Case Against Darin?

[beesy]

I don't think he is as dumb as he acts. He has been smart enough so far to keep himself out of jail. As far as I know they are still married. If he is dating, he has been able to keep it very quiet. I find that very unusual.

I think he looks like a doofus...he's very wiley, keeping to the story after all this
time. Good on him

 

[Goody]

I think he looks like a doofus...he's very wiley, keeping to the story after all this
time. Good on him

He is a little goofy, but I think he also uses it to his advantage.

 

[beesy]

He is a little goofy, but I think he also uses it to his advantage.

good call

 

[RobertStJames]

Darlie has never made any statements about Darin's involvement in the case as far as I know. I think it is her defense team coming up with the claims now. They got Darin to sign an affidavit stating he had put the word out to have someone burglarize his home as an insurance scam. The implication is that these intruders might have been hired by Darin and just screwed up. Darlie's stepfather supports that with another affidavit, saying Darin asked him if he knew anyone who would do it. Darin also says Darlie asked for a separation that night.

I think the strategy is make it look like he had a motive, not prove he actually did it. They just need enough to get Darlie a new trial, using him as the scapegoat but not enough that it could be used against him later on. That is really hard to do and I doubt if they will be successful. It would have been a better strategy for the first trial.

Doesn't anyone else find it very odd Darin didn't admit this during the initial investigation? Wonder if he's lying, but what would be the point there? Saying Darlie asked for a separation hardly supports any "intruder" theory. And I do not see Darin running the risk of finding himself on trial in order to free his wife. If he'd been that devoted to her, he'd have done this a long time ago.

This gets to the core of the question I was asking a while ago, which I'll reword slightly: Does supporting Darlie's innocence automatically mean supporting Darin's innocence?


RstJ

 

[Mary456]

This gets to the core of the question I was asking a while ago, which I'll reword slightly: Does supporting Darlie's innocence automatically mean supporting Darin's innocence?


RstJ

Yes, it does, according to the supporters I've encountered over the last 6 years. Regardless of what their agenda is (anti-death penalty, anti-Texas, family, friends, etc.), they will viciously attack anyone who suggests Darin was involved in any way, shape or form.

They took a stand in the beginning that Darlie and Darin were completely innocent of this crime, and it's sticking to them like glue. A few years ago a staunch supporter had the audacity to suggest that Darin might be involved, and they practically lynched him on the spot. They love Darlie, they love Darin, and their only goal is to find the "real killer" :crazy:

 

[Cowgirl]

Yes, it does, according to the supporters I've encountered over the last 6 years. Regardless of what their agenda is (anti-death penalty, anti-Texas, family, friends, etc.), they will viciously attack anyone who suggests Darin was involved in any way, shape or form.

They took a stand in the beginning that Darlie and Darin were completely innocent of this crime, and it's sticking to them like glue. A few years ago a staunch supporter had the audacity to suggest that Darin might be involved, and they practically lynched him on the spot. They love Darlie, they love Darin, and their only goal is to find the "real killer" :crazy:

And that is their biggest problem. The real killer is on death row, Darin goes to visit her and her boob job, and that is the way it will stay, apparently. He raises their remaining child.

Her mother said that it was love at first sight for Darin at The Sizzler where they met. So that tells you right there what he fell for -- certainly not for the person inside.

One of the times she was coming up for appeal I asked a question about the cut screen on her website and instead of a straight answer, I got a response about "it will all be explained at the appeal hearing" and so I responded that without a more direct answer than that, they would never, ever convince anyone that she is not the guilty party.

The part I will never understand is why. Post partum mania? They had very little insurance on the kids and if you look at her gaudy taste in that house, she was all about material things. She must just have wanted out, I guess. She must just be evil. And whether he knows she is evil or not, he knows no one broke in that house. He has to. They are a very strange pair.

 

[accordn2me]

Doesn't anyone else find it very odd Darin didn't admit this during the initial investigation? Wonder if he's lying, but what would be the point there? Saying Darlie asked for a separation hardly supports any "intruder" theory. And I do not see Darin running the risk of finding himself on trial in order to free his wife. If he'd been that devoted to her, he'd have done this a long time ago.

This gets to the core of the question I was asking a while ago, which I'll reword slightly: Does supporting Darlie's innocence automatically mean supporting Darin's innocence?


RstJ

I do find it very odd that Darin didn't bring this up immediately. And you are right, he had more motive for killing than she did. However, if Darlie were privy to this bright idea, it's more odd that she didn't bring it up. Although it wouldn't be the oddest thing she did.:doh:

While I don't consider myself "supporting Darlie's innocence" - my problem is that her attorney didn't address the evidence against her - if I found out that Darin did it, I wouldn't feel nearly so badly that Darlie is on death row. I don't believe she could have given the description that she did and not know it was Darin. Why in tarnation would she protect him? If she knows and is lying for him, she deserves the same punishment that he should have gotten.

 

[Goody]

While I don't consider myself "supporting Darlie's innocence" - my problem is that her attorney didn't address the evidence against her - if I found out that Darin did it, I wouldn't feel nearly so badly that Darlie is on death row. I don't believe she could have given the description that she did and not know it was Darin. Why in tarnation would she protect him? If she knows and is lying for him, she deserves the same punishment that he should have gotten.

Because they were in on it together, and as another poster at another board said, he just didn't have the guts to do the dirty work. It was not very well planned, but then nothing they did seemed to involve much planning...or research. They tended to jump into things with both feet and ask questions later. At least that is my take on them. Who knows if the murders started with a moment of rage that ended with one child injured/dead or if the argument they had that night that supposedly included a separation request was the trigger. (I think he acknowledged that a sep request was asked for that night in the aff so the defense could use it to point fingers at Darin without Darin having to admit any participation in the actual murders.)

I am suspicious of the suicide attempt in May and how it might have been the foundation for the initial formation of a haphazard plan. I am also suspicious of the hiring of a maid just two days before the murders and then the murders happening before the house could get messed up again. I am suspicious about the timing of the jewelry being left on the counter, of Darlie asking a maid she'd just hired to look at her jewelry because she was thinking about selling it to raise $10,000. (Obvously the maid couldn't buy it.) Why mention a figure like that, esp when it matches to the penny the death benefit on the boys? Add that to the papers/policies being left out in the family room and it gets more suspicious.

Then look at their actions after the crime. All the ordinary oddities aside, what about them signing a contract to shop their story only two days after Darlie's arrest? What were they so happy about the morning of her arrest when they were dancing around the front yard and tossing the toys off the dying wreaths around like they were basketballs? Had they just found an agent for their story maybe and were in the process of receiving a contract from him?

And then there is the trial and all of Darin's odd behavior. He goes to the house on Bond Street to look at the screens, apparently to see if any of them are cut? That was in December just before the January trial began. While there, he tells the current resident that Darlie could make the alley run in 30 seconds (or some such figure), that the intruder was a 300 pound man, and a couple of other odd things that seemed to lean toward incriminating this wife he is supposedly so loyal to. Getting cold feet maybe?

During the trial he gets a big tatoo on his arm of Darlie and the boys and sports it in a tabloidish way outside the courthouse and jail as Darlie looks down thru a second story window. He also holds up a photo for her to see as if he is posing for the press. The family wears Free Darlie tshirts and sing gospel songs outside the court house, creating a carnival effect. One author has Darin's mother holding up a cross as if to curse those who think Darlie guilty as the evidence comes out. He tells his tatoo artist (per one author) that their case is going to be really big and they are going to make a lot of money before it is over. He tells others that Darlie is going to write a book and cut out the middlemen (book authors) so they will make more money for themselves.

There are just many, many little things like this that haunt this case. Each alone doesn't mean much but if you put them all together, most of the time they spell M-O-N-E-Y. Darin's words on that first radio show/tv interview come back to haunt. He said they had gotten in the habit of living large and didn't realize until after the murders what was important. I can't remember his exact words but I recall thinking he was almost saying that they didn't know how important the children were until after they gone and underestimated what it would be like without them. Then there is that detached distant look in their eyes that day after the silly string party when they were interviewed for TV. Are their thoughts drifting to regret or are they just trying to avoid the camera picking up on the emotional confrontation within their own souls for what they have done?

 

[cami]

I do find it very odd that Darin didn't bring this up immediately. And you are right, he had more motive for killing than she did. However, if Darlie were privy to this bright idea, it's more odd that she didn't bring it up. Although it wouldn't be the oddest thing she did.:doh:

While I don't consider myself "supporting Darlie's innocence" - my problem is that her attorney didn't address the evidence against her - if I found out that Darin did it, I wouldn't feel nearly so badly that Darlie is on death row. I don't believe she could have given the description that she did and not know it was Darin. Why in tarnation would she protect him? If she knows and is lying for him, she deserves the same punishment that he should have gotten.

Yes I believe Darin is lying about this alleged insurance scam. He's buying into the State's motive with this story. He must really be that stupid that he can't see he was set up. Probably by DK.

 

[Mary456]

Yes I believe Darin is lying about this alleged insurance scam. He must really be that stupid that he can't see he was set up. Probably by DK.

I think you're right, Cami. I can see DK saying, "Look Darin, if you sign an affidavit that you'd arranged to have the house burglarized, it might get Darlie a new trial, and you'll probably only get a slap on the wrist. Do it!"

They're more than a little dense. Don't they know you have to name names? Good grief, you can't just throw out a crazy story like that without anyone to back it up.

 

[Goody]

Yes I believe Darin is lying about this alleged insurance scam. He's buying into the State's motive with this story. He must really be that stupid that he can't see he was set up. Probably by DK.

I don't think it is a set up, Cami. They needed something to support the intruder theory to avoid pointing fingers at either of them. At the same time, i am sure the defense wanted a little amunition to fire at Darin, not to convict him but to use to get her off. His admission that he hired guys to burglarize his house doesn't hold a lot of water for several reasons, but it can create a weak case of reasonable doubt, give those appellate attys something to argue.

Darin's second statement on the affidavit is more interesting. It actually gives Darin motive. But in the end, both admissions are too little too late unless they can be supported by other testimony and evidence, which I do not believe they can.

Did Darlie Kee trick him into it? I don't think so. I think he had to offer up something in order to help Darlie. The parents who don't know the truth would not understand why he wouldn't be willing to help her and at the same time Darlie was probably looking at him thru squinted eyes. The big threat for him is always going to be when Darlie loses hope will she confess and expose his role in it.

I am sure there were plenty of assurances that the affidavit could not result in charges being filed against him. At the end of the day, I am sure Darin knew all he would have to do is say he lied to help his wife or throw out some other lame, mealy mouthed explanation like those he peppered all thru his trial testimony.

 

[Goody]

They're more than a little dense. Don't they know you have to name names? Good grief, you can't just throw out a crazy story like that without anyone to back it up.

Only if they are going to prove actual innocence. If the appellate attys can show that she was not given a zealous representation at trial because Darin was not pursued as another who had motive and opportunity equal to Darlie's, maybe they can get her a new trial. We haven't heard from the federal courts yet. In fact, they haven't even filed her federal appeal yet, have they?

 

[beesy]

Only if they are going to prove actual innocence. If the appellate attys can show that she was not given a zealous representation at trial because Darin was not pursued as another who had motive and opportunity equal to Darlie's, maybe they can get her a new trial. We haven't heard from the federal courts yet. In fact, they haven't even filed her federal appeal yet, have they?

Hey Goody, I've figured it out! You've got a crush on Darin! :blowkiss: Hee, I know you're just playing Devil's Advocate, but I and lots of others, don't think there's much more than what we see and that he is a ..... fill in the blank for me. Just teasing ya Goody

 

[beesy]

And that is their biggest problem. The real killer is on death row, Darin goes to visit her and her boob job, and that is the way it will stay, apparently. He raises their remaining child.

His parents have permanent custody of Drake, well I know they did at 1 time, anybody know? Do you think they'll let Darin keep her boob job? He can frame them!

 

[Goody]

Hey Goody, I've figured it out! You've got a crush on Darin! :blowkiss:

O, yes, O, yes! He's got my heart going pitter patter ....or is that my bladder going splatter-splatter? O, darn....my new shoes. And they were suede, too! I really have to practice controlling my urges. Sorry, big boy, but that little tryst will have to wait. <swish, swish, swish....Goody's footprints as she heads for the john>

 

[Goody]

His parents have permanent custody of Drake, well I know they did at 1 time, anybody know? Do you think they'll let Darin keep her boob job? He can frame them!

The last I heard the grandparents still have legal custody but Drake lives with his father most of the time.

 

[Mary456]

Hey Goody, I've figured it out! You've got a crush on Darin! :blowkiss:

Naw, Goody just feels sorry for Snaggletooth. She wants to hook him up with a good orthodontist

 

[Mary456]

We haven't heard from the federal courts yet. In fact, they haven't even filed her federal appeal yet, have they?

They're probably in the process of filing it. Darlie lost her last state appeal (Habeas Corpus) on 12/1/04, so it now goes to the Federal habeas corpus appeal. If it's denied by the District Court, it moves to the U.S. Circuit Court. If that appeal is denied, it goes to the Supreme Court. And if that's denied, an execution date is set.

I read somewhere that, barring a miracle or a judge with a weakness for 36 triple Ds, she'll probably be executed in 2007 or 2008.

 

[accordn2me]

Who knows if the murders started with a moment of rage that ended with one child injured/dead or if the argument they had that night that supposedly included a separation request was the trigger. (I think he acknowledged that a sep request was asked for that night in the aff so the defense could use it to point fingers at Darin without Darin having to admit any participation in the actual murders.)

Now I see why they hired Mulder. They thought the public defenders were going to pursue a defense of her-husband-did-it. I didn't realize those attorneys didn't believe there was an intruder.

As far as how the murders started, those tiny cuts on Damon's back haunt me. The ones that look like that one on Darlie's forearm...

Also, the cut on Devon's behind....

I don't know what to think. :sick:

I am suspicious about the timing of the jewelry being left on the counter, of Darlie asking a maid she'd just hired to look at her jewelry because she was thinking about selling it to raise $10,000. (Obvously the maid couldn't buy it.) Why mention a figure like that, esp when it matches to the penny the death benefit on the boys? Add that to the papers/policies being left out in the family room and it gets more suspicious.

I can't believe that jewelry was ever worth $10,000. Didn't most of it come from pawn shops?

Then look at their actions after the crime. All the ordinary oddities aside, what about them signing a contract to shop their story only two days after Darlie's arrest? What were they so happy about the morning of her arrest when they were dancing around the front yard and tossing the toys off the dying wreaths around like they were basketballs? Had they just found an agent for their story maybe and were in the process of receiving a contract from him?

This along with Darin's comment to the cop or whoever about this being the biggest scene Rowlett's ever had makes it seem like Darin was seeing $$ by the time Darlie started wetting towels.

Whatever happened to that contract?

And then there is the trial and all of Darin's odd behavior. He goes to the house on Bond Street to look at the screens, apparently to see if any of them are cut? That was in December just before the January trial began. While there, he tells the current resident that Darlie could make the alley run in 30 seconds (or some such figure), that the intruder was a 300 pound man, and a couple of other odd things that seemed to lean toward incriminating this wife he is supposedly so loyal to. Getting cold feet maybe?

The trip to the house on Bond Street makes me wonder about that screen and if it had anything at all to do with this crime. When I first heard about it I wondered if the boys hadn't cut it for some reason. I think someone in another thread here mentioned that maybe one reason Dana didn't testify was that she knew the screen had been cut earlier. If that is true, I believe her testimony would have helped Darlie immensely because of the bread knife testimony.

What do y'all think about Cron's initial position (or was it Linch's idea) was that the screen had been cut from the inside? I know in Linch's testimony he said something to the effect of, "there was one indication that the cutting was done from the outside." Wasn't it Brantly who argued the cut was done from outside and then the investigator changed his position?

I think it's very possible the screen had nothing to do with this crime. If the Routiers knew it didn't but didn't say anything because they mistakenly believed it supported their intruder story, they should have learned that withholding truth can come back to stab you! This alone should have made one or both of them "remember" the insurance scam plan and immediately tell on themselves.

 

[beesy]

[

QUOTE=accordn2me]

Now I see why they hired Mulder. They thought the public defenders were going to pursue a defense of her-husband-did-it. I didn't realize those attorneys didn't believe there was an intruder.

I didn't know that either. I thought they hired Mulder because of his rep and being able to afford an attorney showed(they thought) that they were well off. No money was one of the DA's possible motive.

As far as how the murders started, those tiny cuts on Damon's back haunt me. The ones that look like that one on Darlie's forearm...

Also, the cut on Devon's behind....

I don't know what to think. :sick:

They haunt me as well. I think Devon picked up his legs to kick at her which exposed his buttocks enough to get that cut. The cut on his arm happened then I believe. I, and some others feel Darlie was cut at some point during this struggle. I think she wasn't prepared for a battle because they were asleep. Which wounds on Damon haunt you, besides that a 5 yr old shouldn't have stab wounds in his back? The cuts I see that are smaller are either hestitation cuts or just poorly aimed. Tell me which cuts and I'll look at them again.