Changes Right Before the Murders

[deanws]

Totally agree, Irish! But that doesn't mean that no one should look at such things.

You do realize that according to Texas statute, it is not enough to kill your own children to qualify for the death penalty? You also have to be a danger to society, or maybe I should say a continued threat. Darlie should not have been given the death penalty because she did not qualify, other than the nature of her crime.

To us lay people, the nature of her crime alone is enough to want her to die, too, but that is not what is laid out in the death penalty statute. I wonder if she will end up getting the death penalty set aside for that reason.

I don't believe so Goody. I think she is going down....in more than one way.

 

[Goody]

AND...will ACTUALLY die. I do not understand why some states sentence to death...but hardly ever carry out the sentence.

I was watching a show the other day about the death penalty history. Back in the 50s and 60s, people were executed pretty darned quick. Some within 6 or 7 years. That should be the way it is here, but we should give it less often, only to those who go beyond the pale in the most heinous of murders or attempted murders. The guy who cut off the teenager's arms after raping her, for example, should have gotten death, if left up to me.

The first woman put to death in a gas chamber was put in there with her husband and partner in crime (kidnap for ransom and murder) and they were both executed at the same time. I doubt if you would see that today.

 

[deanws]

I was watching a show the other day about the death penalty history. Back in the 50s and 60s, people were executed pretty darned quick. Some within 6 or 7 years. That should be the way it is here, but we should give it less often, only to those who go beyond the pale in the most heinous of murders or attempted murders. The guy who cut off the teenager's arms after raping her, for example, should have gotten death, if left up to me.

The first woman put to death in a gas chamber was put in there with her husband and partner in crime (kidnap for ransom and murder) and they were both executed at the same time. I doubt if you would see that today.

About that man who cut off the teen's arms.....I think we should do the same to him. Stuff like that makes me just sick.

 

[Goody]

I don't believe so Goody. I think she is going down....in more than one way.

Maybe so. It will up to the federal judges now. Texas judges have already spoken.

 

[Goody]

About that man who cut off the teen's arms.....I think we should do the same to him. Stuff like that makes me just sick.

I understand where you are coming from, though I would rather the jerk just didn't exist anymore. Anyone who maims like that for no particular reason other than to be just cruel and mean doesn't deserve to live among anyone else, not even fellow cons. That poor girl had the most awful life until she was finally able to accept herself as she was. Now she is a wife and mother, and I believe living happily....without arms though.

 

[beesy]

You do realize that according to Texas statute, it is not enough to kill your own children to qualify for the death penalty? You also have to be a danger to society, or maybe I should say a continued threat. Darlie should not have been given the death penalty because she did not qualify, other than the nature of her crime

I used to think that, but I've since decided that Darlie could be a danger not to society as a whole, but to her loved ones. Her basic personality has not changed. She's young and could still have children, and poor Drake is still there too. How can we be sure that all the "Darlie" reasons will not come back? I do believe that night everything came together, crashed on top of her and ended in the murders of her 2 boys, and that any other night it might not have happened. How do we know similar things won't push Darlie to the edge again? Unlikely, but she's still Darlie.
John List was not a danger to society in general. He only killed his family. However, one thing which triggered John's descent was money problems. Some years before he killed his family, he was in debt and he and his wife and kids just left town, dumped the house and the cars, etc. He showed a history of running from problems. He did fine when he was on the run, after the murders, because he worked at simple jobs and rented cheap apartments. Several years before he was caught, he remarried and began buying the things which we all "need", a house, cars, furniture. Then he started losing his jobs(accounting positions) and going under. Would he have done it again? He was caught before things got impossible. In a recent interview, he said how he enjoys his life in prison. He has a little job in the library and he doesn't have to worry about real life. So John's personality is still there. He still wouldn't be able to handle the real world.
Suppose Darlie played it cool when she got out of prison, but then before too long, starting spending money and taking trips and all the things she likes to do? TX doesn't have LWOP does it? If it does, that sentence would be the right one. Darlie should not be allowed out of prison.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Totally agree, Irish! But that doesn't mean that no one should look at such things.

You do realize that according to Texas statute, it is not enough to kill your own children to qualify for the death penalty? You also have to be a danger to society, or maybe I should say a continued threat. Darlie should not have been given the death penalty because she did not qualify, other than the nature of her crime.

To us lay people, the nature of her crime alone is enough to want her to die, too, but that is not what is laid out in the death penalty statute. I wonder if she will end up getting the death penalty set aside for that reason.

Disagree Goody. She's still young enough to have more children and let's not forget she didn't murder Drake. Any child in her care, I believe, would have been in danger. Murder once and you're able to do so again.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I used to think that, but I've since decided that Darlie could be a danger not to society as a whole, but to her loved ones. Her basic personality has not changed. She's young and could still have children, and poor Drake is still there too. How can we be sure that all the "Darlie" reasons will not come back? I do believe that night everything came together, crashed on top of her and ended in the murders of her 2 boys, and that any other night it might not have happened. How do we know similar things won't push Darlie to the edge again? Unlikely, but she's still Darlie.
John List was not a danger to society in general. He only killed his family. However, one thing which triggered John's descent was money problems. Some years before he killed his family, he was in debt and he and his wife and kids just left town, dumped the house and the cars, etc. He showed a history of running from problems. He did fine when he was on the run, after the murders, because he worked at simple jobs and rented cheap apartments. Several years before he was caught, he remarried and began buying the things which we all "need", a house, cars, furniture. Then he started losing his jobs(accounting positions) and going under. Would he have done it again? He was caught before things got impossible. In a recent interview, he said how he enjoys his life in prison. He has a little job in the library and he doesn't have to worry about real life. So John's personality is still there. He still wouldn't be able to handle the real world.
Suppose Darlie played it cool when she got out of prison, but then before too long, starting spending money and taking trips and all the things she likes to do? TX doesn't have LWOP does it? If it does, that sentence would be the right one. Darlie should not be allowed out of prison.

Didn't see this until after my "disagree" post. I agree with this.

 

[CyberLaw]

Past behaviour is a very good indicator of future behaviour.

You never know who else she might murder, because again we do not know her "motivation" to murder.

We do not know what her personal goal and desire was when she "choose" to murder her kids.

What if Drake is standing in her way of something she wants, he wants and needs something that is beyond her spening habits, that she will take out tons of life insurance on him........

If I understand the Death Penalty(after all I am Canadian)I thought it had to do with the ages of the children. The youngest child. Isn't that a factor in a death penalty case, the child was under a specific age.

The fact that she did not admit any responsibility, remorse, told lies, played herself as a victim, injured herself to deflect suspicion, had monatary gain, the victims were her children and she is "not normal" leads me to believe that if given her own "motivation" she will kill again, and have the same reaction or lack thereof.........but this time she might even go so far as to "set up" another person for her own crime......

Her whole life was smoke and mirrors and when the actual facade was fading, she could not cope because all she knew was how to be "pretty, cute and spend money. There was no internal character development, everything was all external........

It is like a pretty women is not too bright......did not finish high school, lands a rich man and lives her life spending his money because she feels entitled.

Then he leaves her for a younger, pretty women, and she gets mad and kills him because he ruined her life and how dare he leave her. She is an empty soul, a shell of a human being.....so she viewed her children in the same way, an ends to a means, she did not love them, she saw them as objects and obstacles to her lifestyle and money.........

A neighbour might have more money, but in Darlie's mind, this women is "better" then her because she has more money, Darlie feels envy, jelously and wants to get back at this women because she has what Darlie does not not.

So Darlie wants to take it away from her.........

 

[HeartofTexas]

Her whole life was smoke and mirrors and when the actual facade was fading, she could not cope because all she knew was how to be "pretty, cute and spend money. There was no internal character development, everything was all external........

Great post, Cyber. I particularly liked the above quote. And you are correct... it was the age of one of the two boys murdered who qualified Darlie for the DP. I apologize for not remembering the name of the youngest boy murdered... it would help my feeble mind if everyone in their family's name didn't begin with a "D"!

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Past behaviour is a very good indicator of future behaviour.

You never know who else she might murder, because again we do not know her "motivation" to murder.

We do not know what her personal goal and desire was when she "choose" to murder her kids.

What if Drake is standing in her way of something she wants, he wants and needs something that is beyond her spening habits, that she will take out tons of life insurance on him........

If I understand the Death Penalty(after all I am Canadian)I thought it had to do with the ages of the children. The youngest child. Isn't that a factor in a death penalty case, the child was under a specific age.
.

Yes, age of the victim is a factor. Here's the info:

The following crimes are Capital Murder in Texas: murder of a public safety officer or firefighter; murder during the commission of kidnapping, burglary, robbery, aggravated sexual assault, arson, or obstruction or retaliation; murder for remuneration; murder during prison escape; murder of a correctional employee; murder by a state prison inmate who is serving a life sentence for any of five offenses (murder, capital murder, aggravated kidnapping, aggravated sexual assault, or aggravated robbery); multiple murders; murder of an individual under six years of age.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Great post, Cyber. I particularly liked the above quote. And you are correct... it was the age of one of the two boys murdered who qualified Darlie for the DP. I apologize for not remembering the name of the youngest boy murdered... it would help my feeble mind if everyone in their family's name didn't begin with a "D"!

Its hard, I know!! Damon was the youngest. Devon the older. Drake the baby she spared.

 

[HeartofTexas]

Thanks! I started to type Damon, but feared you ladies with total recall on the case would pounce on me if I got the name incorrect! It's Damon and Devon I get mixed up ... Drake I remember.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Thanks! I started to type Damon, but feared you ladies with total recall on the case would pounce on me if I got the name incorrect! It's Damon and Devon I get mixed up ... Drake I remember.

lol We don't pounce!!! Well, Beesy does, but we like her anyway!! Once I heard that even the pets were not immune to the "D" series, I gave up! Since "Devil" starts with "D," Darlie still fits in!!

 

[CyberLaw]

So she did not have to be deemed a "danger to the public", but the reason that she was sentenced to death was because the youngest was 6 or under.

Even with that fact, the jury did the right thing in my opinion sentencing her to death.

If Drake was downstairs with her, he would have been a victim too..... but since he was upstairs, there is no way she could have gone with her "story" about the intruder.

 

[HeartofTexas]

You are correct! The dog's name was Domain. I feel certain the "D" pages in the "Name the Baby" book were very dog-eared from constant use.

 

[beesy]

lol We don't pounce!!! Well, Beesy does, but we like her anyway!! Once I heard that even the pets were not immune to the "D" series, I gave up! Since "Devil" starts with "D," Darlie still fits in!!

Gee, thanks for the compliment. Is that what it was? Better than your usual black eye

 

[Jeana (DP)]

So she did not have to be deemed a "danger to the public", but the reason that she was sentenced to death was because the youngest was 6 or under.

Even with that fact, the jury did the right thing in my opinion sentencing her to death.

If Drake was downstairs with her, he would have been a victim too..... but since he was upstairs, there is no way she could have gone with her "story" about the intruder.

And the fact that there were multiple murders qualified her as well had they decided to try her for both of the murders. However, as you're aware, during cases like this, prosecutors will sometimes hold back a charge. If the prosecution couldn't get a conviction for whatever reason on the first murder charge, they could have tried her again for the second. However, since Devon was older than 6, the death penalty would most likely been off the table.

 

[beesy]

You are correct! The dog's name was Domain. I feel certain the "D" pages in the "Name the Baby" book were very dog-eared from constant use.

And odd "D" names too. What's wrong with David or Daniel? Somebody on a post said they were soap opera names. Damon is too close to Damian from the Omen I've always thought. Poor boys.

 

[Goody]

And the fact that there were multiple murders qualified her as well had they decided to try her for both of the murders. However, as you're aware, during cases like this, prosecutors will sometimes hold back a charge. If the prosecution couldn't get a conviction for whatever reason on the first murder charge, they could have tried her again for the second. However, since Devon was older than 6, the death penalty would most likely been off the table.

Maybe they are saving that one for Darin, although they did say pretty directly that he was not a suspect. Also, they could not link the murder weapon to Devon and that probably would cause some problem. And I suspect that Devon was dead longer than indicated. I think they know that and are holding that information back. I wonder what evidence they have that they didn't use though. I suspect there is some of that, too.