Darlie Routier asks for DNA testing

[SeekingJana]

I don't believe Darlie did it.

Could I ask is there a section for Darlie like the other people ? I couldnt find it on the front page ?

I'd just like to go through and read the history on here about what all the WS'ers think. Their reasons for and against..

I live close to the town of Rowlett too, and I don't think she is guilty for many reasons. Never have thought she was the perp. It is VERY unpopular to say so here, but I think some of the Darlie haters have been banned for other reasons.
The police zeroed in on her because of other cases where mothers killed their kids, IMO. The Susan Smith case was still fresh in memory. They should have looked at Darin more closely. They should have looked at ALL of the evidence. Complete and thorough testing would have taken well over a year. But there was a rush to judgment and she was convicted.

I hope she will be exonerated if she is innocent, and I hope the person or persons who did this will be finally brought to light.

JMHO,
Maria

 

[Linda7NJ]

What I'm wondering is why the judge wouldn't allow testing on two bloody fingerprints that were found?? Why not get it all done in one shot? If those fingerprints didn't belong to anyone in the house or anyone involved in the investigation, shouldn't they be tested??

I read that the prints were partials and could belong to one of the children. Neither child was ever fingerprinted.

 

[SeekingJana]

I read that the prints were partials and could belong to one of the children. Neither child was ever fingerprinted.

Linda, weren't the boys fingerprinted post-mortem?

 

[JaneInOz]

Of course as you know SJ I also do not believe that Darlie killed her boys. I did read a forum years ago for a long time , it may have even been this one, but I read all about the case over and over in a few different places for memory and nothing convinced me she did it..
Yet with Madeleine and Caylee I do think their parents did it, I dont think it was premeditated with either of those but they still killed them.

With JBR I did think the mother / father did it and then for a long time after watching Perfect Murder Perfect Town I did not, but thankfully I have seen the error of my ways after reading on here again and I am back to thinking PR did it.....I think the father covered it up, I think he's a Patsy (haha pardon the pun) a doormat , bossed around by a domineering woman, I think she threatened him with outing him for ??? who knows what , or pointing the finger at him if he didnt cover it up with her...


But Darlie ? NO - this is injustice.

Id really love to see a forum again for DR on here so we can put all the evidence up and crime scene and so on and go through it all again

Is that possible ? to bring back the DR sub forum ?

 

[Crow_Ascending]

Here's a link (hope it works) to the finding of the appeal court on what was granted and what was denied for retesting and why. Kind of long, but worth reading.http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=17021

 

[Crow_Ascending]

The boys were not fingerprinted by the ME. A big mistake on his part. Darlie allowed the boys to be exhumed to see if fingerprints could be taken, but decomposition was too advanced. A copy of Damon's fingerprints were later found among some of his school things, but Devon's have never surfaced, if he ever had them taken. I'm going to do some more searching, but I do know that Darlie's family hired Dr. Bass (?) of the Body Farm in Tennesse to examine the partial print on the coffee table. His findings said that the print either belonged to a child or a small, adult female, according to his examinations. Not the results Darlie wanted. The courts rejected his findings anyway because he was not a fingerprint examiner. The partial print on the coffee table is not "unidentified" it is "unidentifiable" because not enough point matches exist.

 

[annkitty0630]

Hello, I am new to this site. I never had a computer where I could voice my opinion before, only view web sites. I have followed this case and viewed these sites for over 7 years and I still have a doubt in my mind as to whether she is guilty or not. I have read all the books and read all the blogs but my heart still feels that innocent until proven guilty (not innuendo, speculation and character assasination) are not the reasons for GUILT!!! Innocence before GUILT is still alive in this country. I beleive that Darlie needs a NEW trial to put this to rest and all of us can finally feel secure with that verdict. Her wounds, the search, the local Rowell police, and the story of the black car were truly not investigated fully to my liking. I would like to see a complete new trial before they would actually put a woman to death... In all actuality, I am surprised being it is TEXAS, she is not already dead... I live in Illinois where MANY men have been exonerated by DNA as well many prosecuterial misconduct cases found. I am 47 years old and all I would like to see in truth and justice and the guilty pay the price for what they have done.... Have A Great Day!!!!

 

[JaneInOz]

Here's a link (hope it works) to the finding of the appeal court on what was granted and what was denied for retesting and why. Kind of long, but worth reading.http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=17021

Thanks for that

Lol ive only got into the first paragraphs and I am confused

The appellant was convicted of stabbing her own son, Damon Routier, to death. Damon was younger than six years of age at the time. (3) Damon's older brother, Devon, was also stabbed to death. The appellant testified that she was sleeping on a couch in the family room in the downstairs of her home and that her sons were asleep on the floor in front of the television. She awoke to discover a stranger departing through the kitchen and utility room and out through the garage, leaving a bloody butcher knife from the kitchen behind on the utility room floor. She herself suffered a number of wounds, including a slash across her neck that came perilously close to severing her carotid artery. She denied having stabbed her sons.

Bold is mine...

remember I think she is innocent...

But
I don't understand that part ? how can you AWAKE to find someone running off ? wouldnt you wake when they were slashing at you ?

 

[believe09]

Thanks for that

Lol ive only got into the first paragraphs and I am confused



Bold is mine...

remember I think she is innocent...

But
I don't understand that part ? how can you AWAKE to find someone running off ? wouldnt you wake when they were slashing at you ?

I think you are dead on...unless you knew who was slashing at you...might cause you to have a fuzzy memory.

I am thrilled the testing will move forward, although I think she is guilty....but I would love to be proven wrong!!

 

[MrsSimon]

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa080618_mo_routier.18625d69.html

How is it that she is so tan? :waitasec:

 

[JaneInOz]

I mean from the pain of it, as in if you were asleep and someone started slashing at you...
but it didnt say she awoke to find someone slashing/grabbing at her , rather that she awoke to find someone running off...

I still think she is innocent but i am very confused by this

 

[SeekingJana]

I mean from the pain of it, as in if you were asleep and someone started slashing at you...
but it didnt say she awoke to find someone slashing/grabbing at her , rather that she awoke to find someone running off...

I still think she is innocent but i am very confused by this

It's my opinion that she was so traumatized by the chaotic scene- her boys screaming, her injuries that she really does NOT remember what happened exactly.

GOOD and ADEQUATE legal counsel would have drilled into her the need to say exactly that- " I don't/ can't remember" but no, they apparently told her to answer questions.
Darlie was very naive and she had attorneys who did not understand how her answers could be twisted to be incriminating.

If one looks at this case from a first person point of view, as I have always tried to do, putting myself in Darlie's place, it makes perfect sense why she doesn't or didn't remember things in the correct order that they happened. She was a victim in the midst of a crime scene, IMO and never was treated as such.

JMO,
Maria

 

[PattyCake]

I read that the prints were partials and could belong to one of the children. Neither child was ever fingerprinted.

sadly, the children were both unearthed and finger prints were retrieved and they did not match the children. what a terrible thing to have to do to those babes. Necessary but so sad.

 

[OneLostGrl]

Hello, I am new to this site. I never had a computer where I could voice my opinion before, only view web sites. I have followed this case and viewed these sites for over 7 years and I still have a doubt in my mind as to whether she is guilty or not. I have read all the books and read all the blogs but my heart still feels that innocent until proven guilty (not innuendo, speculation and character assasination) are not the reasons for GUILT!!! Innocence before GUILT is still alive in this country. I beleive that Darlie needs a NEW trial to put this to rest and all of us can finally feel secure with that verdict. Her wounds, the search, the local Rowell police, and the story of the black car were truly not investigated fully to my liking. I would like to see a complete new trial before they would actually put a woman to death... In all actuality, I am surprised being it is TEXAS, she is not already dead... I live in Illinois where MANY men have been exonerated by DNA as well many prosecuterial misconduct cases found. I am 47 years old and all I would like to see in truth and justice and the guilty pay the price for what they have done.... Have A Great Day!!!!

Hi thanks for sharing your thoughts and welcome to WS!

 

[OneLostGrl]

Thanks for that

Lol ive only got into the first paragraphs and I am confused



Bold is mine...

remember I think she is innocent...

But
I don't understand that part ? how can you AWAKE to find someone running off ? wouldnt you wake when they were slashing at you ?

I'm not trying to be rude and I hope you don't take it like that.. but I'm a bit confused how you can be so vocal about thinking she is innocent and has been wrongly convicted when it's clear you have not done much fact finding about the case. You had not even heard what she herself stated (what you quote above) about the night of the crime.

 

[Linda7NJ]

54. When she had fallen asleep on the couch, the appellant was wearing panties. As she was being loaded into the ambulance to go to the hospital, she was no longer wearing them, and they were never recovered. She also testified to a vague recollection of feeling "pressure" on her right leg as she was waking up. She told one of the nurses that she had felt "a pressure down there."

http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=17021

 

[CyberLaw]

So did she awake to a person "on top of her", stabbing her, as the person ran out though the utility room.

Remember there are 16 different stories of Darlie. That is SIXTEEN different stories. When you tell the truth, you only need one story. That is the truth.

Many, many times during the trial, Darlie said, I can't remember, I don't know, I don't recall. Funny, she only could not recall details when those details would not be in her favor.

Selective memories.

I saw a program last night. One thing that LE are trained to look out for is "inappropriate" emotional response. That is a clear signal to them that something is not correct.

Like for example, telling an ex-husband that the mother of his child, his ex wife is dead and the husband asking them to come back later.

The husband was not a suspect up to that time. Consequently after that not only was he a suspect, but convicted upon further investigation.

Or a women, who was suspected of injury to her step daughter. While of course she says the words, accident prone, clumsy, always falling. The Police are well trained to look at "a lot" of factors. Not once did this women ask how the step daughter was, could she see her.

She was only concerned about herself, only herself and how did her step daughters injury affect her...and only her.

So trust me, the Rowlett PD convicted the correct person.......based on all of the evidence. Not just the silly string tape......

 

[kgeaux]

I read that the prints were partials and could belong to one of the children. Neither child was ever fingerprinted.

I've actually heard several stories about the unidentified fingerprints, some stories favoring defense, some prosecution.

I am not sure it even matters whose fingerprint it is, in reference to what the defense is asking. They've asked for and received the right to DNA test the BLOOD the unidentified prints were imprinted in. Is that right?

 

[kgeaux]

54. When she had fallen asleep on the couch, the appellant was wearing panties. As she was being loaded into the ambulance to go to the hospital, she was no longer wearing them, and they were never recovered. She also testified to a vague recollection of feeling "pressure" on her right leg as she was waking up. She told one of the nurses that she had felt "a pressure down there."

http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=17021

54. When she had fallen asleep on the couch, the appellant was wearing panties. As she was being loaded into the ambulance to go to the hospital, she was no longer wearing them, and they were never recovered. She also testified to a vague recollection of feeling "pressure" on her right leg as she was waking up. She told one of the nurses that she had felt "a pressure down there."

55. A police officer during a pretrial hearing testified that a rape kit was done. But, as even the appellant acknowledged in a letter brief to the convicting court dated June 30, 2006, that police officer "now recalls that a rape kit was discussed but never performed."

Well, isn't this priceless? Part of the prosecutor's circumstantial evidence was that Darlie's story changed. And now we read at least one police officer's story changed, too. And about some potentially very, very important evidence, too.

 

[JaneInOz]

I'm not trying to be rude and I hope you don't take it like that.. but I'm a bit confused how you can be so vocal about thinking she is innocent and has been wrongly convicted when it's clear you have not done much fact finding about the case. You had not even heard what she herself stated (what you quote above) about the night of the crime.

No I dont take it as being rude, and I did read the case ages ago in full detail (probably on here when it was up) but that was years ago. I havent really looked at any crimes for some years now and it was Caylee Anthony during a google search that I came across this board again and decided to join,,,

I have forgotten an awful lot of stuff to do with any of the cases, and some I do not know.

I remember reading that about her being on the couch but had forgotten it - but I still found it curious and so vocalized my thoughts, and yes the trauma side of things makes sense

I also do not live in the USA and am not familiar with all your terminology for things, and your laws are completely different to ours and how things are handled - I am learning though