Darlie Routier asks for DNA testing

[mollymalone]

From juniordetective--I think the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals made the right decision to order DNA testing of certain items. I am writing to address one part of that court's opinion where the court talks about the strength of the State's case. The court found it odd that Darlie would volunteer that she had handled the murder weapon

and thereby had probably ruined "any prints the intruder may have left." The reason I am writing about that observation is that the killings occurred more than 12 years

ago and I still have not seen even one person put that statement in the proper context. Now, I am not talking about when Darlie was on the phone with 911, the dispatcher said not to touch anything, and Darlie responded that she had already picked up the knife. I am talking about, according to one poster, the statement that Darlie completely volunteered about a minute and 10 seconds later where she blurts out that she had touched the knife and if she had not done so, "maybe we could have gotten some prints." You have to remember that her two children are right there, both of them have been stabbed multiple times, and one is still alive so that maybe he can be helped. I know some posters have said, "why would you even care about getting prints on the knife given the horror right before you?" The almost singular response has been that she wanted to explain why her prints would be found on the knife. Well, from outward appearances, she is concerned about why her prints would be found on the knife. Indeed, she stated the line about picking up the knife and thus not being able to get the intruder's prints several times, including when she was in the hospital after the killings.

The thing you have to remember when you are dealing with Darlie is that you are dealing with a world-class manipulator and the line about not being able to get any prints is evidence of that. Yes, outwardly she is concerned about her prints being on the knife. But that is a cover for what she was actually concerned about. She was not

concerned about whose prints would be found on the knife, she was concerned with whose prints would not be found on the knife. What she has tried to get us to believe is that if she had not picked up the knife, the intruder's prints could have been recovered from the knife. Apparently the surface of the knife was not conducive to getting prints in any event, but her explanation assumes that there actually was an intruder. If there was no intruder, then no such prints could have been deposited on the knife. Since Darlie knew that once the knife was tested it would not show prints from an intruder, she steered us towards the only other plausible explanation: that the intruder's prints were on the knife and she absentmindedly wiped them away by picking up the knife. You have to be careful folks, you are dealing with a person who knows exactly which buttons to push to get what she wants, and she has fooled a lot of people by making them believe that the intruder existed and she unfortunately wiped away evidence of that. I have read comments from people that say the 911 call is evidence of her innocence, but to me, she is setting up her defense during that call (such as

telling Darin that "someone came in here and intentionally did this!" as if Darin would have otherwise concluded that someone accidentally did it.) The defense has never given us any reason to believe that there was any intruder.

The Routiers had no choice but to push for the DNA testing, but now they are in a tough spot: DNA testing can not show the existence of that which never existed in the first place. From what I have read, while exonerations through DNA testing make all of the headlines, the vast majority of DNA tests only show what is already known, that the right person is behind bars. The Routiers have to hope for what other people seeking DNA testing have wished for: that the test somehow gets screwed up and helps the defense rather than the prosecution. I don't think that will happen in the Routier case.

I agree with your assessment, and in that 12 years there's been no proof that an intruder existed. There wasn't then when it happened and at that time was the best opportunity Darlie had of proving there was an intruder.

 

[6angels]

Excuse Me?!?! Maybe I'm confused,
Are you thinking about the book Hush Little Babies?

I have this book but have not got a chance to read it yet.. I did read that the writer has now changed her mind after writing the book.

 

[6angels]

I need to get that book but its like $100! I am not paying that, lol.

look on ebay and amazon

 

[whitywendy]

I came to this site believing Darlie was innocent. I think I wanted her to be, more than anything. After being told to read the transcripts, then reading EVERY single post here, I truly believe she is where she needs to be. With that said, I am glad this is happening. IMO, it will be the last nail in her coffin, so to speak.

Alcina - I also came to this site for the same reason. Wasn't it heartbreaking when you read the key evidence in the transcripts. I still remember how it made me feel.

One thing I wanted to point out in regards to the testing and the ruling. If you read the ruling the judge mentions the bread knife and the screen. Someone correct me if I am wrong but I don't believe Darlie has ever disputed the evidence found on this knife. She didn't ask for it to be retested. As the judge said why would an intruder get into the house go into the kitchen, get the bread knife, go back outside, cut the screen, come back in, put back were it belonged.

 

[christine2448]

DNA testing in Darlie Routier case won't offer indisputable truth
[SIZE=-1]Dallas Morning News - Dallas,TX,USA
Don't read too much into the court ruling that will allow DNA testing for infamous death row inmate Darlie Routier.[/SIZE]

 

[christine2448]

Mother-In-Law Believes In Routier's Innocence
[SIZE=-1]KCBD-TV - Lubbock,TX,USA
Family members of Darlie Routier say they have new hope, now that the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals has granted new DNA testing.[/SIZE]

 

[gaia227]

I just recently started reading in depth about Darlie Routier - I knew the general case history but not the specifics. It seems pretty obvious to me that Darlie is guilty but I still support the DNA testing. Why not? Lets know for sure so there can be no more debate.

I would like to say that I visited a website, I think a pro-Darlie website and while they did put up a disclaimer about graphic photos I was not prepared for how graphic. Most of the time when you see those diclaimers they show the bloody crime scene, clothes, maybe the body covered up. I was not prepared nor did I want to see the full shots of the boys covered head to toe in blood or the one of one of them on the morgue table with his wounds very apparent. I am really trying to get these images out of my head. If it were an adult it would bother me but not as much as seeing a little boy in that condition. They only flashed on the screen for a second before I closed them but it was long enough to burn itself into my memory.

 

[whitywendy]

I just recently started reading in depth about Darlie Routier - I knew the general case history but not the specifics. It seems pretty obvious to me that Darlie is guilty but I still support the DNA testing. Why not? Lets know for sure so there can be no more debate.

I would like to say that I visited a website, I think a pro-Darlie website and while they did put up a disclaimer about graphic photos I was not prepared for how graphic. Most of the time when you see those diclaimers they show the bloody crime scene, clothes, maybe the body covered up. I was not prepared nor did I want to see the full shots of the boys covered head to toe in blood or the one of one of them on the morgue table with his wounds very apparent. I am really trying to get these images out of my head. If it were an adult it would bother me but not as much as seeing a little boy in that condition. They only flashed on the screen for a second before I closed them but it was long enough to burn itself into my memory.

I completely know what you mean. I would recommend to stay away from that Media Tried Justice Denied book if you can't get those images out of your head. It is WORSE. I had to leave that book in my car at home so I would not look at it anymore. Something draws you back though. VERY VERY SAD

 

[StellaTraver]

Mother-In-Law Believes In Routier's Innocence
[SIZE=-1]KCBD-TV - Lubbock,TX,USA[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Family members of Darlie Routier say they have new hope, now that the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals has granted new DNA testing.[/SIZE]

Thanks for posting these articles!

 

[weasel]

<<I don't believe Darlie has ever disputed the evidence found on this knife. She didn't ask for it to be retested>>

I think the reason she doesn't want the bread knife retested is because she has always claimed all along that the investigators cross-contaminated the knife when they dusted for fingerprints.

 

[thefragile7393]

Even her own attorney seems to be tempering expectations that test results would win Ms. Routier the right to a new trial:
"It's not a long shot, but it's certainly not more likely than not," he said. Which I took to mean: Don't place any bets on it.

I love legal-ese! The art of saying something without coming out and saying it.

I'm new to this case...and I'm afraid to get too deep in due to the deaths and the nature of them...but can someone point me to why she wasn't tried for the other boy's murder? I'm not sure where to even begin to look for this info on here.

 

[enigma]

I love legal-ese! The art of saying something without coming out and saying it.

I'm new to this case...and I'm afraid to get too deep in due to the deaths and the nature of them...but can someone point me to why she wasn't tried for the other boy's murder? I'm not sure where to even begin to look for this info on here.

There are 2 trains of thought on this one....

1-) they wanted to see what the outcome of Damon's was and if it came back NG then they could try her for Devon's.
2-) Devon's blood was not found on the murder weapon, only the blood of Damon and Darlie.

Also in the state of Texas, there are 2 DP qualifiers in this case, one is the death of a child 5 or under, the other is 2 or more murders.

Only the prosecutors know for sure why only Damon's death was tried and I wouldn't even begin to try to get into the mindsets of those guys....

 

[AmandaBrown23]

Leaving one child alive doesnt really prove that she didnt do it. There could be a ton of reasons why that one was spared. Maybe if they all were killed she thought it would make her look guilty, maybe she didnt have enough time, or maybe he was her favorite who knows. All I know is that I really do believe she did this and its horrible.

 

[philamena]

I have this book but have not got a chance to read it yet.. I did read that the writer has now changed her mind after writing the book.

Hi trinasangels,
The book didn't change my mind about who killed the children...it actually confirmed my thoughts about Darlie. I bet you will find it informative.

 

[deanws]

I saw her on TV two days ago. She is looking old. The years in prison have been hard on her.

 

[philamena]

Oh really? Gosh I wish I could have seen her.

 

[cami]

Hey lady.

If's it's unknown DNA on her shirt, then I'd say, "yeah well it might be time to eat a big steaming helping of crow."

If these tests prove that Darlie is innocent, I'll pour the gravy on our crow pie.

Actually, I think the supporters believe we all hate Darlie and can't wait for them to push the plunger. I know I don't hate Darlie, I hate the act she committed but would gladly rejoice with her if she is innocent and gets out of prison. Of course I don't believe that will happen. Look at the MacDonald dna results....the hair he claimed belong to the killer was his own and the one, tiny unsourced hair under one of his daughter's fingernails is now what he claims proves he's innocent. But there was also grass and dirt under the nail so that tells me the child didn't have her nails cleaned before bed. Unsourced hair is not reasonable doubt and will not generate a new trial...there has to be some corrobroating evidence of guilt.

 

[CyberLaw]

When the tests come back and points to Darlie guilt, I can just read the press release.

DNA test flawed, says family.

Lab tech is biased against Darlie, says family

Wrong DNA test used, says family.

Re do test, because we just know Darlie is innocent, says family.

Lab does shoddy work, says family.

Wrong DNA material used, says family.

Test are not conclusive of guilt, says family

ETC.............

 

[Jeana (DP)]

When the tests come back and points to Darlie guilt, I can just read the press release.

DNA test flawed, says family.

Lab tech is biased against Darlie, says family

Wrong DNA test used, says family.

Re do test, because we just know Darlie is innocent, says family.

Lab does shoddy work, says family.

Wrong DNA material used, says family.

Test are not conclusive of guilt, says family

ETC.............

You've nailed it CyberLaw. I'm not sure if I mentioned this on these threads in the past, but when Darlie's mother and I corresponded way back in the day, I made a comment that Darlie's supporters wouldn't believe she did it even if there was videotaped proof. They would say it was doctored. She didn't deny that. So, its like banging one's head against a brick wall.

I do take comfort in the fact, however, that we've managed to knock quite a few people off of the fence onto the side of guilt. Many of them said it broke their hearts, but they had to be honest with themselves.

 

[CyberLaw]

Jeana: Well a big hello and happy 4th of July to you, your family and friends.

WE have similar areas of logic and reasoning. We both look at facts, evidence, logic and sound reasoning. Sometimes these are the areas that others need help in. A lot of people may use emotion and their own "reasoning" but when the facts trump their emotions and unsound reasoning, that is where we prevail.

Keep up the good work........:clap:.