Darlie Supporters and Darin Routier

[RobertStJames]

See, you go spouting off at the mouth and then ask the questions!!! LOL When time permits, I'll do some reading up. Its certainly not uncommon for a D.A. to only bring charges on one victim. Its a good question though.

Heh. Mouth-spouting is alas, a besetting sin of mine. I'm curious as to whether DAs are doing this for expedience, strength of case, or in order to have another shot.

RstJ

 

[Yellowrose]

Any lawyer would destroy that case in a week on double jeopardy. Since there's no reason to believe the murders were two separate crimes, but part of the same attack. I've never bought the official line that they were going to re-try Darlie on Devon's murder if they couldn't get a conviction on Damon's. Can you think of any other case that's ever worked that way?
And if the evidence was so strong that she's guilty, why did the DA only file on *one* of the murders?

She's not guilty of the murder(s) plural. She was only tried, and convicted, on one of them. Doesn't that strike anyone as extremely odd? Especially since the evidence was "overwhelming"?

She drops this intruder nonsense, and finally tells the truth, then I think she gets a new trial. And I think that if we could see *all* the evidence, we'd rapidly change our minds on this case. Don't you think there's a reason Dari's jeans are still in an evidence locker, ten years later?


RstJ

Yes I have to agree, extremely odd being tried for "one" murder. Especially in a case such as this. Let's face it we have to "assume" she killed Devon. She should of been tried for both murders simultaniously. Always been one of my pet peeves. Although, I disagree that if in fact it was Darin he did "NOT" want Darlie dead. I'm beginning to think they were both in on it.

 

[RobertStJames]

Yes I have to agree, extremely odd being tried for "one" murder. Especially in a case such as this. Let's face it we have to "assume" she killed Devon. She should of been tried for both murders simultaniously. Always been one of my pet peeves. Although, I disagree that if in fact it was Darin he did "NOT" want Darlie dead. I'm beginning to think they were both in on it.

Jeana is right on this one--DAs do only charge some murders and not others even in cases (Yates) where the murders were carried out as part of the same series of criminal acts. And there was a strong reason only to charge on Damon: his age made Darlie eligible for the DP. And, of course, her fingerprints were on the knife that killed him.

Darin certainly fits the pattern of a family annihalator--controlling, financially in hot water, and, well, just creepy. I don't see what problem two dead kids solves for the two of them. I can definitely see how a dead wife with a 250k insurance policy solves many of Darin's problems.

What would very much help in this case is what was going on before the murders. Why did Darin need $5000 so badly that he tried, twice, to get a loan for that amount? Just how badly was he stretched? He'd been doing business with that bank for years, he had collateral, yet they told him "sorry, only if you put up CDs." If he had CDs, why not just use those? Unless, perhaps, he couldn't sign for them himself. It's still not clear Darlie knew he was trying to get that loan. The official reason was "vacation." This is hard to believe, especially with a baby in the house that there is no evidence Darlie was neglecting. Then Darin tried to say it was for a truck for Dana. This makes even less sense as Darlie herself didn't have the use of a vehicle. So what was the real reason?

Likewise, what was going on with the whole Dana thing? She'd been staying there for two weeks. So what was so important that she had to go home at 9pm that night? Especially seeing as how, as far as I can tell, she and Darin were going to be working the next day. Why didn't she simply stay that night? No one ever gives a reason why she needed to go to a "home" she obviously was not staying at. It's always presented in such a casual way, as if Dana were just stopping in for a visit. She wasn't. She was living there. Effectively, she already *was* home.

Then there's the interviews. I've never read who interviewed Dana or when, much less what she said. We know nothing about the interview at the hospital with Darin other than LE wanted to know where he'd gotten that hole in his jeans from. He says "fixing the fence." But the fence was pretty clearly not fixed.

Lots of holes. The DA would not have presented evidence that pointed at Darin (for obvious reasons) and the defense was being financed by Darin (and nobody pays a lawyer to make themselves look guilty). And, of course, one of the primary sources for info for the books is Darin. He's always interviewed. He always says the same things.

There's a whole 'nother side to this that we have not seen, and, if Darlie continues to insist on mystery intruders who do not exist, we never *will* see it.


RstJ

 

[Yellowrose]

See, you go spouting off at the mouth and then ask the questions!!! LOL When time permits, I'll do some reading up. Its certainly not uncommon for a D.A. to only bring charges on one victim. Its a good question though.

In this particular case it definitely is. It's not like Devon was found in the neighbor's backyard. Those children were killed together, in the same room and in the same house. It's highly unlikely not to be tried for both killings. It was the "KNIFE" they had insufficient proof that the same "KNIFE" killed Devon. I'm sorry but this case reeks of suspicion, I don't believe it was fully solved properly. Let Robert spout, he's entitled to his opinions, he's not doing any harm. :snooty:

 

[Jeana (DP)]

In this particular case it definitely is. It's not like Devon was found in the neighbor's backyard. Those children were killed together, in the same room and in the same house. It's highly unlikely not to be tried for both killings. It was the "KNIFE" they had insufficient proof that the same "KNIFE" killed Devon. I'm sorry but this case reeks of suspicion, I don't believe it was fully solved properly. Let Robert spout, he's entitled to his opinions, he's not doing any harm. :snooty:

Robert's more intelligent than 95% of the other posters who have shown up here trying to support Darlie, so believe me darlin, he doesn't need you to stick up for him.

You didn't say that you are an attorney, so I'd like to know what makes you think that its "highly unlikely" not to be tried for both killings. Its categorically not true. I'm not sure if you know how to research on the internet, but give it a try. I'm sure you'll find plenty of examples of this happening.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Heh. Mouth-spouting is alas, a besetting sin of mine. I'm curious as to whether DAs are doing this for expedience, strength of case, or in order to have another shot.

RstJ

Mouth-spouting is what we all do best. How do you think we all ended up here!! LOL I know one of the attorneys who prosecuted this case, but I can't speak for him. Its my opinion, however, that in this particular case, it was "insurance" in case one of the jurors had a problem convicting a "mother" in this grissly of a murder.

 

[RobertStJames]

Mouth-spouting is what we all do best. How do you think we all ended up here!! LOL I know one of the attorneys who prosecuted this case, but I can't speak for him. Its my opinion, however, that in this particular case, it was "insurance" in case one of the jurors had a problem convicting a "mother" in this grissly of a murder.

Yet if only one juror held out, it would only hang the jury. They could retry Darlie on the same charge. Well, all theory anyway. They got the conviction.

If you run into him again, it would be interesting to hear about Darin's hospital interview. That seemed to raise a whole lotta red flags.


RstJ

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Yet if only one juror held out, it would only hang the jury. They could retry Darlie on the same charge. Well, all theory anyway. They got the conviction.

If you run into him again, it would be interesting to hear about Darin's hospital interview. That seemed to raise a whole lotta red flags.


RstJ

I wouldn't post anything about this case that I've heard from anyone involved. (Except when Darlie's mother told me something and then called me a liar). :angel: :angel: :angel:

 

[RobertStJames]

In this particular case it definitely is. It's not like Devon was found in the neighbor's backyard. Those children were killed together, in the same room and in the same house. It's highly unlikely not to be tried for both killings. It was the "KNIFE" they had insufficient proof that the same "KNIFE" killed Devon.

That knife has always confused me. In Darlie's original statement, it appears she took it off the "floor" and there's the outlines of a bloody knife on the floor in the Roman room, on the carpet. Makes sense. Later, for some reason, it's interpreted as her picking it up off the utility room floor, where there's no indication a knife was dropped. Ok, so Darlie fights with some guy on the couch, gets hacked and stabbed up, then sliced open. Guy drops knife and splits. Simple enough. Except she kept changing the story, dropping the struggling part, changing the location of the knife, etc.

You have to wonder, though, if she did all this "staging" she was supposed to have done, why she'd leave a knife with her blood, Damon's blood, and her fingerprints on it, right on the counter. Not exactly a criminal mastermind, is she?


RstJ

 

[Jeana (DP)]

You have to wonder, though, if she did all this "staging" she was supposed to have done, why she'd leave a knife with her blood, Damon's blood, and her fingerprints on it, right on the counter. Not exactly a criminal mastermind, is she?

RstJ

What do you think she should have done with it?

 

[RobertStJames]

What do you think she should have done with it?

Left it on the living room floor.


RstJ

 

[cami]

That knife has always confused me. In Darlie's original statement, it appears she took it off the "floor" and there's the outlines of a bloody knife on the floor in the Roman room, on the carpet. Makes sense. Later, for some reason, it's interpreted as her picking it up off the utility room floor, where there's no indication a knife was dropped. Ok, so Darlie fights with some guy on the couch, gets hacked and stabbed up, then sliced open. Guy drops knife and splits. Simple enough. Except she kept changing the story, dropping the struggling part, changing the location of the knife, etc.

In Darlie's voluntary statement here she says "I ran back towards the Utility Room and realized there was a 'big, white handled knife lying on the floor....and I grabbed the knife thinking he was in the garage.... I looked over and saw the door shut to the garage"

Sounds pretty clear to me she is talking about picking the knife up from the floor in front of the Utility Room not the carpet in the Roman Room. She also says in her 911 call that the intruder "ran out to the garage.....threw the knife down......"

She changes her story because she doesn't know that the knife handle is not conducive to finger prints and she has to explain how her's and not an unknown intruder's would have gotten on the knife. The sock's out in the alley most likely by this time and Damon needed those two more stab wounds to finish him off after he moved to where he was found.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Left it on the living room floor.


RstJ

Yeah, but how would she explain the fingerprints if she doesn't pick it up???

By the way, a website that contains photographs of actual defense wounds:

(CAUTION - GRAPHIC PHOTOGRAPHS)
http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/autopsy_photos.html

 

[RobertStJames]

Yeah, but how would she explain the fingerprints if she doesn't pick it up???

By the way, a website that contains photographs of actual defense wounds:

(CAUTION - GRAPHIC PHOTOGRAPHS)
http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/autopsy_photos.html

Graphic all right. And illustrative of what *fake* wounds look like. Unless you think Macdonald was attacked by "hippies."

Anyway, Darlie wouldn't be the one explaining fingerprints on the knife if she hadn't picked it up. Someone else's would have been there. You know, the guy who's hair was found on the knife, and the guy who didn't have a knife wound.

Bet he got scratched, though. LE is supposed to have photographed him. You ever hear what the photos showed, or see them yourself?



RstJ

 

[dasgal]

True. But until she drops that "intruder" nonsense, her appeals aren't going to go anywhere. And her lying is a major problem. Even if she came out and said "he did it! I saw him!" who's going to believe her now, almost ten years later?
I think there is evidence against Darin in the form of those jeans, but if Darlie is going to take the stand and start babbling about 300lb intruders, black cars, and mysterious phone calls, how can a case be made?

I know that my thesis relies on Darlie being so totally brainwashed that she'd lie to protect Darin even though he'd killed her "babies." Yet, if she wasn't 100% sure, do we think she'd make that kind of accusation? At least, at the time? If she'd said "I don't know if it was him or not" then the DA most likely goes after Darin. But with her saying "It absolutely positively could not have been him" the DA really had no choice.

Thanks for the insight into LE thinking. Am I right in saying that the investigation into the death of Devon Routier is considered to be an open case?

I think Darlie could get a new trial based on:
a) making a full, written statement covering not only the night
of the murder, but the days/weeks leading up to it.
b) taking an FBI-administered polygraph to verify that statement
c) agreeing to testify against Darin, if not as an eyewitness, then to
the events leading up to the murders
d) pleading guilty to accessory after the fact for having lied to protect him.

RstJ

I think you are trying to be thoughful about this, so consider this.....what possible motive would they both be caught in a web of lies. There is only one thing that holds them together. Both Darlie and Darin have moved on years ago, yet they stay married. In front of the cameras they "kinda" support each other. Behind each other's backs they fillet each other....within reason.
What is the logical reason for this behavior? I can only think of one. Darlie did it (due to the evidence at the scene) and Darin plays a big part in it although not physically. They can't bust each other without giving the bust to themselves.
Take care.

 

[Yellowrose]

I think you are trying to be thoughful about this, so consider this.....what possible motive would they both be caught in a web of lies. There is only one thing that holds them together. Both Darlie and Darin have moved on years ago, yet they stay married. In front of the cameras they "kinda" support each other. Behind each other's backs they fillet each other....within reason.
What is the logical reason for this behavior? I can only think of one. Darlie did it (due to the evidence at the scene) and Darin plays a big part in it although not physically. They can't bust each other without giving the bust to themselves.
Take care.

Dasgal, you are so RIGHT! :clap:

 

[RobertStJames]

I think you are trying to be thoughful about this, so consider this.....what possible motive would they both be caught in a web of lies. There is only one thing that holds them together. Both Darlie and Darin have moved on years ago, yet they stay married. In front of the cameras they "kinda" support each other. Behind each other's backs they fillet each other....within reason.
What is the logical reason for this behavior? I can only think of one. Darlie did it (due to the evidence at the scene) and Darin plays a big part in it although not physically. They can't bust each other without giving the bust to themselves.
Take care.

I'm not sure just how much more "busted" Darlie Routier can get. She's on death row! I'm not really sure where you think Darlie can move on to. Her options are kinda limited.

Darin, on the other hand, has every reason in the world to stay loyal. Darlie'd have to be insane not to suspect him, but suspicion is not proof. Had those prints been Darin's on the knife, they would have arrested him no matter what his wife had said. As it was, they had circumstantial evidence pointing at both of them, with one (Darlie) alibing Darin. So the DA made the case they had. I'm sure they had many a night wondering just what was going on. They also had two dead children and only two possible perps.

I really don't know. It's not logical. If she's guilty, why not just confess and remove any shadow of suspicion over Darin? If she thinks he did it, why not focus her appeals on that? Instead, she clutters up her appeals with mystery perps who do not exist. As long as that continues, she'll stay in prison.


RstJ

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Graphic all right. And illustrative of what *fake* wounds look like. Unless you think Macdonald was attacked by "hippies."

Anyway, Darlie wouldn't be the one explaining fingerprints on the knife if she hadn't picked it up. Someone else's would have been there. You know, the guy who's hair was found on the knife, and the guy who didn't have a knife wound.

Bet he got scratched, though. LE is supposed to have photographed him. You ever hear what the photos showed, or see them yourself?

RstJ

I was talking about the wife's (McDonald's) injuries, not his.

Anyway, since Darlie committed the murders not knowing the material on the handle of the knife was not conducive to prints, she had to explain them away - you know that.

I can't remember seeing any photos of Darin. (Maybe someone else reading can help us out on that). But, as I've opined before, I think the cops hated him and WANTED to be able to charge him. Why wouldn't they if he had any signs of being involved?

 

[tezi]

Is it me, or does Darin have the DUH look?

Between the two of them, they might have one functioning brain cell, and for the life of me, I don't understand why they are still married....

 

[dasgal]

I'm not sure just how much more "busted" Darlie Routier can get. She's on death row! I'm not really sure where you think Darlie can move on to. Her options are kinda limited.

Darin, on the other hand, has every reason in the world to stay loyal. Darlie'd have to be insane not to suspect him, but suspicion is not proof. Had those prints been Darin's on the knife, they would have arrested him no matter what his wife had said. As it was, they had circumstantial evidence pointing at both of them, with one (Darlie) alibing Darin. So the DA made the case they had. I'm sure they had many a night wondering just what was going on. They also had two dead children and only two possible perps.

I really don't know. It's not logical. If she's guilty, why not just confess and remove any shadow of suspicion over Darin? If she thinks he did it, why not focus her appeals on that? Instead, she clutters up her appeals with mystery perps who do not exist. As long as that continues, she'll stay in prison.


RstJ

You don't understand. Darlie is on death row WITH supporters. If she were to admit to any part of the murders, she would still be on death row, but WITHOUT supporters. She knows she can't roll too far on Darin without Darin rolling back. She will go to the death chamber saying she didn't do it.