Why? What was the motive?

[whitywendy]

No no no, my friend. The dna tests have been completed. There are no dna tests that show MacDonald's innocence at all because he's guilty as sin.

Helena was not seen by an MP anywhere near the MacDonald house. A woman wearing a floppy hat and a raincoat was seen by one MP ..Ken Mica....no one else. That mp also testified to the fact the woman he saw had "nice legs". MacDonald described the alleged woman in his house as wearing muddy boots.

A phone call? Really? From Jimmy Friar right? Why doesn't MacDonald remember this phone call? Why are there no phone records of this call. Why didn't the defense put Jimmy on the stand during the trial to testify to this alleged phone call?

Helena's mother can sign all the affidavits she wants. Why did she testify that her daughter was a drug addicted attention seeker who would have done anything for Prince Beasley including confessing to murder?

Helena was a small time snitch who Beasley used...she was not a informant for the military...get real, she was a 17 year old drug addict who would have said anything to anybody. One of the men she named as having been in that house that night was in jail at the time. She also confessed she saw MacDonald committing the murders.

Well yeah MacDonald alleges she was threatened by a prosecutor but the defence confirmed at trial that she told them exactly what she told the prosecutor.

MacDonald's injuries were not extensive by any means. Listen all the documents are on the net...go and read them.

When MacDonald can refute the blood evidence, refute the pajama top evidence, refute the bedsheet evidence, he might get someone to listen to him. Even his own experts at trial agreed with prosecution. He's lost every single appeal, no case has been litigated more than his. He's a brutal killer a psycopath who shows no remorse whatsoever.

Here's the link for you. You can read all the transcripts from the Article 32, the Grand Jury, the Trial. All the medical documents are there, etc. You can read the doctors testimony for yourself...all about Mac's little booboos. The only serious injury he had was the one he self-inflicted at the bathroom sink.

My research has led to the truth, the truth that Mac is an ice pick baby killer and he's where he belongs.

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/transcripts.html

Here's a link to the doctor's testimony....as you can see Mac was not seriously injured at all.

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/tt-1979jul30-bronstein.html

I bet you still have not :silenced: her. But once I again I say BRAVO and KUDO'S :clap:

 

[whitywendy]

I don't think anyone here said that prescriptions diet pills have made anyone a killer.

Please then point out the evidence that proves Darlie is innocent? If there's a lot more to this case than is written here, we'd like to hear it..well I would. None of us here want to believe that Darlie brutally killed her boys but there's no way to give her an out. There is zero evidence of an intruder in that home.

Yes, Missy, we are all open to NEW evidence to prove her innocence. If you read back, I was originally a believer of her being innocent. But after reading all of the transcripts and some very helpful and insighful posts here, I HAVE NOT DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT DARLIE MURDERED HER BEAUTIFUL LITTLE BOYS AND ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT SHE MIGHT GET AWAY IT.

 

[Missi]

There was a rape kit done and somehow those results "disappeared", plus my question is if there was no rape as you say or at least an attempted rape then where did the pubic hairs come from? They didn't match Darrin or Darlie....

Are you serious? The pubic hairs could of come from Joe Blow repairing some kind of problem in the home. These types of hair can wonder in on your shoes. The results didn't disappear. It was proven that she was not raped!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Read the transcripts.............. then we can have a healthy discussion..[/quote]

That may be true about transfer of hairs, but God forbid you are ever attacked in your home and there are hairs that can prove someone else was in your home and they don't believe you, bet that won't feel too good will it? If you are so set on believing that any hairs can just appear in someones home then why is it so hard to believe that they could have been an intruder....doesn't make sense that you could believe hairs can get into someones home by transfer and not that someone broke in.....I HAVE READ THE TRANSCRIPTS.....we just believe differently, but it does not mean what I am reading and researching is wrong, maybe your info is....guess we will never know until the truth comes out and when it does IF I am wrong I would fully admit that and I hope that you would do the same if it came out the other way. We can still have a healthy discussion or at least I think so just because we have a difference of opinion. I am willing to hear whatever anyone says and I am sharing info that I have seen, it doesn't seem that I am as welcome.

 

[Missi]

Yes, Missy, we are all open to NEW evidence to prove her innocence. If you read back, I was originally a believer of her being innocent. But after reading all of the transcripts and some very helpful and insighful posts here, I HAVE NOT DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT DARLIE MURDERED HER BEAUTIFUL LITTLE BOYS AND ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT SHE MIGHT GET AWAY IT.

I will compile the info I have found that makes me believe she is innocent and I will send it to you. I have an entire case file on DR so give me a little time and I will present it.

 

[CyberLaw]

Missi: I am looking forward to your presentation of the FACTS. But please make sure when you present the FACTS that you have supporting evidence. I look forward to "a logical, critical analysis using reasoning to rebut the facts that you present.

 

[Mary456]

Plus if you know this case like you say then you would know that there have been DNA results that have come back that were not available in the 70's that has info that exonerates him.

What specific DNA test results are you referring to, Missi?

 

[Missi]

YES I WAS IN FACT BRUTALLY ATTACKED. I REMEMBER EVERY FREAKING SECOND OF IT. HOW ABOUT YOU?

As a matter a fact yes I have....I was knocked out and do not remember everything, so to have someone say that I was a liar would totally be devestaing....so now I ask you, if there was even remotely anything that says that you may or may not have been attacked how would you feel if there were people that said, "no that didnt happen, you did that to yourself". That would suck. All I am saying is to me there is reasonable doubt and enough for me to say I do think she is innocent. Not every case is cut and dry. I am not trying to offend anyone, but the point is that even if there was other things in your house that you would want tested because you want to know who the hell those fingerprints or hairs belong to and then someone said, " there wasn't an intruder and anything could be transferred into your house from you or other people that may have been in your house, but you know that could be evidence to prove your innocence wouldn't you want it done? How would you feel if you had the whole world judging you with every move you made and said no, you did this to yourself? All I am saying is I have been attacked and have not remembered everything, but does that mean that I wasn't? NO. I also have a friend that has had a child die and has also been brutally attacked as well and she doesn't even remember about 6months of her life afterward. So you may remember and thank god that you did so that whomever it was paid for the crime against you, but it doesn't work that way for everyone. no one paid for what they did to me or to my friend, but according to some of the things being said here I would be convicted as well, or at least called a liar, and that is WRONG. The mind does a lot of things we can't explain. IMO there is just as much evidence to say that she is innocent and until I have seen otherwise I do believe that.

 

[CyberLaw]

Darlie was convicted and sent to Prison, would that count as "otherwise". Guess what many people do not believe "criminals" stories and that is what evidence, investigation, and a trial comes into play. Scott Peterson would be walking the streets if "everyone believed" his story. Ditto the many husband's who "wives" suddenly went missing and they have no idea where she is. Ditto also for the parents who claim: Have no idea how the baby\child was burned, bruised and battered. They must have done it to themselves. If every criminal was believed, their story, then where is justice for the innocent victim.

 

[haypaula]

Darlie was convicted and sent to Prison, would that count as "otherwise". Guess what many people do not believe "criminals" stories and that is what evidence, investigation, and a trial comes into play. Scott Peterson would be walking the streets if "everyone believed" his story. Ditto the many husband's who "wives" suddenly went missing and they have no idea where she is. Ditto also for the parents who claim: Have no idea how the baby\child was burned, bruised and battered. They must have done it to themselves. If every criminal was believed, their story, then where is justice for the innocent victim.

I've always wondered if Darin was also involved. If he was, Darlie would never say it, as it would be an admission of guilt on her part as well. Before those beautiful boys were murdered, an insurance fraud scheme had been planned.

IMO

 

[Missi]

Darlie was convicted and sent to Prison, would that count as "otherwise". Guess what many people do not believe "criminals" stories and that is what evidence, investigation, and a trial comes into play. Scott Peterson would be walking the streets if "everyone believed" his story. Ditto the many husband's who "wives" suddenly went missing and they have no idea where she is. Ditto also for the parents who claim: Have no idea how the baby\child was burned, bruised and battered. They must have done it to themselves. If every criminal was believed, their story, then where is justice for the innocent victim.

I agree with what you are saying to a certain extent, but I will clarify that I do not believe that every criminal is "innocent". I believe that the case that is being discussed here (DR) is not an open and shut case, say compared to Andrea Yates or Susan Smith. I was just trying to make a point that there are people that have suffered a horrible trauma that do not remember all the details, but it doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

 

[whitywendy]

Are you serious? The pubic hairs could of come from Joe Blow repairing some kind of problem in the home. These types of hair can wonder in on your shoes. The results didn't disappear. It was proven that she was not raped!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Read the transcripts.............. then we can have a healthy discussion..

That may be true about transfer of hairs, but God forbid you are ever attacked in your home and there are hairs that can prove someone else was in your home and they don't believe you, bet that won't feel too good will it? If you are so set on believing that any hairs can just appear in someones home then why is it so hard to believe that they could have been an intruder....doesn't make sense that you could believe hairs can get into someones home by transfer and not that someone broke in.....I HAVE READ THE TRANSCRIPTS.....we just believe differently, but it does not mean what I am reading and researching is wrong, maybe your info is....guess we will never know until the truth comes out and when it does IF I am wrong I would fully admit that and I hope that you would do the same if it came out the other way. We can still have a healthy discussion or at least I think so just because we have a difference of opinion. I am willing to hear whatever anyone says and I am sharing info that I have seen, it doesn't seem that I am as welcome.[/quote]

Hey Missy - I am open to a healthy discussion. AND I would be the first to own up IF it was proven that Darlie is innocent. I am not afraid of admitting that I am wrong when discovered. All I am saying is that there was no proof whatsoever of an intruder entering that home on 6/6/96. NO footprints or fingerprints and no DNA. I am all for testing the pubic hair. Do I believe it will prove her innocence, NO. But go ahead and test it.

Please do not take my posts as though you are not welcome. This is a debate. It would be so boring here if everyone agreed with each other. What kind of debate would be left?

Like I said before I am interested in your proof of her innocence.

 

[whitywendy]

I will compile the info I have found that makes me believe she is innocent and I will send it to you. I have an entire case file on DR so give me a little time and I will present it.

Okie Dokie. I love to read.

 

[whitywendy]

Darlie was convicted and sent to Prison, would that count as "otherwise". Guess what many people do not believe "criminals" stories and that is what evidence, investigation, and a trial comes into play. Scott Peterson would be walking the streets if "everyone believed" his story. Ditto the many husband's who "wives" suddenly went missing and they have no idea where she is. Ditto also for the parents who claim: Have no idea how the baby\child was burned, bruised and battered. They must have done it to themselves. If every criminal was believed, their story, then where is justice for the innocent victim.

EXACTLY CYBERLAW....WELL SAID.

 

[whitywendy]

I agree with what you are saying to a certain extent, but I will clarify that I do not believe that every criminal is "innocent". I believe that the case that is being discussed here (DR) is not an open and shut case, say compared to Andrea Yates or Susan Smith. I was just trying to make a point that there are people that have suffered a horrible trauma that do not remember all the details, but it doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

But Missy, the problem with Darlie is that she did remember, that was until she was arrested and put on trial. How can she remember in the beginning then all of a sudden FORGET when she was arrested and put on trial. It is the other way around. What you don't remember in the beginning of something so traumatic, usually (if it does at all) comes back in the months, if not years to follow.

 

[whitywendy]

How would you feel if you had the whole world judging you with every move you made and said no, you did this to yourself?

Darlie put herself out there to be judged when she invited the NEWS CREW to the Graveside Birthday Party. If she didn't want to be judged, then she should of done what any normal parent would ofdone. Went there alone and grieved. But no Darlie wanted the world to see her. WHY? To prove she was a loving mother? Why would any mother want to prove to ANYONE that she is a loving mother? Because she murdered those boys, that why.

If I have sounded testy with you, I apologize. BUT you can't come on here shouting her innocence and claiming you researched this case and yada yada... friend wrote about this case... but not be able to back up anything you have said with clear actual facts . Everyone here debating with you have spent countless hours reading the transcripts, investigating and discussing with others. They can back up their statements with actual facts. All you have done is come on here and state YOUR OPINIONS and then wonder why everyone has jumped at your posts, making you feel unwanted here. All we ask is if you have information that is not privy to the rest of us and actually shows her innocence, then post it.

 

[Rino]

As a matter a fact yes I have....I was knocked out and do not remember everything, so to have someone say that I was a liar would totally be devestaing.... ....? All I am saying is I have been attacked and have not remembered everything, but does that mean that I wasn't? NO. .... no one paid for what they did to me or to my friend, but according to some of the things being said here I would be convicted as well, or at least called a liar, and that is WRONG. .

Who does remember stuff that happens when they are knocked out? Darlie was not knocked out, so that comparison does not apply. She claims to remember bits and pieces of an attacker leaving her house after sleeping through the attack on her and her sons, with her dog remaining quite as a stranger was in the house making these attacks. She claims she was awakened by her sons tap on her shoulder - it simply does not add up.


I am sorry about your attack, they are always sad. But memory does not work the way Darlie wants you to believe it. You forget or you remember, she remembers to forget. Like the central park victim, she forgot everything. That happens because short term memory must have time to actually be processed. With an assualt or tramatic event the loss of memory is actually not having had the event ever burned into your brain, therefore, no memory. For Darlie to have partial memories is not believable in the context of these events. Partial memories apply to the passage of time or unimportant events.

Your notion that you would be called a liar is riduculous. If evidence is found to prove you have been assulted by other than yourself no one would - or did- question your victimhood. I too have been attacked, and I remember every detail with vivid recollection. And, like you no one has paid any price for it. But according to folks like you, why should anyone? Killers lie and you believe thier lies

 

[Missi]

That may be true about transfer of hairs, but God forbid you are ever attacked in your home and there are hairs that can prove someone else was in your home and they don't believe you, bet that won't feel too good will it? If you are so set on believing that any hairs can just appear in someones home then why is it so hard to believe that they could have been an intruder....doesn't make sense that you could believe hairs can get into someones home by transfer and not that someone broke in.....I HAVE READ THE TRANSCRIPTS.....we just believe differently, but it does not mean what I am reading and researching is wrong, maybe your info is....guess we will never know until the truth comes out and when it does IF I am wrong I would fully admit that and I hope that you would do the same if it came out the other way. We can still have a healthy discussion or at least I think so just because we have a difference of opinion. I am willing to hear whatever anyone says and I am sharing info that I have seen, it doesn't seem that I am as welcome.

Hey Missy - I am open to a healthy discussion. AND I would be the first to own up IF it was proven that Darlie is innocent. I am not afraid of admitting that I am wrong when discovered. All I am saying is that there was no proof whatsoever of an intruder entering that home on 6/6/96. NO footprints or fingerprints and no DNA. I am all for testing the pubic hair. Do I believe it will prove her innocence, NO. But go ahead and test it.

Please do not take my posts as though you are not welcome. This is a debate. It would be so boring here if everyone agreed with each other. What kind of debate would be left?

Like I said before I am interested in your proof of her innocence.[/quote]


ok here goes.....these are the reasons that I believe she is innocent or at least evidence that I have researched that points out some interesting issues:

1. The transcripts (which I have read) when Sandra Halsey was transcribing failed to complete transcripts on time, despite being granted extensions,claimed to the Dallas Morning News she nearly had a breakdown during the preperation of the transcripts. those transcripts had to be reconstructed by Susan Simmons by audiotapes. Even though these were accepted by Judge Francis, it was deemed that the originals were seriously flawed,and as a result Ms. Halsey was stripped of her certification by the Court Reporters Certification Board. Even though the reconstructed ones were accepted the Court of Criminal Appeals found that there were 2 volumes overlooked. So I question at least that partial of the transcripts due to the inconsistancies. The prosecuter's say that it was accurate and valid, but Ms. Routiers attorneys claim that it was illegal and no one can vouch for the completeness of the audiotapes. Ms. Halsey admitted to falsifying records to hide her mistakes, which there were 10's of thousands reported errors in the transcript(other then typos).The court refused to prosecute her despite that the state paid her 30,000 for the the transcript and then she even sold several copies to the media. Her behavior delayed the appeal for nearly 2 years and resulted in 6 hearings that were unnecessary.


2. There also is no evidence to prove that the bloody fingerprints belong to Darlie, Darren, or the boys. There was the one on the living room table, where the murders occured, 2 separate prints from the utility room door, none of which have been DNA tested and proven to be Darlie's or darren's. This is one piece of evidence that Darlie has requested to be tested several times and Judge Francis has denied, denied,denied. Why? That is a key piece of evidence that very well puts an intruder at the crime scene.

3. I understand that the pubic hairs and the other limb hairs that were found very well could have been transferred in another way, but where none of these hairs match any of the Routier's that also puts someone else in the house that night. It certainly can't be excluded. Again another piece of evidence that has been requested by darlie to be tested and it has also been denied. Anything that could be tested should be due to the fact that now a days there are definitley more sophisticated tests. So why keep denying the tests? It could shed some light on her guilt or innocence.

4. The crime scene was severely contaminated and I say this because it states that crime scene protocol was disregarded, at least 20 paramedics and police officers trampled all through the house before it was secured, Key evidence was moved, blood was stepped on all over the place,multiple bloody items were rolled up and placed in the same bags and the blood was still wet, which could tamper with testing and come out with results that show blood from either Darlie or the children on items that it may never have been on in the first place or "mixed" blood that may never have been mixed until put into the bags still wet, bloody towels were left behind, the vacuum cleaner WAS moved all over the place, and the pillow Darlie was lying on disappeared and reappeared throughout the collection of the crime scene photos. The reason this is so important is because the whereabouts of these items that were moved around were also used against Darlie for "staging the crime scene".

5. The case of the "missing" knife....there was only one knife recovered which we all know was the one from the kitchen, but the DR's that performed the autopsies(Janice Townsend-Parchman & Joni McClain) testified that the large butcher knife "could have" inflicted the wounds on both boys, but what they failed to say was that Devon's blood was NOT found on this knife. That sets up reasonable doubt that there was more thenone knife used and to me that also puts an intruder at the scene and would explain how the screen was cut from the OUTSIDE not the inside and why there was only the one knife found....someone must have taken it with them.

6.Key evidence was withheld from the jury......there were approx. 1,000 photos taken and the defense only had access to about 400. Why not show them all? Something that the prosecutor didn't want the jury to see? The prosecution claims this isn't true, but it still is a fact that the jury never saw the photos of darlies extensive wounds and bruising.

7. I do have a theory about the issue that comes up about why the boys died and she was left alive....she was knocked out for who knows how long and so IMO the intruder could have thought that Darlie was already dead. It's pretty simple, but I see that come up a lot in other posts.

8.The timeline is impossible because according to the states own "expert" witness Damon was still alive when the paramedics got there and said that he couldn't have lived any longer then 9 minutes, the 911 call lasted for 5 min. 44 sec., Darlie was on the phone the whole time, then the paramedics were delayed by the cops for 2 minutes while the house was being inspected before they were allowed to come in which gave Darlie 1 min. and 16 sec. to inflict her wounds,stage the crime scene, plant the sock with the blood and the saliva on it 75 yards away from the house. Seems like she would have pulled something out of Houdini's book in order to do that!

9. In may of 2000, Charles Linch, which was the states key expert witness was committed to a mental hospital and heavily medicated because he was a danger to himself and others. This info was kept from the jury and the defense team. Mr Linch has stated that he performed work on this case that he was NOT qualified to do. To me that means that his credibility is pretty much shot.

10. All family members were listed as a witness and the rule was invoked. That means that no one but Darlie was in the courtroom to assist the attorney's on how to rebut false testimony. The attorney's never knew what was false until after the trial was over and the family reviewed the transcripts.....the interpretation of the gravesite, Darren being in the front yard when the first cop arrived when he was in the house the whole time(it's on the 911 tape)so who was the man that was able to fool the cops in to thinking that was Darren?, the nurses testimony( about the bruising), most of the witnesses were never called for the sole purpose to restrict the jury from hearing testimony that would have assisted the defense.

11. Investigator Jimmy Patterson should not have been assigned to this case because his son was a potential suspect. His son owned a car that matched neighbors descriptions and he was also a defendant in a drug related drive by shooting, which he was convicted for. Another murder was commited in the same neighborhood in the same week, but this info was NOT given to the media and the case was sealed until recent times and is still unsolved. There was also no follow up on what the neighbors stated or what darlie stated when there were witnesses that saw a man and the car that matched the description fleeing the scene....who knows if it was the investigators son or not....point is it was never followed up on and it wasn't just Darlie that gave the description.

I could go on and on, but here are some of the reasons I believe Darlie is innocent. I think that there is a lot of evidence that shows that it is not an open and shut case.....there is a hell of a lot of doubt and for me it points to her innocence.

 

[whitywendy]

Thanks for posting your "proof" of her innocent, Missy.

However, if you go to the site ran by Darlie's Family you will find Judge Francis's Final Ruling, which basically outlines and defines all of your reasons.

1. - The court reporter was prosecuted. She has lost her license and has to pay out a large sum of money to the courts because of her poor job performance. SO she was in fact held responsible for her errors.

2. - In regards to the prints. They could not exclude Darlie from the print on the Sofa table. Nor could they exclude her from the bloody print on the UT door. They did rule out Darren on these prints. Also the latent print on the UT door was proven to be Darren's. Until they can rule her out 100% on these prints, I believe they are hers.

3. Like I said before, go ahead and test this pubic hair. Just because you have one pubic hair from someone who does not live in your home, does not PROVE that a intruder left it there. Where is the other proof that an intruder was actually in the home? Excluding the prints that I have already talked about, there is no proof of someone other than the Routiers being in the home that night.

4. - In regards to evidence being combined together. Darlie's shirt went with her to the hospital. It was removed at the hospital. SO the bags you are referring to involve the evidence bags collected at the scene. So how did Devon's blood end up on Darlie's shirt? Devon was left at the scene, Darlie's shirt was removed at the hospital. AND if we can figure out what a transfer stain looks like, I am sure LE can also.

5. - The missing knife.... now this was one of my "innocent reasons" too. However, if the intruder kept the knife and took it, then were is the trail of blood leading out of the house? If someone was carrying a bloody knife as they were leaving there would be a blood trail from the knife dripping blood. It was also proven that there was blood and water mixed in the plumbing at the sink. So, IMO that is where Devon's blood is.

6. - Darlie's own defense lawyer has stated and prepared a statement that was submitted to the Judge, that the Jury and the defense was shown all of the pic's you are referring to.

7. - Darlie did not have a head wound. If the woman had been knocked out as you say, then she would of had a hell of a bruise or knot in the head/face area. Also there weren't any kind of "knocking you out drugs" found in her system. So, how was she knocked out? Oh I know, she must of fainted and passed out through the entire murders.

8. - If you read the trial transcripts in its entirety, then you would know about the prosecution's theory of a 2nd attack on Damon. The fatal wounds happening to Damon just prior to the 911 call being placed. Which sure would give her enough time to run that sock with tiny drops of blood on it out to the alley.

9. - Lynch - now like I said if you read Judge Francis's Final ruling, you will find all of the info in regards to Lynch and his mental breakdown etc. After reading these doc's, I believe that this is just something the Darlie's through out there hoping to help her cause. And it was proven that he was not drinking during his investigation into the Routier boy's murder. Read this ruling, it will clear up any confusion in regards to Lynch.

10. - Now this statement makes no sense to me. Darlie isn't stupid and naive. She was in the court room the entire time. I believe she would of called anyone out on lies or statements that she did not agree to. I do not believe she needed her family to review the transcripts in order to find lies by other witnesses. Darlie was fully capable of doing this herself.

11. - I am not even going to attempt to re answer this one. I have already replied to a post of yours in regards to the "similar break-ins in the area", that apparently you chose not to read.

I think there is allot of gaps in your reading of the trial transcripts. Please go back and re-read, it might help you sort through these things better.

 

[CyberLaw]

So lets just say "if" lets pretend. If Darin did arrange a fraud. Lets just if. Well the dog would have to have "been friendly" and not bark at the "stranger". Funny how he knew the neighbor, but even barked at her and the Police that attended the scene.

In my opinion, Darlie fully expected to be treated as a victim and her story in her mind was to be believed 100%. She fully expected "everyone" to feel sorry for her, well guess what, she became a suspect, and now she is grasping at straws to "impress" the point that the entire justice system is wrong and that only Darlie is right. Please.....talk about a personality disorder and character disorder.

There are too many facts in evidence that point to her guilt. When I watch 20/20 and Dateline, even after the evidence has been presented at trial, even after the jury verdict comes back, even after the sentence, when they "interview" the criminal, I sit back and say to myself: He/she is going to say they are innocent. Sure enough, every time.

Now if someone produced a blood trail, I mean anything indicating that "someone else was at the scene. I would be the first person to say: I am wrong, poor Darlie, someone did kill her kids. But that has not, nor will it ever happen. The evidence is just not there. Remember evidence does not lie.

You have convicted criminals who to their dying day, convince themselves that they are innocent. Well they may believe that, but no one else does. It is called self denial.

Justice was sought for the boys, not for Darlie as she is where she belongs and where she will stay. It seems to me, that the supporters seem `to overlook damaging evidence and ignore the facts. They keep on saying that Darlie is innocent, well give me the proof, give me the evidence, not smoke and mirrors.

Regarding Lynch: Is there any, I mean any evidence that his son was on the scene. At all. I mean you cannot add up 1 + 1 = 5. Just because someone may drive a car that may be the same. Just because he was involved in a shooting that did not involve stabbing kids to death in their home. Does not mean that again he is a potential suspect. If he did flee the home, there would have been a blood trail. Again no evidence and no offer of proof. A drive by shooting and stabbing two innocent children to death in their home are not similar in any way, shape or form. So you want me to believe that another two children were brutally murdered in their home,while they were sleeping during a related time frame. Without anything taken from the home. Really now why did the stranger enter the home and go right to the kids and kill them, and not pick up the valuable in plain sight. Remember everyone was asleep by then, what did he gain by killing two kids and not anything else. How did the stranger profit, as we all know that if someone breaks into a home they somehow want to profit from the robbery.

If the facts do not add up, if the story defies logic, if it defies common sense, then guess what, the story is fabricated. Again Darlie has nothing, and I repeat nothing that has a basis in fact and evidence that support her claim that a stranger came into her home and killed her two boys. I am sure after all these years, because it is a comfort to Darlie, that she convinced herself and others that she is innocent. I guess I am not of the school of thought to believe everything that anyone says.

 

[Rino]

7. I do have a theory about the issue that comes up about why the boys died and she was left alive....she was knocked out for who knows how long and so IMO the intruder could have thought that Darlie was already dead. It's pretty simple, but I see that come up a lot in other posts.

Show some kind of evidence to support this claim, please