Newcomers to this blog are advised to begin with the first two posts, Just the Facts, Ma'am and Case Solved, which explain in very general terms why I believe I've solved this case. Some important questions are answered in the following post, Misunderstandings, Misconceptions, Misdirections. After that feel free to browse whatever topics might interest you (see blog archive).

NB: If anyone has trouble posting a comment, email it to doktorgosh (at) live.com, and I'll post it for you.

Notice to readers of my Kindle book: I recently noticed that, on certain devices (though not all), the Table of Contents begins with Chapter One and omits the Introduction and Preface. Since the Introduction is especially important, I urge everyone to make sure to begin reading at the very beginning of the book, not the first chapter in the Table of Contents. Thank you.

Monday, August 6, 2018

Darlie Routier: part 4

When Darlie foolishly agreed to let her husband off the hook and testify that he was not the one who assaulted her and her children, she signed her own death warrant, as all the evidence pointed to an inside job -- no sign of an intruder. Her own family must take a large part of the responsibility because they agreed to hire a lawyer who was already representing the husband in another case and was ethically constrained from even suggesting that he could have been the "intruder." I am now convinced that he is in fact the guilty party. If there could have been no intruder, and Darlie could not have done it (see my earlier posts), then the only possibility is Darin, her husband -- who had already contemplated staging a phony home invasion; who'd been spending recklessly for years and was now heavily in debt; who had over $200,000 in insurance money to gain upon Darlie's death; who had already expressed contempt for her over some  weight gain and driven her to contemplate suicide.


As I demonstrated in my previous post, it's not all that difficult to come up with a scenario starring him as a self-absorbed, cold-blooded killer. In this post I'd like to add a few more wrinkles.

One very interesting piece of information I only learned of recently was the fact that Darin appeared on the scene naked from the waist up. While in itself there is nothing suspicious about that, the absence of a shirt could be a very important piece of the puzzle. If "the intruder" hadn't been wearing a shirt, Darlie would certainly have noticed that and reported it. She obviously saw someone wearing a shirt. And considering the nature of the assault, his shirt would have been covered in blood. The theory I outlined last time fails to take this into account. If Darin is the one, then his shirt would have been extremely bloody when he re-appeared to call the police. So what could have happened to that shirt?

As I now see it, Darin's plan must have been to return to the  house and call the police as soon as possible. His only serious problem would have been the bloody shirt. He couldn't very well re-enter the house to call 911 while wearing that shirt and there was no convenient place to hide it. This would explain why "the intruder" immediately exited via the garage, as Darlie reported, rather than remaining in the house after assuming Darlie was either dead or dying. Darin would have needed to discard that shirt some place where no one could find it. I think he ran very quickly to  the storm drain in the alley, only a couple of short blocks away, just next to the spot where the bloody sock was found:


As it was the middle of the night, the chances of his being noticed were slim. After removing the shirt, he would have stuffed it into the storm drain, accidentally dropping the bloody sock (which he'd been using as a glove) as he did so. He'd have then run back to the house, with the intention of cleaning all the blood off the knife, leaving a bloody trail from the family room through to the garage and out the window, and then calling 911 to report a home invasion and murder. While approaching the house, however, he'd have heard Darlie's screams and realized that she was still alive, which forced a change of plans. Instead of re-entering via the garage, which would have looked extremely suspicious, he decided to run around to the front entrance and, as I indicated in the previous post, create the impression that he'd just run down the stairs. He might even have quietly gone up the stairs and then noisily ran down to create the illusion that he'd been upstairs all the time. Which is what Darlie chose to assume.

Here once again is the floor plan, indicating how easy it would have been for him to give the impression he'd just run downstairs, though in reality he'd entered via the front door:


Of course this is all speculation. There is no direct evidence implicating Darin, so even if Darlie's attorneys had provided a scenario similar to mine, they'd have had no way to prove it actually happened that way. As it seems to me, Darin is forever off the hook for this reason, there is probably no way he could be convicted of this crime. However, if her attorneys had been free to suggest the possibility that Darin could have done it, motivated by the prospect of collecting a considerable insurance payout, that would have made an effective argument for reasonable doubt, and she might very well have been found innocent. Unfortunately, as I understand it, reasonable doubt applies only to the trial itself and can't be used as an argument during any appeal. Burden of proof is reversed during an appeal, as there is no longer a presumption of innocence. The appellant must prove his or her innocence, which may, in this case, not be possible.

Darlie's only hope may be for a pardon from the Governor. However, while she has a great many supporters, it will probably be impossible for anyone with law enforcement experience to pardon her, as there is no credible evidence of an intruder, and as far as I can tell none of her supporters seems interested in suggesting that Darin could be the guilty party. What a tragedy!

99 comments:

  1. But if Darin's shirt had been covered in blood, wouldn't that blood have also been on his bare torso? When would he have had time to wash that off?
    Minnesota Linda

    ReplyDelete
  2. Just want to point out that Jonbenet would be turning 28 today. I try to not forget the real little girl who had hopes and dreams behind the tragedy.
    -SM

    ReplyDelete
  3. Where was all the blood on Darin ? Surely he did not have time to clean up and plant that sock. Also, if Darin was planning on murdering Darlie, he would have surely picked a better time to do so then with the kids laying right next to her. Like ANY other time than then. There are a multitude of choices of how and when to murder Darlie, with this scenario being probably THE absolute worst choice he could possibly make.
    Also, if Darin were indeed the perpetrator he would have thrown Darlie under the bus long ago, instead he maintains her innocence.
    So he kills the children and leaves Darlie alive ? Sorry but there are some huge flaws with Darin being the perpetrator.
    Also, there is not a shred of evidence pointing to Darin, the same cant be said for Darlie, who has in fact changed her story more times than cwn even be kept track of.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Plus, in one of Darle's many stoties she battled with the intruder, in another one of her stories she saw this intruder walking away and out the utility room . Surely, she would know this was Darin. This alomg with blood splatter on her back when she was laying on it all have no logical explanation. Nor does she hace a logical explanation as to why her blood was washed down the sink, as she claims she was never even at the sink. Things that can not with any logic, be explained away.
    Had Darin wanted to kill Darlie then one stab to the neck, as the boys were stabbed would have hamdled the job in less than one minute. Instead he decides to viciously slaughter the boys, who were never even targets and give Darlie a superficial slice to the neck ? If the wounds and bruises on her were defensive wounds, as she claims then that means she battled the intruder and would surely no it was Darin. Which then means that she made that battle up and that means she is the guilty party.
    Sorry but you have o proof and 0 evidence that Darin did this. All you have is your own "hunch" that Darin is the guilty party but there nothing to back that up

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You make some good points, however,

      1. It's not unheard of for a murderer in a domestic case to wipe out his (or her) entire family and then claim that "an intruder" did it. We know nothing about Darin's state of mind, or even how he really felt about his children. Blaming a murder on an "intruder" is a time honored ploy, and the stabbing of the children would have made it even more plausible. And maybe he didn't want to be stuck with raising three children after Darlie had been killed. We just don't know.

      2. If he'd been wearing a heavy shirt, the blood might not have penetrated to his skin. Moreover, with all three of his victims dead, he could easily have washed it off after returning to the house. In any case, he immediately threw himself on one of the boys, claiming he was attempting to revive him. So he'd be able to explain away any blood found on his torso or his pants.

      3. As I see it, Darin has defended Darlie because he needs her on his side. If he were to accuse her, she might be motivated to identify him as the "intruder." She could easily have testified that, on second thought, she realized it must have been him she saw.

      4. According to my scenario he would have assumed Darlie was dead or dying. The wound was NOT at all negligible but could easily have killed her. And if he'd slit her throat from behind, she would not have seen who did it.

      5. The evidence pointing to Darin is circumstantial but, as far as I'm concerned, convincing. As there was no intruder, and Darlie could not have done it (see my previous posts), the only one left is him.

      6. Darlie did not change her story as far as struggling with the intruder is concerned. The wounds on her arm and shoulder would have been enough to convince her that a struggle had taken place, even though she didn't remember it. Can you name any other instances where you believe she changed her story?

      7. All Darlie saw was a man walking away from her. She saw him from the rear. It was the middle of the night, it was dark and she was unable to describe him in any way other than that he was wearing dark clothing. When the prosecutor got her to testify that it wasn't Darin, he made no effort to ask her why, all he was interested in was eliminating Darin as a suspect so he could zero in on her. It's clear from the Habeas Corpus writ that she later changed her mind.

      8. If "the intruder" attacked her from behind, then she might well have not seen him while they were struggling. And don't forget, the lights were off, it was the middle of the night and it was dark.

      The bottom line for me is that I see no motive for Darlie to want to kill her boys; no motive for her to slit her own throat so deeply and dangerously while superficial wounds would have been sufficient; and no motive to make up a story about being unconscious during the attack when she could easily have come up with something a lot simpler and easier to understand. Also I see no reason to assume she was putting on an act during the 911 call. Her agonized screams are totally convincing as far as I'm concerned.

      Delete
    2. To me, this all seems as if it was or could have been a terrible mistake. For one, it was dark at night with a knife.

      Delete
  5. The Routier home looks very large. Why was Darlie sleeping on the couch and not upstairs with her husband, near her infant, and why were the two boys sleeping downstairs on the floor? Did they not have a bedroom in the house?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Doc,

    You do a great job making your case and raising lots of good points which creates reasonable doubt. Surely her lawyers made those same points.

    I wonder why then, she was convicted. If you say it was because of the tape of her in the cemetery, I can't buy that. Most people would cut her some slack and attribute that to shock or just her way of grieving recognizing that we all grieve differently. That would not be enough to convict her or anyone else.

    What did the prosecution use to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that Darlie did it? Was it the blood evidence? The wound they said was self inflicted? Motive?



    1. The coroner described the boys wounds as "savage and deep" and Darlie's wounds as "hesitation wounds, possibly self inflicted".

    2. No trail of blood was found leading outside the house. (which could implicate Darin)

    3. Darlie never asked how her children were on he way to the hospital, her main concern being the prints on the knife being compromised by her picking it up.

    4. They had a dog that barked at strangers but never barked when the intruder entered the house. (could implicate Darin)

    5. There was evidence that the kitchen was cleaned up, but under testing showed blood all over.

    6. There was no rape, no robbery, but instead a savage act of rage against two children which made it personal. (could implicate Darin)

    From what I just read new facts have come to light which would provide enough evidence to appeal the case and re try it.

    I believe if that's the case, then they should.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What new facts have come to light ? The Routier family have been trying to come up with new facts for 20 years and have not been able to come up with a single shred of anything even resembling new facts or evidence.

      Delete
    2. The main new fact that I read about and would make me believe a new trial was warranted, is that the jury was never shown photos of her arms and hands which showed defensive wounds. Her arms were black and blue as if fighting off an attacker. Those were not shown to the jury and could've and probably would've made a huge difference.

      EG

      Delete
    3. "You do a great job making your case and raising lots of good points which creates reasonable doubt. Surely her lawyers made those same points.

      I wonder why then, she was convicted."

      Imo she was convicted because her lawyer was unwilling to even suggest the possibility that Darin might be the one who did it. That was part of the deal Darlie and her family made with the lawyer they decided they needed.

      So the case hinged solely on whether or not an intruder had been present, and since all the evidence pointed away from an intruder, Darlie's goose was cooked. The prosecution even manipulated her into stating that the man she saw was not Darin. If she had had an effective lawyer, she would never have made such a statement, and the possibility that Darin could have done it would have remained open.

      Delete
  7. I still have to wonder why Darlie was sleeping downstairs on the couch and her boys on the floor? Was there bedding on the couch? Or was the "sleeping on the couch" just a ruse?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anon,

    I believe I read that Darlie had been sleeping downstairs for a week due to Drake's crying. I think she said the boys were watching a movie and they all fell asleep. Her on the couch, them on the floor.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh thank you then, that makes sense why she would be in that particular area on the couch, kids on the floor.

      Delete
  9. Doc, you are making the same mistake on this case as you have done and continue to do in the Ramsey case. You cannot seem to accept how a “loving mother” could savagely murder her kids. I need not remind you that in most cases not only are the mothers guilty, but also can be the most savage of killers. Doc, you simply do not understand what a person like Darlie is capable of doing. You also do not know Darlie or her family and all of the intimate details that shaped her life. The only scenario that makes sense is that Darlie experienced a psychotic break brought on by several factors that severely impaired her judgment. It is that simple. For people that do not understand how this can happen they convince themselves that there must be another explanation despite what the evidence tells them. Doc, this is your weakness; your logic is trumped by your own emotions. Your lack of experience in forensic psychology is understandable, but it still creates a large hurdle for you when trying to solve this type of case.

    Hercule

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Herc is baaack. Me thinks it’s you who has an emotional issue with women. No reason not to examine the faulty search for justice that allowed Darlie to be represented by a compromised attorney. Why wasn’t Darin looked at? Answers are needed. It’s ok to play devils advocate Hercules.

      Delete
    2. Herc thinks every woman he accuses of murder suffers a psychotic break, despite the fact that they exhibit no disconnection from reality, no delusions and no hallucinations.

      Andrea Yates is a perfect example of a mother suffering those symptoms. Darlie Routier and Patsy Ramsey are not.

      Best to take Herc's armchair "diagnoses" with about a pound of salt.

      Delete
    3. I drop by now and then. I had never heard of this case. I agree with doc that it was the husband. However, I struggle to understand why he didn't kill the baby, and how could she cover for him, knowing he killed their two children? As a mother, I would fear he would hurt the third child.

      Delete
    4. I don't know that Doc is so much convinced Darin did it as that he wants to provide a new topic of discussion, and he has succeeded.

      Delete
  10. Doc, what circumstantial evidence is there against Darin Routier ? There is no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise. It is nothing more than a "hunch" on your part that he has any involvement whatsoever. I tend to agree with Hercule on this, you are handicapped by your thought that no loving mother, with no motive that you can see, could possibly do such a thing ...history shows otherwise time and time again. CC, this is a woman who just wrote a suicide note shortly before these murders occured and you want to debate how stable she was and her state of mind ?
    The hesitation wounds Darlie had are a very, very unforgiving fact in this case, one that hints at who the guilty party is, just as her blood that was washed down the kitchen sink where she inflicted the wounds to herself, the sink that she claimed she was never at gives another big clue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have no problem with a "loving mother" killing her children. This has happened many times in the history of crime, going all the way back to the ancient Greeks. My problem centers on Darlie's lack of any motive to kill her children PLUS the almost fatal throat wound, so deep as to be inconsistent with a self-inflicted wound. I also see no reason for her to make up a story about having her throat slit while she was unconscious where a much simpler story would have been easier to understand. There are other factors as well, e.g., why wouldn't she have carefully scrubbed all the blood off of the kitchen knife and returned it to where it belonged before calling 911? Why wouldn't she have been sure to produce a trail of blood leading to the garage window? Etc.

      Once we realize how unlikely it is that Darlie could have done it, then all suspicion falls on Darin. Only that possibility was never even considered and to this day Darlie's supporters are reluctant to consider it, which means she has no chance of winning an appeal. What a travesty of justice!

      Delete
    2. Also, if you want to claim she had some sort of psychotic break, then why was she convicted of first degree murder?

      Delete
  11. https://youtu.be/AxYPM9g4sQE

    ReplyDelete
  12. Nurse Jody Cotner testifies that it would have been remiss if bruises on Darlie's arms and hands were not noted, but does not say they observed any. If Darlie claims she struggled with an intruder she may have decided to inflict the bruises on herself from the hospital bed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. “Herc thinks every woman he accuses of murder suffers a psychotic break, despite the fact that they exhibit no disconnection from reality, no delusions and no hallucinations.”

    And hello to you too, CC. It is always a joy to watch you and your likeminded union pontificate over a case in which you clearly have no expertise. At the same time, I am unable to suppress a certain amount of revulsion when a murderer such as Darlie Routier, is defended by people based on what they read on the internet and what they see on television. If you had access to the police report then you would clearly see the difference between truth and fiction. Whether or not you would be willing to accept the truth is another question entirely.

    Hercule

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Herc, have you seen the police report?

      Delete
    2. We've been down this road with H before. He's going to "yes", but when asked to share it, he's going to say he cannot. Yawn.

      Delete
    3. Yes, Herc - hello. Actually, it's good to see you here. When you absent yourself for more than a few weeks I become concerned about your health issues. Hope all is well on that front, and that we can continue to spar for years to come.

      Delete
  14. Has there ever been discussion on the Sherri Peteni case on this blog, or anyone have thoughts about what might have happened to her? She disappeared for 22 dats and turned up on Thanksgiving batttered, bruised, and branded. Some say it was a hoax.

    ReplyDelete
  15. In looking at Darlie's neck injuries, it appears that the "slicing" motion of the knife went from the right side of her body towards the left. InflictIng the wounds to herself would have (most likely) required her to slice with her left hand, but the infamous "silly string video" shows her using her right hand, so she's most likely right-handed. Does anyone know of a source with more information about the neck wounds? DB

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. excellent point. Knowing how the knife made the mark and whether Darlie is left or right handed should give a good idea whether she did it or not. Also if it was done from her front side by somebody else, it could be inferred if the person was rightie or leftie. And what about Darin ? I guess the case never went in that direction.

      Delete
  16. Since Doc posted this I have taken the liberty to read a lot more about the case.

    Darlie was a stay at home mother, she had no interest in working. Darin made a good living, until the last year when his business flattened out and there were no more jobs.

    Darin was not abusive in any way. He worshipped Darlie and gave her whatever she wanted.

    My opinion is that Darlie tried to kill herself. She was spending money they didn't have and that lifestyle would have to stop. She was depressed and suicidal and her suicide note proves this.

    She either planned it for that night (and perhaps used the excuse of the baby crying as the reason why), or something made her snap that night.

    Either or, I think she attacked both her sons (to either be with them in the afterlife or perhaps she thought they were as depressed as she was) and then attacked herself.

    When she slit her own throat, maybe it hurt more than she imagined. Maybe she realised she couldn't go all the way and experience that kind of pain. Or maybe one of the boys started moving during her self-infliction which startled her as she realized at least one of them was still alive. She then panicked and decided to blame the whole thing on a non-existant intruder.

    She staged (very badly) a break in, and quickly ran down the alley to leave a sock (obvious staging). The stock, I admit, is bit of an enigma, but I am satisfied that Darlie was able to do this. She then made the call to police and due to her rather low IQ, she didn't even attempt to care about the kids, administer first aid or ask how they were. No, she was more interested in repeating that the knife had her prints on it and asking if her jewellery was stolen.

    A few days later at the infamous "graveyard birthday" she was clearly in good spirits. This does not prove anything but I believe she had a new lease on life...she nearly committed suicide and nearly got caught for killing her two boys, and she escaped both (so she thought).

    From what I have read, there is absolutely zero evidence against Darin. Nothing. LE took all the right measures and investigated Darin immensely...he came up cold. Not saying he isn't a creep, but I don't think he was involved. Ultimately, he went along with the intruder theory as the path of least resistance.

    Also, it's possible his insurance scam gave Darlie some fuel and she decided that her boys in heaven was a sacrifice she was willing to take for money. That's another theory if she didn't intend on killing herself that night.

    For me, Darlie = guilty. The decision was justified, the evidence was followed and they made the right decision.

    Thanks Doc for posting some fresh content.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zed, Its very hard to fantom what you saying. I would say the probability of this happening is close to zero.

      Delete
  17. I believe she is guilty too, and was convicted mostly if not totally on circumstantial evidence that was quite compelling. I do believe her third and final appeal now is based on DNA evidence of that bloody fingerprint that was found.

    Motive is what's lacking in this case and that doesn't sit well with me. WHY would she kill those kids? Nothing I come up with makes sense to me. It wasn't for money, she wasn't psychotic, and from what her mother and sister said, she was planning on renewing her wedding vows.
    It just doesn't make sense to me.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nor to me, E. Susan Smith and Diane Davis killed their children to be with boyfriends. Andrea Yates was obviously mentally ill. But Darlie...we've got nothing. Motive is not a necessary component of a prosecutor's case, but it sure helps with a jury.

      I hope her final, Federal appeal, is based on ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, as that argument is demonstrably, glaringly true, and grounds for a new trial.

      Delete
    2. I agree CC, and I do believe there was at least one juror, who said if he had seen those pictures of her battered arms, etc. he wouldn't have voted guilty. That disturbs me.

      I would have needed a motive to find her guilty, even with all of the circumstantial evidence and even if I believed she was guilty I could not, in good conscience vote the death penalty without proof positive.

      Darlie had life insurance ($250k) which is a motive for Darin but then why didn't he kill her instead of killing the children? That doesn't make sense to me either. The boys were savagely and violently stabbed. She was slashed. If he wanted her dead to collect the life insurance, he knew that wouldn't work because he'd be the prime suspect and probably convicted. How would Darin benefit from all of this? What am I missing here?

      EG

      Delete
    3. the photos were there. They may not have taken the time to fully look at all the photos, but they were in discovery.

      Delete
  18. “We've been down this road with H before. He's going to ‘yes’, but when asked to share it, he's going to say he cannot. Yawn.”

    I would never share a report that was not of my own authorship. Since I am not, nor have I ever been employed by the city of any police department, I certainly would not print or broadcast any official police report. It would obviously be unethical and therefore out of the question. I have not seen the Routier case files and really have no reason to request them. I was not contacted to consult on this case because there was never any doubt as to who was guilty. Sure, this case was discussed among peers who did have copies of the files. I was satisfied by the information that was shared with me. There was nothing for me to further deduce. Darlie Routier killed her children. Case closed.

    I am only contacted when certain cases go cold. I work up a profile based on crime scene evidence, however, I will only agree to offer my assistance if I feel like the case materials were documented to my satisfaction. My profiles are only are good as the information that I receive.

    Thank you, CC, for your warm remarks with regards to my health. Over the last year or so I have no complaints about my well-being. My energy levels are high and my life is all the more busy for it with no plans of slowing down. Work is life. I hope you are still recovering well from your loss.

    Hercule

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A wise man once said the definition of happiness is someone to love, something to do, and something to look forward to [sic].

      I would argue with you that, while work is important, love is life. Perhaps another root cause of our fundamental disagreement, along with my disdain for profiling and other non-science based forensics.

      In any case, best wishes for your continuing recovery. Mine is presently still in the nascent stage, but I hear time heals.

      Delete
  19. Acording to Darin's affidavit (found on Darliefacts.com), he and Darlie had had an argument the night before during which she asked for a "marital separation". He was in debt, his wife wanted to leave, this and all the rest seals the deal for me.


    Sam

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He also testified that he had once put a gun to her head during an argument.

      Delete
    2. Thank you, Sam. I feel a bit outnumbered by the Darlie-did-its who lack facts. I realize there is scant information, but please keep plumming those depths.

      Delete
    3. Thank YOU CC, I've been a reader here for a while and have exchanged a few emails with Doc, and for some reason could not comment on the site. So I am happy to be able to finally tell you how much I admire your intelligence, expertise, infallible logic etc. I think the world of you! Since I could not comment, your posts were really cathartic for me, as I almost always agreed with you. (of course I am a more than convinced JDI!!)Anyway, CC, you've got a french fan over here!!

      Sam

      Delete
    4. You're embarrassing me, but merci. Welcome aboard, we're glad to have you.

      Delete
    5. And Im glad to finally be here, believe me! I am not sure I will be as patient and articulate as you are (English is obviously not my native language and I have a very low tolerance for stupidity and narrow-mindness) but Ill do my best! A bientôt!

      Sam

      Delete
  20. If Darin wanted to kill Darlie he did a piss poor job of it. She was lucid enough to call 911, and although the knife wound barely missed her carotid artery, she was deemed well enough to leave the hospital two days later. I think Zed's summary above is excellent, and makes the most sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Darlie wanted to kill her children and blame an intruder, she did a piss poor job of it. Her 911 call was utterly hysterical, and unexpected by first-time murderer Darin, who mistakenly thought the volumes of blood produced by slashing her throat indicated she was dead. I think Doc's summary, by and large, is pretty good, and makes the most sense.

      One has to accept there are two divergent opinions here. IMO humble legal opinion it comes down to motive: Darlie had none, while Darin had 250,000.

      Delete
  21. Ok, so what exactly would have been Darlie's motive? She had absolutely NOTHING to gain!! As a local reporter who interviewed her said "either she's an academy award winning actress, or she didn't kill her children" (source: TRUE CRIME DOCUMENTARY)

    Did you listen to the 911 call? Come on guys. She could not have faked it. But guess who is very discreet during that call? It's like he's not even there. Oh, yes, he was giving CPR to an already dead kid.

    And it is far more logical for Darin to be the culprit since he had a motive: MONEY. And she wanted to leave him. Why could HE not be the psychopath?

    Why does it have to be the woman, just like in the Ramsey case. Look, Im no man-hater, Im even marrying one in two weeks! But as far as logic is concerned, Darin's culpability is way more believable imo.


    Sam

    ReplyDelete
  22. When the police arrived Darlie told them a "knife-wielding" intruder had broken into their house. She told them she fought with the intruder who was wearing a black shirt, dark pants and a baseball cap, and that she had chased him through the kitchen and out of the house. That's pretty energetic not to mention descriptive for someone who's husband has just tried to kill her. If she had the slightest clue her husband had killed her children as well as tried to kill her why would she not tell the police that, instead of some intruder story. Make no doubt about it, Texas will put her to death unless someone can prove her defense team messed up. It doesn't HAVE to be the woman, but in this case, it is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Her "defense team", such as it was, did indeed "mess up". They presented no rebutting forensic examiners, and no argument against Darin or any other possible perpetrator.

      Ineffective assistance of counsel is one of the very best grounds for appeal.

      You may think her guilty, and godspeed with that, but the woman deserves a new trial.

      Delete
    2. And let's not forget that weird deal with the lawyer: they would hire him only if he'd let Darin out of it. Why such a demand?????

      Sam

      Delete
    3. I am not disagreeing about the technicalities of this case, her defense being subpar and the court reporting errors are both probably grounds for a retrial. I am not an expert on court laws for a retrial due to court reporting errors but have read that is the case, surely CC would be more of an expert on that subject.
      I would love to see a retrial of this case just as much as you all do, my personal opinion is the jury will find her guiltier even faster than they did the first time however. Pointing the finger at Darin is the only chance she would have and even with that I think she will still be found guilty. All question marks about fingerprints and blood evidence have pretty much all been laid to rest since then thus eliminating those question marks.
      Good luck getting on her getting a retrial in Texas, she is living on borrowed time.

      Delete
    4. But there is no proof of her involvement! How can you guys be so peremptory? And she could have died from those injuries! And again, what would have been her MOTIVE for killing her own kids? If she had mental issues, where are the psychological reports stating that? She is no Susan Smith. Im sorry, but you're going to have to find something a little bit more solid. I believe it's Darin because there clearly was no intruder and :

      -he had a lot of debts and 250 000 dollars to gain
      -the woman he's known since she was 15 and didn't want him anymore (he once held a gun to her head, remember?)
      -maybe he even wanted to get rid of two out of three kids (my boys are approximately the same age as Devon and Damon and believe me, I love them to death (no pun intended) and sometimes I wanna run far far away! being a housewife can be really depressing and lonely, and two boys that age is a LOT of work and stress. Especially with the third one so young.

      Not all woman with post partum kill their kids.


      Why won't you at least accept the fact the Darin had more of a motive than Darlie ever had?


      BSY!

      Sam

      Delete
    5. Agreed. I'm in agreement with doc, CC and Sam. Darin has a strong motive whereas Darlie seems to have no motive.
      Also where would Darin be when all this was happening ? I mean stabbing 2 of her kids and then a dangerous self throat cut ?

      Delete
  23. Correct to above commenter. The logic being used here defies the facts and ALL of the Evidence. Darlie clearly had mental issues. She SAW the intruder and it was NOT Darin, a fact the ones here who are claiming conspiracy want to ignore, among many other facts and all evidence. Darlie is guilty and where she belongs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please detail for me the evidence that Darlie had "mental issues".

      Interesting that you are arguing that there was, simultaneously, an "intruder", yet it was Darlie killed her kids.

      How does that work for you, exactly?

      Delete
  24. What are the facts that condemn Darlie beyond a reasonable doubt please?

    Sam

    ReplyDelete
  25. I never argued anything in favor of an intruder. I said Darlie claimed she saw the intruder and it was NOT Darin. Meaning either Darlie is a liar or she is covering to this day, for Darin. The latter of which I do not even consider a posibility.
    A suicide note apologizing for taking her own life would be the first clue as to mental illness.
    It is a a good enough clue in my book as to her state of mind, if it isnt for you then so be it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, Anony-P, it was not a suicide note. It was a diary entry which she shared with her friend Barbara.

      Delete
    2. Ok, so if you ever woke up in the middle in the night, with a stranger standing at the foot of your bed, in the dark, with that same stranger walking AWAY from you, you think you'd be able to describe that person exactly?

      Of course Darlie must have had her suspicions over the years,but not being the brightest tool in the shed (and not wanting to face an awful truth)doe not a murderer or psychopath make.


      Be seeing you!

      Sam

      Delete
    3. So, in your book, writing in one's diary (which is basically writing to yourself) about thinkin of ending one's life is a sign of mental illness? So, all depressed people are potential infanticides? Boy, there would not be a lot of kids alive on earth if that were true. I don't have any background in psychology or psychiatry, but trying to commit suicide at one point in one's life is a clear sign of mental illness?? Was there even one attempt? She only wrote about it IN HER OWN PERSONAL DIARY. People who want to off themselves generally don't tell anyone about it (believe me, I know from sad sad experience), they just do it. Others make several attempts, as a cry for help. There is a clear difference between contemplating suicide and doing it. And again, feeling depressed does not an infanticide make.


      Darin had a motive. Darlie had not.


      Sam

      Delete
  26. I am well aware that it was an entry in her diary, a note meant for others to read after her death, of which she was apologizing for taking her own life.

    I think if I woke up in the middle of the night with a stranger walking away from me,I would sure as hell know if it was my husband or not. Secondly, I am not the one claiming that I got a good look at him and know exactly what he looks like, Darlie Routier did, and claimed well enough to know it was NOT her husband.
    Secondly the man she says she followed out the utility room door is impossible to have been Darin because only seconds later Darin came down the stairs. Sorry but not enough time to change out of the clothes that Darin would have been in and clean up the blood that would have been all over him. = A Made up story and the evidence clearly shows that it is exactly that, made up. The hesitation wounds are a dead giveaway, as is the cleaned up kitchen sink with Darlie's blood in it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm a little tired of your insistence that Darlie cleaned up the kitchen sink, implying she cut her own throat there.

      And despite your constant refrain, her blood WAS on her pillow and on the couch - check the crime scene photos - clearly indicating that was the location of her attack.

      Both Darlie and Darin have stated that she wet kitchen towels for the boys' wounds IN THE KITCHEN SINK. Running water washes away blood; there was no cleanup.

      Delete
    2. Likewise, your "hesitation wounds" are garbage. Hesitation cuts are a series of shallow cuts made by someone considering self-harm. Back to the crime scene photos: No series of shallow cuts, just one, continuous wound.

      Delete
    3. Further, the "suicide note" you harp on as evidence of Darlie's "mental illness" was a diary entry, which Darlie promptly shared with her friend, Barbara Jondell, who not coincidentally, was employed by Darin.

      Barbara promptly reported the diary entry to Darin, as I'm sure she was intended to do - making Darlie guilty of attention-seeking, but certainly not a victim of some sort of psychosis.

      Delete
    4. And lastly, THERE WAS NO BLOOD SPATTER on the back of Darlie's nightshirt, other than a single 1 mm drop from Devon. The rest of the blood was hers.

      Delete
    5. Sorry CC but the police reported that Darlie NEVER brought any wet towels to the boys and would never have been let to bring "wet towels" to the boys as wet towels are not beneficial to stopping such wounds.
      As far as Darlie not being in a good state of mind , you can ve as illogocally excuseful as you want. Anyone threatening, leaving what was a remorseful note for everyone too see is clearly NOT in a good state of mind. You are calling it just attention seeking , of which we do NOT know one way or the other unless Darlie personally told you so.
      The hesitation wound is called such because the depth of the slice trails off in depth rather than goes deeper. Indicating that pressure was let off of the knife, probably due to the pain.
      As far as blood splatter, there was splatter on the front of her night shirt as well if I am not mistaken. Before posing a debate over this I will read the transcripts as there is a lot of false information on this case out there and I will adnit that it wouldnt be the first time I have gotten sourced incorrectly with this case.

      Delete
    6. IT WAS NOT A NOTE IT WAS A DIARY ENTRY!!!!!!!!!
      THERE WERE WET TOWELS ON THE CRIME SCENE (go watch the crime scene photos, even Darin states that she went for towels)

      So, let me follow your logic. Darin once pointed a gun to his wife's head. Mental illness. He did it. See, easy?

      Sam

      Delete
    7. Good idea, Anony-P; you need to buff up your information and stop playing fast and loose with the facts. Start by googling "hesitation cuts".

      You're absolutely right, Sam. Three dark wet towels are visible near where Damon's body was found; a single white one near Devon's. (Your English, by the way, is first-rate, really excellent, and needs no apologies.)

      Delete
    8. Possibly you can argue with the coroner or medical examiner in this case and let them know what is and what is not a hesitation wound.
      My descriptiom of a hesitation wound and why it is such is dead on. You may want to research a little more in detail than just googling the definition of a hesitation wound.

      Delete
    9. If I remember correctly there were at least two seemingly wet (and bloody, even if the dark blue colour makes it difficult to see at first) towels in the hall leading to the kitchen (?)


      (CC, merci pour le compliment! I have taught English on and off through the years, so maybe that's why! But sometimes I wish I could switch to French when some comments really frustrate the h out of me! But then I've got your comments, you always bring it, I love it!!)

      Sam

      Delete
  27. So what was HIS sock doing by the drain? And how do you know he was there " only seconds later" and not a wee bit longer ?(one can do A LOT in 3 or 4 minutes or less even) And nobody SAW him coming down the stairs, unless you were there yourself to witness it.

    Be seeing you!

    Sam

    ReplyDelete
  28. Let's be honest, Anony-P. You have not "gotten sourced incorrectly", which seems to imply your errors are something that happened to you rather than something you perpetuated.

    You held yourself out to be a person who's followed Routier for 22 years, and had full command of "the details", while you mocked newcomers, yet it is you who, time after time, posts misstatements and outright falsehoods.

    Sorry to be blunt, but you've been around here long enough - however intermittently - to know how much I dislike purveyors of misinformation in furtherance of their own point of view, rather than an honest pursuit of the investigation.

    Do better.

    ReplyDelete
  29. The wet towels and CPR were applied before the arrival of first responders.
    For anyone who may be interested, wet towels weren't the worst amateur idea in the world, though Saran Wrap is better for a sucking chest wound.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Incorrect State’s Exhibit 87 (and Defense Exhibit 31): This was a bloody white towel near Devon’s body. Charles Hamilton collected this towel on June 10th, and Kathryn Long subsequently took blood samples from it. It’s unclear how this towel came to be near Devon, but one thing is certain: the blood on it was not diluted in any way, which rules out the wet towel theory.

    ReplyDelete
  31. There was no testimony whatsoever to support diluted blood on the kitchen floor, towels, throw rugs, carpet, or Darlie’s t-shirt. Blood diluted by water would have been readily apparent to the investigators as well as to the forensic analysts. Darlie’s defense didn’t even inquire about diluted blood on those items when they cross-examined Kathryn Long, Judith Floyd, and Carolyn Van Winkle. Why the defense did not is rather obvious. They knew the answer would be “no.”

    The only diluted blood was in the kitchen sink and on the faucet handle. This blood typed as Darlie’s, with a fainter type that could be either Devon or Damon’s.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Darin’s Conflicting Testimony
    At the August 26th, 1996 Bond Hearing, Darin knew only that the kitchen sink had been removed from the house.
    Davis: How many times have you met with the Rowlett Police Department about this case?
    Darin: Four to five times.
    Davis: Okay. When is the first time that you told them that your wife went over to that kitchen sink?
    Darin: Probably the second or third time.
    Davis: Isn’t the truth is that you never have mentioned that to the police, have you?
    Darin: Well, I remember seeing it.
    Davis: Okay. But you never did tell the police, did you?
    Darin: I don’t recall*
    (Darin Routier, Sec. 129)

    Darin’s trial testimony, five months later, was quite different. By that time, he was aware of the DNA evidence on Darlie’s t-shirt, and he changed his story to conform to the physical evidence.
    Davis: As I understand your testimony with Mr. Mulder, you testified that when you were with Devon, that your wife got some towels and brought them over to you, while you were actually blowing into his mouth, is that right?
    Darin: Yes, sir.
    Davis: Now, Mr. Routier, that is the first time that you’ve told that story to anyone, isn’t it?
    Darin: Well, I guess so.
    Davis: Sir, you never did, in your testimony of September 12th ever mention your wife coming over there and doing anything with Devon, did you?
    Darin: I wasn’t asked.
    Davis: Sir, I asked you a lot of times about what your wife was doing; do you remember that?
    Darin: A lot of things I don’t remember.
    (Darin Routier, Sec. 4381, 4388)

    *During cross-examination, Darlie said “I don’t remember” or “I don’t know” 72 times. Darin was a close second with 67.

    Note: One particular supporter website states, “Much emphasis was placed on bare footprints which showed a path from the family room to the kitchen and back again.” This statement is incorrect. There were only two of Darlie’s bloody footprints, and both were leading away from the sink toward the family room. None led toward the sink.
    (David Mayne, Sec. 1730-1731)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The notion that Darlie slit her throat while leaning over the sink is a fantasy dreamed up by some "forensic expert" with a vivid imagination. There is absolutely no evidence supporting that assumption. But there IS evidence that this wound could not have been self-administered, i.e., the FACT that the knife came within 2 millimeters of killing her -- something no one staging a crime would want to do or need to do.

      It's possible the blood could have gotten into the sink when Darlie was wetting down the towels. It could also have gotten into the sink if she leaned over it while trying to keep her balance or if she grabbed a quick glass of water while trying to understand what had happened. The blood could have gotten diluted when she poured the remainder of the glass into the sink or maybe even splashed some of it onto the edge of the sink.

      There are all sorts of reasons why evidence in a crime scene looks the way it does. Reality is stranger than fiction and also very often much stranger than the imaginations of imaginative "experts."

      Delete
  33. The following comment appeared via email. For some reason the author was unable to post it here and asked me to do so:

    Anyone know if Darin was right or left handed? The scar on Darlie's throat looks like it was done with a dominant left hand as the slash starts from the right side of her neck slanting downward to almost the tip of her left collar bone. The perp perhaps held her head with his right hand and naturally used his stronger left hand to penetrate the knife deeply in order to kill.

    Darlie, on the other hand, looks to be right handed from the silly string footage at the funeral. She naturally uses her right dominant hand to spray. If she had self-inflicted her throat wound given the seconds she had while all this was happening, I would imagine she would use her right dominant hand to slash herself quickly and start on the left side of her neck. Would be awkward to slash herself with her right hand starting on the right side of her neck. Makes so sense.

    This woman is innocent. Be a real man and fess up, Darin! Feel sorry for their only surviving son, who now has cancer, and is living with his murderous father.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't forget the deep stab wound on her right arm. Did she, or could she do this with her off hand?

      Delete
  34. There was no wetting down of any towels !

    "The notion that Darlie slit her throat while leaning over the sink is a fantasy dreamed up by some "forensic expert" with a vivid imagination. There is absolutely no evidence supporting that assumption. But there IS evidence that this wound could not have been self-administered, i.e., the FACT that the knife came within 2 millimeters of killing her, something no one staging a crime would want to do or need to do."
    Surely you can not even be serious on this.
    Often someone who inflicts a self inflicted wound comes close to some kind of arterie or vital organ, which is really besides the point here anyways. This means absolutely nothing. In this scenario, where children were slaughtered and a maniac with a knife had just tried to kill Darlie, she was going to have to have some pretty serious wounds and nake it look like someone was trying to kill her.
    If Darlie would have came back with only a slice on her hand then her story would sound more ridiculous than it already does, she needed to have serious injuries. Much more serious than what she ended up with.
    You think a paper cut would have worked Doc ?
    I like the debate here but the theory on this case has grown wildly irrational. The killer, whose main target is Darlie, tries to kill her in her sleep or while she is drugged, gives her a couple of light stab wounds in the arm and a light slice to the neck, while she is rendered indefensible BUT then stabs 2 children, who were not even targets so hard that it goes all the way through one of their bodies and chips the concrete below. Darlie was the main target though. I am not sure why this killer took it so easy on her lol.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Also Doc, had Darin done this and just wanted off the hook as you propose, it would have been the easiest thing in the world for him to do. He could have done so without ever shelling out a dollar. All he had to do was point his finger at her once and this case was a closed death penalty case. Yet he has NEVER done that. Why not ? Makes no sense that he did not immediately blame Darlie and makes even less sense that to this day he still has not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Darin pointed fingers at Darlie, and as Darlie knows herself that she didn't kill their children, then it would stuck her mind that Darin is the one who tried to attack her, because it would not make sense to her why Darin is playing the blame game.

      Delete
  36. IMO, it's much more comfortable and SAFE to play the grief-stricken father and husband who would do anything to get her out of jail. (but who doesn't really do shit and asks his/her lawyer to leave him out of it at all costs)


    As Doc said, pointing the finger at her could have "woken her up": he would have given her a reason to fight. her own husband accusing her? That's why he didn't. Because she didn't do it. And he knew that, since he did it.

    Did you ever watch the graveyard "birthday party"? The one the jury watched 8 or 9 times? Look at his body language. And let's remember he failed the detector test miserably, claimed he'd been set up (just like that poor John Ramsey claimed over and over again that the mean Boulder Police were set to get him) but the cops on Court TV watched it and deemed it completely professional. It's only AFTER the test was over that they tried to ruffle his feathers, not DURING. That guy is a liar.

    Like Darlie said herself about the birthday party: would a guilty person do that? It doesn't make sense. Either she's a psychopathic mastermind or she's not (she's not)

    Sam

    ReplyDelete
  37. I never said he was not a liar. He seems to be one the bigger snakes I have ever heard speak. However, this does not make any evidence of him being the murderer in this case. Darlie and Darin BOTH failed lie detectors in this case. In the Ramsey case it was called nothing more than junk science, of which i disagree.
    The evidence as I see it, has Darlie Routier involved no no matter what.
    When I bring up the solid evidence in this case, CC, Doc and you as well want to get into behaviors, body language and demeanor. Something that was heavily frowned upon by Doc and CC constantly in the Jonbenet case is now their (and your) only evidence.
    As far as Darlie being a psychopathic mastermind, I would hardly call her even an amateur. This is the worst staging of a crime scene that I have ever encountered. Darlie was not an intelligent woman but Good people do bad things sometimes and bad people do good things sometimes. This may be one of those instances. If you want to get into behavior analysis, I will post you an interesting video regarding this case.

    ReplyDelete
  38. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I dont dabble in " body language and demeanor", nor does Doc. Time for you to step up with real facts, or fuck off. I suggest the latter; you bore me sonny.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Whoa. You seem to have a couple problems that have nothing to do with our discussions. Maybe e-ail Doc Directly. He's a srt guy, and may be able to direct you the help you need

    ReplyDelete
  41. The only person posting falsities is you CC. Wet towels (Never existed), guns being pulled etc. Post the transcripts or testimony like I did above or kindly STFU.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You need some help,girlie. Contact Doc personally, or me at my well known e-mail address



      Delete
  42. The wet towels are clearly visible in the crime scene photos. I've never alluded to "guns being pulled".

    Nor have I ever called anyone here an "ugly bitch", threatened to murder a fellow poster by shoving a "bloody sock" down her throat, "as your daddy should have done".

    You're way out of line.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You get that a death threat is not inconsequential, right? Twitter would ban you; Doc is more indulgent. I am not. I plan to report your threat to the proper authorities.

      Delete
  43. Further, Doc's blog is not "busier" simply because, absent information on the pending litigation, there just isn't anything to discuss that hasn't been yammered to death here for many years.

    Doc has several times praised and thanked me for my contributions, nor has he been slow to chastise me when appropriate. I assure you, if he wanted me gone, so I would be.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I've been lax lately in monitoring this blog and as a result missed a few extremely offensive posts that should have been deleted immediately but were allowed to remain. I just now marked them as spam, and as a result they've been removed. However, I left CC's completely justified responses in place. I'm really sorry it took me so long to address this issue, and want to apologize to CC for not having deleted these extremely nasty attacks on her, which were totally unwarranted. Since this person's posts were tagged as spam I'm hoping that future comments from him -- or her -- won't be appearing here again, but if anyone notices anything of this sort in future, please alert me. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The week of my 8th birthday (6-10-96) my stepdad and two of his friends went on a 5 hour road trip to the Dallas area. I remember it clearly bc they wanted my mom to go with them (she grew up right outside of Dallas) and she didn't go bc she was pregnant with my little sister and didn't want to be in a car that long. They had a huge fight about it but anyway, they left and didn't come back for days. When they came back there was another huge screaming fight and I heard my stepdad say they broke into a house in a nice neighborhood but there were people at home and they had to "eff them up." My stepdad said he didn't hurt anybody but there was a big fight and there were little kids in the house that woke up and got stabbed. When I got older I tried to do some research to find out more about it the only thing I can find about kids stabbed in Texas around that time is info on the Darlie case so I always wondered if he was involved in that...

    ReplyDelete
  46. Who "wakes up" to find they've been stabbed in the throat by an intruder then "follows" the intruder to the utility room?

    ReplyDelete
  47. The innocence Project has now taken the case.Darlie signed papers and a formal announcement shold be coming soon

    ReplyDelete
  48. Wow! this is Amazing! Do you know your hidden name meaning ? Click here to find your hidden name meaning

    ReplyDelete