lets say the carpet pieces held for evidence show blood that does not belong to any known bleeding person at the scene. The appeals lawyers submit that result to the courts and the courts say OK we will retest it too as we don't just take your word for it. The court tests show yes there is unknown donor of blood at the scene and this could mean that a 4th person was bleeding at scene. Did any police personnel or emergency responders have a bleeding wound? Well no.. not that we know of , but we have their DNA profiles on file just in case. It is compared to them and it doesn't match anyone known to be at the crime scene. The court will feel compelled in the face of this new evidence that further testing of items need to be done. They can submit the fingerprints to AFIS and Bingo it comes up with some possible matches of several suspects. They have DNA on file for those people and it matches the DNA FOUND ON THAT CARPET! I don't remember the exact number of points required to make a positive fingerprint match but the print does not have enough to meet that criteria, that is why they may come up with several suspects instead of just 1. The DNA match up along with the few points matching does back up the claim of an intruder. That evidence alone does not mean they could convict the matching person but it may be enough to grant a new trial as proof a 3rd party was in home at time of crime.
Especially because Darlie Kee has been accused of jumping the gun and releasing info that cannot be supported she is following the lawyers advice to hold her tongue and let the process complete before she says anything about it. Darlie does not want to spend the rest of her life in prison so she wants to prove she is innocent and not have her sentence commuted to life in prison.
The stress of doing all she can to save her daughter, take care of a now very ill Drake and all the normal everyday stresses are taking a toll on her and it shows. Instead of an angry, combative mom. We see a very worn out from all the legal wrangling mother who would absolutely lay down and die should the State execute her daughter. She has lost 2 grandsons brutally murdered and to watch her daughter die too would cause such a heart break that she feels she would never recover from it. THIS KIND OF DEVOTION COMES FROM LOVE. Since we all learn how to be parents from our own parents we have to surmise that Darlie was shown love as a child and would show the same kind of love and devotion to her own children. I know of no other case where the convicted woman has held on to the claim of innocence as long as Darlie has - over 15 years. If you want to judge someone on their behavior look at all that has been done by the family to free their daughter, sister, mother, daughter-in-law etc. How could so many people close to her believe her guilty with the evidence that was used to convict her. They don't and haven't waivered because the person they knew was not the person the prosecution made her out to be.
Wow, quite a few assumptions in your post.
Its been a while since I read the trail transcripts and I no longer even have it on my Kindle. I'll see if I can go through them again and give you full details. But from what I recall:
First, the fact that Darin was outside the house when the first police officer arrived is also supported by a neighbour of the Routiers.
Second, all the photos you posted above shows the same towel from different angles. It is not disputed that Darlie held a towel to her own neck.
Comments made by Davis about the vacuum cleaner are untrue? Which comments? And what makes you say they are untrue?
I think you maybe confused a bit here. The silly string tape shown to the jury, and in the media was shot by a journalist invited by the Routiers. The "mourning memorial service" is supposedly seen in the police tape which was not a part of the prosecution or the defense evidence.
Davis offered atleast 3 times during the trial to let the jury view the entire police surveillance tape, which Mulder refused. I remember reading Davis say that copies of the tape have been given to the defendant and that there is nothing exculpatory in it.
The legal system is fickle. Mulder her attorney objected to the tape and because he objected it he could not show the parts of the tape to the jurors that show a very distraught mother. The DA ONLY SHOWED THE PORTION THAT PAINTED HER IN A BAD LIGHT. The memorial service was considered private while the party was public. The grave site was bugged and taped yet that tape was not allowed to be seen by the jurors because Mulder objected to the silly string portion. HOW IS THAT FAIR?
Like I said, 2 different tapes. Maybe a lawyer here could comment on the bolded part, but I doubt you are correct.
She was told to get it together as her behavior was going to frighten the small children soon to arrive for the party. Darlie was told to act joyful and celebrate the birth of her oldest son.
Despite the fact that he viewed the memorial tape and saw with his own 2 eyes a grieving mother. TO ME THAT IS PROOF HE LIED. He knew the truth that Darlie did grieve at the memorial service, he heard others telling her to "buck up" and act happy. HE CHOSE TO USE ONLY THE PORTION OF THE TAPE THAT SUPPORTED HIS CASE. When you tell a jury that this tape shows a callous self absorbed woman but you have seen a tape that disproves what you just said that is a lie, or at the very least a huge lack of integrity.
Where are you getting this stuff from??
I could not make any sense of the rest of your post, so I have no comments to make on that part.