Darlie Routier asks for DNA testing

[CathyR]

The blood spatter evidence is unassailable. Too much of it points to her hands wielding the knife, tipping over the vacuum cleaner, etc.
Her story is in conflict with the facts in every single detail. Even an Appellate Court agreed with this.

Those kind of previous rulings, before the laws changed, is what got people held in prison for too many years when evidence was not allowed. The bite in the apple was only once and is always upheld no news there. Due to the finicky choice of prosecutors and lawyers to to test what they deem plausible at the time, defendants have been set free later. DNA and cases where not all relevant information was handled over. IS why?

 

[Madeleine74]

How was it that anyone was able to run down that alley without depositing evidence/blood along the way? Forget about Darlie for a moment. An intruder should have been leaving evidence of themselves in some manner. Two limb hairs inside a sock is not doing it for me. No murderous intruder is that pristine, and certainly not when said intruder stabbed 3 human beings and there was obviously some kind of struggle occurring.

Where are the footprints of any intruder? What about dripping blood from his victims on his escape path, through the garage, out the window screen? And forget about the logical question of why would an intruder leave a murder weapon in the house but instead remove a tube sock? Just looking only at physical evidence, I saw where luminol was sprayed, which revealed lots of Darlie footprints. So where are the intruder's shoe prints?

And why would an intruder come into a home (allegedly to murder since said intruder didn't steal anything, including valuable gold jewelry sitting right there), and go get a knife from the kitchen to butcher 2 sleeping children and a sleeping woman? If one's intent is murder, wouldn't the murderer make sure they actually had their weapon already with them? If one's intent is robbery wouldn't they actually take something, I mean something besides one tube sock? Are we dealing with a forgetful murderer ("oops, my bad...I meant to bring my own knife but well...hey...can I borrow ones of yours? Thx!")

The scene doesn't make sense.

 

[PamelaC123]

Some one smart enough to leave and someone who may have known that bleeding at A SCENE IS REASON ENOUGH TO LEAVE.

Are you saying that the intruder saw Darlie bleeding so he left?

 

[neesaki]

Reading in Appendix D, I can't believe it.... blood stains on the sock, in the fingerprint on the table, on the t-shirt, the knife, and the pillow were not all tested. Even the limb hair in the sock. What? This was a death penalty trial, for pete's sake. It should have been done to infinity, imo. Yet it's just now in the works. That's infuriating, and incompetence on both sides. :moo:

And now wanting the quantitative analyses, not sure what that will prove other than there's not much, or enough there to give any information. I'm not that DNA savy but am wondering if it will be helpful one way or another.

That's been the problem with this case all along, though. The investigation was never thorough, it was rushed through and conducted in a half-a@#*@ manner. And I agree with the appeals court that the State never fully proved Darlie's guilt. What, are they afraid they might find something that won't support their circumstantial case? They need to get this done already.

From Appendix D, page 10.
" Further, as the Court of Criminal Appeals has already recognized, 'the State's theory is hardly unassailable' and is not ' wholly consistent with the circumstantial evidence'. Id. at 259."

I've been back and forth on Darlie's innocence versus guilt. Her behavior was always very questionable and suspicious imo. But to some degree so was Darin's, also imo. So I want to see all the evidence, all of it.

 

[Val830]

There is lots of evidence of her innocence. Missing knife, boot print in blood, unidentified fingerprint, suspicious vehicle seen by neighbor, sock in alley, the list goes on.

Baloney.

There is no missing knife - Devon's blood was rinsed down the drain which we know by its presence in the p-trap of the sink; there is no boot print - and if there was the defense would have jumped on it in her trial & appeals, it's completely made up by an untalented true crime writer with no experience or expertise in crime scene investigation; the "unidentified" finger prints would be more aptly referred to as "unidentifiable" prints and it's so funny that out of all those prints in the house, the only ones belonging to an intruder are the ones that happened to be of too poor quality for comparison purposes; "suspicious vehicle" is nothing but a red herring and does nothing to prove Darlie didn't kill her kids; the sock in the alley is just one more piece of evidence pointing right back to Darlie Routier; and I can go on and on too.

All of these things are unsuccessful defense tricks to try and put doubt in a solid case of Darlie Routier's guilt. Defense attorneys live in mansions b/c they are damn good at inventing doubt. Doesn't mean their arguments are reasonable though and the jury saw through it as did (and does) the appeals and federal courts.

 

[neesaki]

I have poured over this latest report for an embarrassing amount of time in the past two days. Here is what I've determined.

1. The two limb hairs DO NOT MATCH EACH OTHER. The hairs are labelled--10-2589-1A and 10-2589-1B. Look at the status report on under Appendix A. The DNA sequences are different. Hence, they do not match each other. They DO exclude Darin and Darlie (and by default, her biological children).

2. They are NOT the sock hairs. Page 6, Item #2, of DARLIE's latest motion for DNA testing states that the limb hairs from the sock have not yet been tested - she filed this motion this past November, only a month ago. The lab report is dated January 11, 2013 - TEN MONTHS before Darlie motioned to the Court for permission to test the sock hairs.

3. These two hairs HAVE NOT been compared against law enforcement, lab techs, EMTs, or any of the people known to be in the home. Further, considering #2, these hairs were probably just collected from inside the house. You show me a house without an unidentified hair or two and I'll show you a recluse, hermit, or a person suffering with a severe case of OCD. Two hairs in a house do not prove an intruder stabbed Darlie and her children.


Any claims that these hairs came from inside the sock are unsubstantiated. Any claims that these hairs match each other are blatantly false.

That is what I'm gleaning from the report as well. As I said, I'm not that DNA savy, but per the report, the sequences as compared to the revised Cambridge reference sequence are different. I assume that may be some kind of control or baseline (?) that is used in the testing ?...

Sequence for 10-2589.1A

16069-T 16126-C 16319-A 73-G
185-A 228-A 263-G 295-T
315.1-C ins.

Sequence for 10-2589.1B

16311-C 16362-C 239-C 263-G
309.1-C ins. 315.1-C ins.

 

[Val830]

I would also like add that I am starting to feel so desperately sorry for Darlies mother. I know she has not always behaved well, but I would not wish this situation on anyone. This whole thing is horrible.

I absolutely agree with this. Darlie Kee has done and said some deplorable things - but she's doing what a mother does. I don't agree with her tactics but a mother will do anything she can to save her child's life. Compare it to Darlie - who stayed on the phone for 5 minutes, talked to the police about fingerprints and jewelry, rather than trying to save her own dying children's lives. Can you imagine your kid painfully dying a few feet away from you, and NOT touching him, comforting him, trying to save him, etc? They say behavior is not predictable and there's some truth to that, but I can't imagine a scenario where an innocent mother pays no attention to her dying children.

I wish she'd focus on overturning the death penalty rather than pretending her daughter is innocent, but I imagine she's in too much denial to see that her daughter did this.

In any event - if Darlie is guilty, and I fully believe she is - it is absolutely cruel of her to do this to her mother. Her mother believes in her innocence b/c mothers believe their kids when it comes to something important. Darlie Routier is to blame for Darlie Kee's suffering. Darlie Routier is to blame for Drake growing up without a mother.

Tragedy all around in this case and that family has been through suffering I wouldn't wish on anyone. It's ALL caused by Darlie Routier. She is responsible for taking 2 lives and destroying several others.

I have no sympathy for her. I'm not a blood thirsty person but she deserves everything she gets - and a whole lot more.

 

[chlban]

[quote

Next thing you know, it's all over the Internet repeated ad naseum by other people who couldn't be bothered to read the report.

It took me a whopping 15 minutes or so to read it and to know that what's being claimed by Darlie supporters is a bunch of BS

Yes, this rather well sums up the entire DR defense machine. Just report a bunch of false information and try to convince those that have never researched the case to any degree that there is "reasonable" doubt.

No need to let those pesky facts ruin a good defense.

 

[cami]

Cami, you said "Who in Texas said she had superficial wounds and minor bruising? Her doctors who treated her that's who and I am sure they would know"

Totally INCORRECT. The doctors said the wounds were superficial to the carotid sheath- NOT THE SAME THING as a superficial wound.
The doctors comment mean that they were near, but not touching the carotid sheath. They were NOT saying the wounds were superficial. You are using the WRONG definition of superficial.

I know exactly what the doctor said thank you. Yes he testified the wound was superficial to the carotid sheath.

 

[cami]

Cami,
Think about it. Why would anyone undergo surgery for a superficial wound?

I didn't say anything like that? Why would you make that leap? I know what the doctor testified to.

 

[cami]

There is lots of evidence of her innocence. Missing knife, boot print in blood, unidentified fingerprint, suspicious vehicle seen by neighbor, sock in alley, the list goes on.

There is no missing knife, nor is there a bootprint in blood. Darlie has not been excluded as yet by any court to the fingerprints found. Oh yes I know her defence says there not hers but they can say anything they want. A suspicious vehicle? A vehicle didn't commit the murders. No make, no model number, no tag number, no description of occupants was ever given the police about the so called black car watching the Routiers--just another red herring.

You need to get past the trial, it's been 17 years.

 

[cami]

Well, the writ that was filed last month requesting further DNA testing will be granted. The state won't be able to fight it anymore. Once the tests results come back there's a very strong possibility of a new trial. One that doesn't include her family being called trailer trash, her being called a psychopath, a DA obsessed with making sure the jury knows about her breast implants or a forensic quack passing off his opinions as scientific.

Yes because the law has changed, that's the only reason she will be granted further DNA tests. I fail to see how that is going to lead to a new trial. The burden is on Darlie to name this intruder, not the state. So far she's been unable to do that. Two hairs isn't going to do it for her.

 

[cami]

Some one smart enough to leave and someone who may have known that bleeding at A SCENE IS REASON ENOUGH TO LEAVE.[/QUO

Smart enough to leave? Was he supposed to wait around to be caught? Why would he stab three people if he didn't want to see blood?

 

[CathyR]

Baloney.

There is no missing knife - Devon's blood was rinsed down the drain which we know by its presence in the p-trap of the sink; there is no boot print - and if there was the defense would have jumped on it in her trial & appeals, it's completely made up by an untalented true crime writer with no experience or expertise in crime scene investigation; the "unidentified" finger prints would be more aptly referred to as "unidentifiable" prints and it's so funny that out of all those prints in the house, the only ones belonging to an intruder are the ones that happened to be of too poor quality for comparison purposes; "suspicious vehicle" is nothing but a red herring and does nothing to prove Darlie didn't kill her kids; the sock in the alley is just one more piece of evidence pointing right back to Darlie Routier; and I can go on and on too.

All of these things are unsuccessful defense tricks to try and put doubt in a solid case of Darlie Routier's guilt. Defense attorneys live in mansions b/c they are damn good at inventing doubt. Doesn't mean their arguments are reasonable though and the jury saw through it as did (and does) the appeals and federal courts.

The case is not solid. If it was there would be no debate.

 

[Val830]

The case is not solid. If it was there would be no debate.

Bull.

There's debate surrounding the most solid of cases all the time. Sentence an attractive white woman to death and there's debate, whether it's warranted or not.

If she was not sentenced to death, her name would have been forgotten 17 years ago.

 

[cami]

I absolutely agree with this. Darlie Kee has done and said some deplorable things - but she's doing what a mother does. I don't agree with her tactics but a mother will do anything she can to save her child's life. Compare it to Darlie - who stayed on the phone for 5 minutes, talked to the police about fingerprints and jewelry, rather than trying to save her own dying children's lives. Can you imagine your kid painfully dying a few feet away from you, and NOT touching him, comforting him, trying to save him, etc? They say behavior is not predictable and there's some truth to that, but I can't imagine a scenario where an innocent mother pays no attention to her dying children.

I wish she'd focus on overturning the death penalty rather than pretending her daughter is innocent, but I imagine she's in too much denial to see that her daughter did this.

In any event - if Darlie is guilty, and I fully believe she is - it is absolutely cruel of her to do this to her mother. Her mother believes in her innocence b/c mothers believe their kids when it comes to something important. Darlie Routier is to blame for Darlie Kee's suffering. Darlie Routier is to blame for Drake growing up without a mother.

Tragedy all around in this case and that family has been through suffering I wouldn't wish on anyone. It's ALL caused by Darlie Routier. She is responsible for taking 2 lives and destroying several others.

I have no sympathy for her. I'm not a blood thirsty person but she deserves everything she gets - and a whole lot more.

I felt so sorry for Ms. Kee in that Herzog programme. That's what she needs as you noted, stop lying and claiming innocence. She needs to confess to her family what she has done and give them some closure. Let them then fight to have the DP overturned or to have her sentence commuted. It's just such a sad situation all round. I too have no sympathy for Darlie Routier whatsoever but her family doesn't deserve this after all they've done nothing wrong.

 

[cami]

Those kind of previous rulings, before the laws changed, is what got people held in prison for too many years when evidence was not allowed. The bite in the apple was only once and is always upheld no news there. Due to the finicky choice of prosecutors and lawyers to to test what they deem plausible at the time, defendants have been set free later. DNA and cases where not all relevant information was handled over. IS why?

And if that should happen to Darlie no one will be happier than I will. Do you honestly think I or any of us want this woman to be guilty, we don't, nor do I support a death penalty in this case but that's not my call. But I won't count my chickens until the cell door is opened and she's been exonerated. I don't see any of that happening as yet or ever.

This latest motion is the final motion for DNA testing at the state level.

 

[cami]

That is what I'm gleaning from the report as well. As I said, I'm not that DNA savy, but per the report, the sequences as compared to the revised Cambridge reference sequence are different. I assume that may be some kind of control or baseline (?) that is used in the testing ?...

Sequence for 10-2589.1A

16069-T 16126-C 16319-A 73-G
185-A 228-A 263-G 295-T
315.1-C ins.

Sequence for 10-2589.1B

16311-C 16362-C 239-C 263-G
309.1-C ins. 315.1-C ins.

This is taken from the original lab report and the new status report.

These are the two hairs referenced in the new status report:

10-259-1A Microcentrifuge tube labelled - 1879-5034B

10-259 -1B Microcentrifuge tube labelled - 1879-5035C


This is from the original lab report:

1879-5034 is the pubic hair - shaft. In 1996, they DNA tested this hair but got no result.

1879-5035 is a facial hair, which had the result 18,28--doesn't match any of the Routiers. In 1996, they DNA tested this hair but got no result.

As noted the sequences are not the same so these hairs don't match.

the original DNA tests from 1996 are on Darlie's website.

No, it's not that blood on the sock was not tested, it was but not all the stains showed a result.

 

[Val830]

Reading in Appendix D, I can't believe it.... blood stains on the sock, in the fingerprint on the table, on the t-shirt, the knife, and the pillow were not all tested. Even the limb hair in the sock. What? This was a death penalty trial, for pete's sake. It should have been done to infinity, imo. Yet it's just now in the works. That's infuriating, and incompetence on both sides. :moo:

And now wanting the quantitative analyses, not sure what that will prove other than there's not much, or enough there to give any information. I'm not that DNA savy but am wondering if it will be helpful one way or another.

That's been the problem with this case all along, though. The investigation was never thorough, it was rushed through and conducted in a half-a@#*@ manner. And I agree with the appeals court that the State never fully proved Darlie's guilt. What, are they afraid they might find something that won't support their circumstantial case? They need to get this done already.

From Appendix D, page 10.
" Further, as the Court of Criminal Appeals has already recognized, 'the State's theory is hardly unassailable' and is not ' wholly consistent with the circumstantial evidence'. Id. at 259."

I've been back and forth on Darlie's innocence versus guilt. Her behavior was always very questionable and suspicious imo. But to some degree so was Darin's, also imo. So I want to see all the evidence, all of it.

At the time of this investigation, this case had more DNA testing than ANY murder investigation in Texas's history.

DNA testing was simply no where near as advanced then as it is now. In order to test something for DNA - they needed certain types of biological evidence and they needed a sample to be 10x larger than they do today.

 

[neesaki]

At the time of this investigation, this case had more DNA testing than ANY murder investigation in Texas's history.

DNA testing was simply no where near as advanced then as it is now. In order to test something for DNA - they needed certain types of biological evidence and they needed a sample to be 10x larger than they do today.

Awe, your right, I guess this was a long time ago now, wasn't it? Hey, I'm all for it. Whether it was or wasn't tested previously, it should be. They need to get it done and over with. Enough of this BS , IMO . Oh, btw, didn't mean to step on any toes.