As far as something I saw that was in the transcripts about " the blood of her babies on the back of her shirt". There was evidence that states that the "spatter of blood" was not consistant with her being the one stabbing. As far as her injuries, she went through $10,000 worth of surgery and her injuries were very extensive(I have seen the pictures). I firmly stick by that she is innocent and have a lot of facts to say so.
Why? What was the motive?
- Thread starter VespaElf
- Start date
As far as the fingerprints and also other hair( did not belong to Darlie or anyone in the house), Darlie has requested several times that it be tested and was denied or simply ignored. Why would they deny any requests for DNA when it could either make them more innocent or guilty? There are more advanced testing that could prove this all and no one wants it done except darlie and her supporters? Sounds kinda funny dont you think?
I have a couple questions have any of you ever been through a violent attack? How the hell are you going to know how your words are going to come out when you have been bruatlly attacked? If anyone here has ever been through a severe attack and then to see one of your boys dead,tried to save the other, your mind is going crazy with or without drugs. By the way does anyone know about the fact that there was another suspect and it was one of the investigators sons, he just got out of prison for another drive by shooting and then was picked up for questioning on this case?! Then the investigator was able to "plead the fifth". Not to mention another murder a week later that happened close to where this case was, somehow no one knows of this case. An intruder was reported.
There was more then one bloody print as well as pubic hair and other limb hairs and they DO outrule the fact that it is darlie's or anyone else's that lived it that house. She has requested for further testing and has been denied. Why? Why not just do the damn test and get this over with? I'll tell you I wouldn't want to "play the game" on these tests if I were guilty.
excatly the point. WHY? There isnt a reason....why would she not kill her other son and darren? That doesnt really make sense since she didnt have any money problems...the financial records indicate they had over 8,000 dollars in thier bank account and that all of thier bills were paid. So it's not money. also why would a nurse lie on the stand about darlies injuries when clearly she had many injuries. Specifically the bruising on her arms, now anyone that has seen the pics of darlie has seen this. so why would the nurse lie?
ok well first thing about the fingerprints, they dont match anyone that lived in the house....darlie,darren,and the 3 kids,just to clarify,so that leaves the fact that someone else was in that house during the murders and attack. Also just because your 6 ft tall doesnt mean that your hands are automatically big....I say do the tests that darlie has been requesting all this time and she will be released.
well, well...lets bring up Jeff Macdonald in comparison. That is a subject I know a lot about. I guess no one knows about the new evidence that has finally been tested for DNA on the JM case...not him...as well as the statement that was sworn in last month from the mother of Helena Stoeckly that said that the story about her and her friends being there and killing his family was true. Helena told this to her mother on 2 occasions,SOBER, and wanted to make it right....finally after all this time helena's mother has told the truth....her statement was made and submitted last month.
you know what really bothers me and it is just one of many things that makes me believe in her innocence....why did she only get convicted of one of her sons deaths if she is so guilty? they say another knife, well where is it? Thats a piece that makes me think twice.
Because she was only tried on one of the sons.
JM murdered his family. Plain and simple truth. He has nothing to do with this case.
JMO8778
..at the beach!
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 5,554
- Reaction score
- 42
it wasn't just a diet pill,it was prescription amphetamines...speed,of sorts.I think he took too many for too long and it made him manic...ragingly manic.And he snapped.
Missi: Please answer the following:
Why did the dog not bark when the "intruder" came in to a house and murdered two boys in a vicious attack. But when the person whom he knew came with the cops, he barked like crazy.
Why was there not more damage to the "personal" possessions" of Darlie during this life and death struggle. A flower vase was upended. Or actually place on the floor, the flowers were not disturbed and the vase not broken.
Why was the crime scene cleaned up, wow what a considerate "intruder" to clean up at the sink.
Why were no shards of glass on Darlie's feet, when she ran through the "kitchen" after the intruder. She told LE "she chased" the intruder, but in actually it was well proven that she walked, not ran.
When I read the crime scene analysis of McD case, the facts of the analysis are very much the same as in Darlie case.
Darlie mentioned in an interview that the boys lived a full life. Sure at age 5 and 6.
Why were the motion lights not tripped by the intruder and there were no signs of footprints outside the window that "the intruder" came io through, nor was the dust disturbed on the sill.
Why was Darlie left alive and the two boys viciously stabbed, in what can only be deemed "anger" and "rage" in the knife stabs of the boys.
How many times "has a shaggy" stranger and intruder been "named" as the suspect only to be determined later that there was no intruder.
Why was there no sign of robbery, with valuable items in plain sight. What was the motive of the break in by the "intruder". To kill two innocent boys.
Why did the "intruder" flee after killing two boys. Was he afraid of the unarmed Darlie when he had the knife.
Why did the parents try and were turned down for a bank loan if they had money in the bank.
Days later after the crime,when the smell of blood and death were still lingering in the air, did Darlie comment when entering the house, that it will cost money to clean up all the mess from the blood. Not a tear shed for the two boys who were the source of the blood.
Why was there no blood trail or any sign what so ever outside the house of any intruder. Not a drop of blood, not a trail, nothing.
Where did the pattern of bruises come from if Darlie "only" struggled with the "intruder", she had bruises up her arms, from what.......and why were the bruises not following a well established pattern of "colour".
Why was Darlie chewing gum, in cut off shorts at the "ceremony" at the grave mere days after her boys were killed.
Why were there "hesitation" wounds at the site of Darlie's neck injury, did the "intruder" have second thought or hesitated when after he viciously stabbed two innocent boys to death thought twice about injuring their adult mother.
Why did the dog not bark when the "intruder" came in to a house and murdered two boys in a vicious attack. But when the person whom he knew came with the cops, he barked like crazy.
Why was there not more damage to the "personal" possessions" of Darlie during this life and death struggle. A flower vase was upended. Or actually place on the floor, the flowers were not disturbed and the vase not broken.
Why was the crime scene cleaned up, wow what a considerate "intruder" to clean up at the sink.
Why were no shards of glass on Darlie's feet, when she ran through the "kitchen" after the intruder. She told LE "she chased" the intruder, but in actually it was well proven that she walked, not ran.
When I read the crime scene analysis of McD case, the facts of the analysis are very much the same as in Darlie case.
Darlie mentioned in an interview that the boys lived a full life. Sure at age 5 and 6.
Why were the motion lights not tripped by the intruder and there were no signs of footprints outside the window that "the intruder" came io through, nor was the dust disturbed on the sill.
Why was Darlie left alive and the two boys viciously stabbed, in what can only be deemed "anger" and "rage" in the knife stabs of the boys.
How many times "has a shaggy" stranger and intruder been "named" as the suspect only to be determined later that there was no intruder.
Why was there no sign of robbery, with valuable items in plain sight. What was the motive of the break in by the "intruder". To kill two innocent boys.
Why did the "intruder" flee after killing two boys. Was he afraid of the unarmed Darlie when he had the knife.
Why did the parents try and were turned down for a bank loan if they had money in the bank.
Days later after the crime,when the smell of blood and death were still lingering in the air, did Darlie comment when entering the house, that it will cost money to clean up all the mess from the blood. Not a tear shed for the two boys who were the source of the blood.
Why was there no blood trail or any sign what so ever outside the house of any intruder. Not a drop of blood, not a trail, nothing.
Where did the pattern of bruises come from if Darlie "only" struggled with the "intruder", she had bruises up her arms, from what.......and why were the bruises not following a well established pattern of "colour".
Why was Darlie chewing gum, in cut off shorts at the "ceremony" at the grave mere days after her boys were killed.
Why were there "hesitation" wounds at the site of Darlie's neck injury, did the "intruder" have second thought or hesitated when after he viciously stabbed two innocent boys to death thought twice about injuring their adult mother.
whitywendy
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 618
- Reaction score
- 27
Whoa Missy - have you been talking to yourself? I was trying to read your posts and it sounds like you were conversating with someone but there are no other posts besides yours.
First of all, if you have researched this case as you stated, then you WOULD KNOW the reason why they only tried her for one of the boy's death. The same reason other people who are have killed multiple people. The DA saves the other for "JUST IN CASE". Just in case Darlie was to get off on a technicality, they would bring her back and charge her for the death of her other son. AND since Damon was 6 years old, that qualified for the death penalty.
Question for you: IF they had money in the bank WHY did the bank turn them down twice for a $5,000 loan just days before the murders? AND you obviously skipped over some facts in your research because there was a policy on Darlie. The baby was the only one without a policy. OH, and IF YOU READ THE TRANSCRIPTS, you would see that they owed American Express appx. $8,000, behind at least two months on their mortgage. IF THEY HAD $8,000 then why didn't Darin get his car out of the shop? Like I said I think you have skipped over some very interesting guilt proving facts while you were researching.
whitywendy
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 618
- Reaction score
- 27
If you read the transcripts you will understand why Patterson took the 5th. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO RECORD SOMEONE WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE/CONSENT. BOTTOM LINE.... had nothing to do with his son. He was saving his own butt because Darlie's attorney was going to press this issue.
Not to mention another murder a week later that happened close to where this case was, somehow no one knows of this case. An intruder was reported.[/quote]
Well another lapse in your research I see. The crime you are speaking of had to do with a rapist in the Dallas area, no where near where Ms Darlie lived. HE broke in with every intention of rape and used the women's kids against them to get them to do what he wanted.
THERE IS NO PROOF WHAT SO EVER THAT DARLIE WAS RAPED.
whitywendy
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 618
- Reaction score
- 27
No what has been said is that the issues she was dealing with in her life at the time (money problems, unhappy with self., ie diet pills, staying at home all day long with 3 kids with no transportation) made her depression worse and the diet pills just fueled it even more.
Have you ever taken diet pills? I have and they do mess with your mind. They make you very testy, impatient, argumentative and easily angered. Can't sleep worth crap. Depending on how long you are on them, it will just get worse. AND SHE WAS ON STRONGER DIET PILLS than what is on the market today. It is the same thing as speed, crack, coke, meth. Why do you think it is so regulated? I do not believe the government would allow 1 million people access to prescription diet pills or we wouldn't have so many people over weight now would we.
cami
Keep your fork......
It would appear that your research let you down. If you had researched this case, you'd know that "did not match anyone in the house" is not true. Darlie cannot be excluded as having left the prints.
We all have unsourced hair in our homes. We all transfer hair daily and we all drop hair daily. An unsourced pubic hair really doesn't mean anything without corroborating evidence of guilt. That hair and the limb hair could have come from anywhere.
cami
Keep your fork......
Another badly researched case on your part Misi. MacDonald's hair (E5), the one he has stated for 30 years would belong to his wife's killer, was found clutched in his wife's dead hand. DNA testing proved it's his hair.
One tiny unsourced hair was found under his youngest daughter's fingernail. So was grass and dirt and a blood soaked blue pajama fibre from Mac's pajamas he wore the night he killed her. Her fingernails were not cleaned prior to her going to bed that night, nor were her hands bagged at the CS.
No dna in either hair, blood, no fingerprints, etc of Helena Stockley were found at the MacDonald crime scene nor was any dna, hair, fingerprints, fibres etc., found belonging to Greg Mitchell.
LOL again, Helena said anything to anybody. Her many confessions were not consistant with the crime scene, nor consistant with Mac's version of the crime. She was a pathetic drug addict who would have done anything for attention.
MacDonald in an amphetemene fueled rage murdered his wife and two baby daughters.
whitywendy
New Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 618
- Reaction score
- 27
:slap: you go Cami!!!:clap:
cami
Keep your fork......
LOL, I know the MacDonald case, unlike said poster. Anyone here knows it's my favourite case or was anyway. I started researching back in 1999. We have a group on another website that I am part of. All the documents pertaining to Macdonald are now online so MacDonald cannot hide behind the skirts of a paranoid schizoid drug addict...Helena Stockley any longer. The evidence of his guilt is overwhelming. How he got to her mother is just disgusting, I am sure he put the new wife up to it.
Similar threads
Online statistics
- Members online
- 180
- Guests online
- 1,096
- Total visitors
- 1,276