I've been reading a lot about this case lately, and viewing some of the documentaries, and this extremely ironic aspect of the case is totally overlooked. If Darlie had died, Darin would have been the one put on trial and, if things had gone the way they went in Darlie's trial, HE would have been convicted of murder. Yet practically from day one, he was not considered a suspect. And one has to wonder why. Considering the seriousness of Darlie's throat wound, it's hard to rule out the possibility that she herself was the intended victim.
Could Darin have decided to kill Darlie to collect on her $250,000 life insurance policy? He'd been living above his means for years and was, at the time, desperately trying to get a loan. The prospect of collecting on a quarter of a million dollar insurance policy is a pretty powerful motive, while it's all but impossible to find a motive for Darlie to suddenly snap and stab her own children to death. Is it possible to put together a convincing scenario with Darin instead of Darlie as the perpetrator and Darlie as a victim? Pure speculation of course -- but let's give it a try:
As we know, Darin had recently contemplated the staging of a burglary as part of an insurance scam. This tells us how desperate he was for cash, and how willing he was to break the law in order to get some. So let's say that one day, out of sheer desperation, he decides that, instead of staging a burglary, he could stage the murder of his heavily insured wife by a would-be burglar. When alone in the house, he grabs a knife from the kitchen, walks into the garage and cuts a slit in a window screen to stage a point of entry. He then returns the knife to its rack in the kitchen and waits for Darlie and the children to come home. That night, he decides to make his move. He walks downstairs to the kitchen, takes a knife from the rack and quietly makes his way into the family room where Darlie and his two sons are fast asleep. It's possible that he could have prepared a paper towel soaked in chloroform or ether ahead of time. He'd have crept up from behind her, covered her face with the towel, and waited for her to lose consciousness. During this episode there could have been a struggle, which would explain the cut on her arm.
Once she was unconscious, Darin could have slit her throat without fear of her screaming and alerting the neighbors. Since he'd slashed so deeply into her throat, Darin might well have assumed that she was either dead or dying at that point, so his attention then turned to the two boys, who could have awakened during the struggle. Since they could identify him, they too would have to be killed. He stabs them both viciously, to make it look as though they'd been attacked by some monstrous psychopath.
Meanwhile, unbeknownst to Darin, Darlie is slowly reviving and in an extremely confused state of mind. Suffering from shock, she doesn't recall what happened and doesn't realize at first that her throat had been slashed. And since she'd been assaulted from behind, she has no way of knowing who stabbed her. She looks up and sees what she assumes to be an intruder. She can't identify him because his back is turned. And by the same token, Darin has no idea that Darlie is alive and regaining consciousness. Assuming that everyone in the family room is either dead or dying, he drops the knife and heads for the utility room and from there to the garage.
And at this point, I must admit, I find it difficult to speculate regarding what he would have been up to or what was on his mind. Perhaps he'd decided to make his way into the alley to plant that bloody sock. No need for him to run two blocks to plant it. He could have dropped it just outside the garage, as intruder evidence -- a stray dog might have got hold of it at some point, and carried it to the place where it was later found. Returning to the house, he would have overheard Darlie on the phone, hysterically trying to communicate with the 911 operator. Realizing to his horror that she was still alive, he would have had no choice but to forget about completing his staging, switching gears to play the innocent husband, "coming to the rescue" of his family. Quietly making his way back into the house from the front entrance, he could have given Darlie the impression that he'd just run downstairs after hearing her screams. As we can see from the floor plan, someone arriving via the front door could easily make it seem to someone in the kitchen as though he'd just emerged from the staircase:
While Darlie was distracted by her 911 call, Darin would then have thrown himself on top of one of the boys, pretending to render CPR, thus providing investigators with a reason why his victim's blood would be on his clothing. When the police arrive, he is, of course, "fully cooperative."
Since I'm new to this case, I can't be sure that the above scenario is fully consistent with all the evidence, so at this point I'm just tossing it out for whatever it may be worth, in the hope that someone reading here can offer a critique.
Regardless of how accurate my scenario might turn out to be, it does seem extremely strange that the authorities decided to rule Darin out so soon. Some light is shed on the situation by a writ of Habeas Corpus by Douglas Parks, a lawyer representing Darlie's appeal, dating, it would seem, from 2004. Some excerpts:
The State’s misconduct is matched only by the unethical and unconstitutional actions of Petitioner’s own defense counsel, who, even though advised by her prior counsel that the husband was a possible perpetrator, agreed not to implicate Petitioner’s husband in her trial as a condition of being hired by the family to defend her. By completely foreclosing this line of defense, her counsel never learned or presented to the jury evidence that Darin Routier had arranged to have his car stolen in 1994 to collect insurance proceeds and for a period of months before the events on June 6, 1996, had inquired of relatives and associates whether they knew of anyone who would “burglarize” his home so that he could collect the insurance proceeds. . .
Defense Counsel’s Attorney-Client Relationship with Darin Routier and Employment Arrangement with the Routier Family Prevented Defense Counsel From Presenting an Effective Defense for Petitioner and From Effectively Cross-Examining Darin Routier at Trial.All I can say is: hmmmmmm . . .
Defense counsel was twice conflicted in this case. First, he represented Darin Routier in a matter substantially related to this case. Although the State had evidence implicating Darin Routier in the crimes with which Petitioner was charged, that concurrent representation of Petitioner’s husband prevented defense counsel from investigating Darin Routier and pursuing a viable defense strategy for Petitioner. Second, Darin Routier “told [defense counsel] that if we hired him, [he] did not want him to ‘go after’ [him]. [Defense counsel] agreed that, if hired to represent [Petitioner], he would not argue as part of the defense that [Darin Routier] was in any way responsible for the death of [his] children.” Routier Aff. ¶ 7. These obvious and irreconcilable conflicts of interest adversely affected his representation of Petitioner throughout her trial.
I have went over a similar scenario in my head as zi oersonally think Darin to be involved, his story makes him way to clean. There are just a couple of things that I can not get past. The main one is if she was out or put out with a drug and on her back then how do the boys blood splatter end up on her back and shoulders ? This with no blood on the couch. I see this as impossible and without even a possible innocent answer to how it could get there any other way considering Darlie was on her back in the couch.
ReplyDeleteThe one and only drop of blood on Darlie's back was Devon's, Sample TB8, located on the right rear shoulder of her nightshirt.
DeleteLook at the schematic above: Devon was killed on the floor, not far from Darlie's head on the couch. Had she struggled or squirmed at all, or when she rose from the couch, it's perfectly possible her right shoulder could have been exposed to blood exhaled by Devon in his struggles to breath - a mistake the blood spatter "expert", Tom Bevel, made in another case, mistaking blood exhalation for a gunshot spatter pattern and sending an innocent man to prison.
I also wondered if she had been drugged. According to the trial transcripts a drug screen was performed when she entered the hospital, and showed the presence of amphetamines. Darlie reported that she took two types of weight control diet pills.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if there are any drugs that don't register on a typical hospital screen. I would think yes, but I'm speculating.
I'm trying to read through the court transcripts, as I didn't know much about the case. I don't understand why she was allowed to be represented by the same attorney that had briefly represented Darin. That seems so wrong to me, especially in a murder case.
K
Some very good information here on the Darlie's wounds. All medical personnel found the cut ( not a stab) in the neck to be "superficial." This article goes into more detail.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.darlieroutierfactandfiction.com/statement-5/
Yet those same medical personnel also said the wound came within 2 mm of her carotid artery, and she lost a "substantial" amount of blood.
DeleteFrom the trial transcript:
Delete9 Q. And is it true that this wound, at
10 that point, to the carotid sheath came within two
11 millimeters of the carotid sheath (sic)?
12
13 MR. RICHARD C. MOSTY: The artery?
14 MR. PRESTON DOUGLASS: Sheath. I'm
15 asking about the sheath first.
16 THE WITNESS: You said it's an injury
17 to carotid sheath?
18
19 BY MR. PRESTON DOUGLASS:
20 Q. On the records it says it came to the
21 carotid sheath.
22 A. Right.
23 Q. Now, the carotid sheath is 2 or 3
24 millimeters thick; is that right?
25 A. Correct.
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
793
1 Q. Okay. So it came within 2 millimeters
2 of the carotid artery?
3 A. Correct.
So yes, in technical terms it's considered a "superficial wound." But any wound that doesn't penetrate a vital organ such as the carotid artery would be considered "superficial" in a strictly medical context. However, the doctor agreed that it came within 2 millimeters of the carotid artery, which to most people would NOT be considered superficial at all, but dangerously close to being fatal. The prosecutor was of course well aware of the distinction between the purely technical definition and the way the term is understood by most people, but he chose to ignore it, giving the impression that the wound was not as serious as it was. Two millimeters from certain death can hardly be considered "superficial" in the everyday sense of "negligible," but that distinction seems to have been lost on the jury.
She was walking around just fine when the police got there so I tend to believe more of the latter. An almost doesnt count, especially when she is planning on emergency medical personnel to be there immediately. A killer changing from stabbing to slicing would be very odd and unusual change in assault method, coincidentally. I know that no one hear takes much stock in lie detectors but Darlie most likely failed her lie detector. Also on of the investigator shows (probably still on youtube) Darlie's mother gets caught in a blatant lie telling them that she knew nothing of Darlie taking a lie detector test and cuts off the interview.
ReplyDeleteSolid evidence ? Surely not, interesting while restudying the case though.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/justice4newcomers.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/darlie-routiers-ironic-polygraph/amp/
Got a little confirmation bias thing going there, Anony? You consistently misrepresent the facts.
DeleteShe wasn't "walking around just fine". She was leaning on the kitchen island, staunching the blood flow from her neck wound with towels.
How does one "plan[ning] on emergency personnel to be there immediately"? Response times vary widely, and even just a nick to a major artery is fatal in minutes.
A serial killer may have a particular way to commit murder; a neophyte killing his own family for money? Not so much.
And you carefully do not mention that Darin failed a polygraph as well.
Ok everyone who has not followed this case since the beginning is reading and believing many false facts.
ReplyDeleteThis case is very similar to the JBR case because the Routier family has used the media to slur the case. To their credit they have done a very good job, in order to seperate fact from fiction in this case without having to read through thousands of pages of court transcripts, someone was kind enough to do that and summarize a site for us that seperates all the fact from fiction. Darlie Routier is, without question, right where she belongs.
http://www.darlieroutierfactandfiction.com
PIERRE
Pierre? Yup, yup, yup, fooled me, Anony.
DeleteYou think your punctuation, prose style and reliance on the same one or two websites aren't instantly recognizable?
You claimed in your first post here on the 27th to have followed this case from the beginning, and to know every detail, yet it's you who constantly muddies the water with misstatements.
I never tried to fool anyone, I just decided it was a good idea to start putting a name on my posts so that I could be identified from other Anons ?
DeleteI dont believe that I have misstated anything but you back up exactly what I misstated with factual evidence then I will surely acknowledge any mistake I have made..
Darlie Routier was up, more than coherent, moving around and even stayed on the phone with the emergency operator until after the police arrived. At one point during the 911 call she walked over to the boys and told then to hold on mommy's here. She was in such shape that she was told to go and help with her children by the police. If you believe that she was in such bad shape that she was close to death yet the police told her to go and help with the children then you do. It goes against everything I have ever read about this case. Not something usually told to someone who is so badly injured.
At no point is there anything I have ever seen by LE or medical personnel documented that Darlie Routier had been in as bad of shape as you are portraying, all of her wounds were reported by medical staff as superficial.
Like I said though, post it then, i would love to read it.
I posted a link to the lie detectors so Darin failing is obviously not something that zi was trying to "conceal".
I am not suffering from any type of bias whatsoever. I , at one time believed Darlie to be innocent as well however there is a ton of evidence that while following the case has said otherwise. I believe it is you who probably just started reading about the case and is reading alot of Routier twists and media manipulation that then spilled into the media amd is now mainstream reading. It is all right there to read as I post sources some with links to the actual transcripts. I will be eagerly awaiting your contradictory evidence.
PIERRE
I've been reading the testimony of the nurses and doctors from the trial transcripts. ER Nurse Jody Fitts testified that the neck wound "spurted blood" when touched by a surgeon (See darliefacts.com - The Nurses for a brief summary). Her necklace was embedded in the wound. Have a look at the photos of her nightshirt: The front is saturated in her blood. ER personnel testified she came in naked, covered head to toe in caked blood. Any neck wound requiring surgical repair is serious.
Delete7/27 - you stated the sock belonged to "the boys". It was Darin's.
7/27 - you rely on blood spatter "expert" Tom Bezel. Three guilty verdicts based on his "evidence" have been overturned by DNA evidence. Three others are in question.
7/27 - you stated screen fibers were found on the murder weapon. They were found on another knife, that had been returned to the knife block.
7/27 - you said no one knew about Darlie's "suicide note". Both her friend Barbara and her husband were aware.
7/29 - you stated blood spatter on Darlie's back was from both boys, and caused by "overhead stabbing". One 1 mm spot only, and it was Devon's. Cast off from a blood-soaked murder weapon would have caused much more spatter.
7/29 - you said Darin's insurance scams were not real, but a "Routiers sham" to help Darlie's appeal. They were real. You have several times referred to Robbie Zee as Darlie's father. He is her stepfather.
Thanks for all this useful info, CC. I'll add one more bit. I've never claimed that Darlie was incapacitated by her neck wound. The point is that, if the wound had been only a very tiny bit deeper, it would have totally incapacitated, and very probably killed her. Since it miraculously did not go that far she was able to function fairly well, though the loss of blood would eventually have been very serious.
DeleteRead about the case contemporaneously, later read a book or two. My present principal source is the trial transcripts. When I have particular questions, I google them, viz: "Darlie Routier blood spatter evidence", "Darin Routier insurance scams". Works a treat.
ReplyDeleteOnce again, as with the Ramsey case, the Amanda Knox case, and the Steven Avery case, I feel compelled to focus on the logic above all. Because, as we see time after time, the evidence, the forensics and the psychology can so easily be misinterpreted, meaning one thing for the defense and something entirely different for the prosecution -- whereas the logic speaks for itself. And I ask you:
ReplyDelete1. Is it logical for someone staging a phony breakin to slash her own throat so deeply that it comes within 2 millimeters of almost certain death? I've heard of people cutting their arms, their legs, even stabbing themselves in the stomach, in order to throw investigators off the track -- but slashing your throat? Why take such a huge risk? Darlie was not a surgeon -- she'd have had no way of knowing exactly where to cut and how deep she could safely go before killing herself.
2. Is it logical for someone staging an intruder breakin to make up a story about sleeping through a knife attack? What would Darlie have had to gain by concocting such an unusual story. You claim you walked into the family room and surprised an intruder stabbing your children, who then ran out of the house when you discovered what he was doing. No need to elaborate by claiming you'd been unconscious while someone slit your throat. What would she have had to gain by making up such an unlikely story?
3. Is it logical to assume that anyone would be so naive as to stage an intruder breakin based only on a slit in a window screen? How easy it would have been for her to plant a trail of blood from the kitchen to the garage and out the window, but for some reason she neglects to do that. Why?
4. Is it logical to assume that she'd decide to use a knife from her own kitchen? Why not go to some town where she wouldn't be identified and buy a knife? And then toss it in a storm drain after the deed is done.
While there is indeed no evidence of an intruder, there is also no evidence that Darlie made any serious attempt to stage an intruder. If she had, the evidence would be there and her story would have been much more believable. Which is why Darin is by far the most likely suspect. Darlie would have had all the time in the world to stage before calling 911. According to my scenario, Darin's staging would have been cut short once Darlie came to, and made her call.
She was mentally ill, probably didn't know where or how to avoid that artery, and perhaps she didn't care if she lived or died. Maybe she had remorse and wanted to kill herself, and had a change of heart. I don't think this alone is enough evidence for innocence.
DeleteThe blind "Darlie did it" proponents drive me as nuts as the PDIs. They want us to believe that these women were simultaneously mentally ill, smart yet rather dopey and clumsy, and capable of spontaneous murder without motive.
ReplyDeleteWhile their husbands, who have motive, means and opportunity, walk away blameless and unscathed. Now THAT defies logic.
I read that the boys clothing along with Darlie's nightie were put into evidence bag together. This could explain transfer of blood from boys clothing onto back of nightie
ReplyDeleteSorry, evie. Your comment got lost for a while in another discussion. The trial testimony indicates that Devon's pants and undershirt were in one brown paper bag, Darlie's nightshirt in another, and had been stored, inexplicably, at the fire department, thereby breaking the chain of custody.
DeleteFrankly, the Rowell PD did a piss poor job of note- taking, report- writing and evidence collection, so who knows?
Good to see you.
Good to speak cc. Always better with transcripts or trial testimony rather than a news report that I read thanks for that.
DeleteCC you are correct as I mispoke about whose sock it was, (Darin's) and that that knife was the murder weapon. Those were slips mainly due to typing out these long responses on a small phone, excuse the typos as well.
ReplyDeleteThe capchas on this site are next to maddening.
About Darlie's suicide note I was speaking about general public not knowing, not Darin or Barbara and in relation to being able to hide even a severe mental illness.
The blood splatter evidence you are incorrect about.
Several cast-off stains in Devon’s blood were found on the front and the right shoulder of Darlie’s nightshirt.
Several cast-off stains of Damon’s blood were found on the back of Darlie’s nightshirt. Damon’s cast-off blood was found on top of Darlie’s blood, as well.
No dilution of the dna and no water was indicted on the night shirt.
Cast-off blood as the word implies is cast-off the murder weapon as it is in motion. It will have tails which point to the source of the blood. The tails on Darlie’s shirt pointed upward towards the source of the blood. The blood splatter on the back of Darlie's shirt is next to impossible to get there unless flying off of a murder weapon while raising it about ones head in a downward stabbing motion while at the top of that motion. In this case the claim that she was lying on her back on the couch while these murders occured and there is no blood splatter on the couch where Darlie lay makes it an impossible piece of evidence to find any other answer to.
If this is refutable please post the info.
As far as the insurance scam not being real we can debate all day. I never refuted that Darin and Darlie's stepfather did not say these things. It is a "real thing" that they did. Whether or not you believe it is another story and the point I was making. Her own family waits 5 years to come forth with this information while their daughter is on death row makes it a little hard to believe. Why in the world would they possibly do that ? In no way, shape or form does that make any sense whatsoever.
I write my posts exclusively on my phone to avoid any conflict of interest that might be implied by using my firm's devices, and so fail to see what composing on a phone has to do with your errors of fact.
DeleteWith regard to the blood evidence, you've got it exactly ass backwards: The tails point in the direction the blood is traveling, not from whence it came. (Tip: google "blood spatter tails")
From the trial transcripts, Tom Bevel testimony, Section 3589-3590: The only blood on the back of Darlie's nightshirt, other than the single spot from Devon on the right rear shoulder(TB8) is Darlie's. None of Damon's blood was on the back of the shirt. I explained about blood exhalation as an alternative to cast-off from a knife strike yesterday.
There are only 4 other samples that Bevel sourced to the boys, all on the front of the shirt.
Two were on her right front shoulder (TB2 and TB3, a mixture of Damon and Darlie and Devon and Darlie, respectively), and two on her left front shoulder (LS1 and LS3, Damon and Darlie and Devon and Darlie).
With the exception of TB8, these are all mixtures, no way to prove whose got where first, and no way to prove they came from the knife. Darin testified that Darlie brought wet towels for the boys' wounds, and stood over him while he performed CPR. CPR also causes blood exhalation, particularly when a patient is drowning in his own blood from punctured lungs, as these boys were.
Finally, from an article by Skip Hollandsworth in "The Texas Monthly", June 30, 2002: Robbie Kee did not tell his wife until 5 years after the murders about Darin's insurance scams (says he didn't connect the two), at which time Darlie's mother promptly got on the phone to Darlie's appelate attorney.
Doc. I understand your logic but it flies in the face of all of the evidence in this case. There was no intruder, I think we can agree on that and there is not an iota of evidence in this case that says otherwise, while there is a ton of circumstantial evidence that adds up to Darlie doing this. When you go back and read her changing stories, that changed with the evidence that was presented, it seems clear that she is good for this crime.
ReplyDeleteYou seem unwilling to accept the obvious in favor of a random scenario based on 0 evidence whatsoever other than a "possible" motive. Clearly there was no intruder and Darlie was there and tells an absurd, changing story about another man in the house.
That should tell you that if Darin did this then Darlie would have to know that. There is no way around this. So why would Darlie take the death penalty to cover for Darin ? She wouldnt.
Darlie cutting her own neck would not be the first time someone had done this, so I am not sure why this seems so impossible to you. This was a woman contemplating suicide to begin with.
She most likely never even thought about her carotid artery and just got plain lucky that she did not cut into it. As I said before, in her mind and train of thought, help was on the way.
Someone washed her blood down that sink and cleaned up and the only other person in that house that could have done that would have been Darin and that would make even less sense than the scenario that we have right now.
The staging of the scene would not give her all the time in the world ? Once she stabbed the boys she would have to quickly cause her own wounds and that limited her time.
"She could have planted a trail of blood from kitchen to the garage."
Whose blood could she plant ? If she planted her own blood from kitchen to garage she would have looked even more guilty than she does now. You lost me on that one Doc.
IMO, Darlie Routier's education level was nowhere near that of say PR. She qas a dumb blonde. I personally do not think that Darlie Routier was intelligent enough to stage much of anything, let alone a crime scene, which is why the crime scene was pointing right back at herself. I do think that Darlie Routier had some well thought out plan nor do I think that she ever even contemplated or even knew something like fibers from a window screen could be found on a knife etc etc.
A lot pf people are not that educated on crime scenes, watch ID channel and
read about murder cases.
You both act so surprised like a woman could not and would not do this, yet it happens all the time so that can not be the excuse.
In this case and the JBR case the women are caught in many more lies than any innocent person in a murder case should ever be telling.
PIERRE
Totally agree with your logic Pierre. She was living the high life before the money train ran out, children take money, she wanted them gone. In many ways this is Susan Smith - childish woman wants something, perceives children standing in the way, invents an invisible perpetrator and lies unconvincingly.
DeleteAlso, the neck wound is A-typical of a self inflicted wound as the depth of the cut trails off and becomes less and less deep.
ReplyDeleteThis generally does not occur when someone is going for a kill as they do not let the pressure off of the knife.
Had someone really wanted to kill Darlie one simple stab to the neck with a lot less pressure than it took to kill the boys would have done the deed and been alot faster.
PIERRE
Hey Doc/CC/everyone, I hope everyone is well. It's good to see some fresh content about a different case. I watched this episode on Forensic Files, but other than that I know very little about this case.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to your above questions though....if it was Darlie who did this, then all logic goes out of the window. Because it's extremely difficult to try and understand a person who could do that to their own kids. So slicing your own throat is definitely illogical to you and I, however to Darlie...who knows. Maybe in her state of mind she just thought the throat would be more realistic. Maybe she didn't care if she died. I dont know. The same argument could be had on all of your points in an earlier post.
From my limited knowledge and the evidence that I have seen, Darlie looks the most likely culprit. However it would not surprise me if Darin did the deed or was involved. Poor kids though...absolutely terrible.
Zedley! How's life, mate?
DeleteLiving the dream CC...one day at a time ;)
DeleteHow are you going?
Zedley
Oh...y'know...still don't sleep well, and the nights are long. I try to put a good face on it, but that doesn't work so well after hours.
DeleteGood to see you. Cheers.
Keep your chin up....I'm sure you have much better days ahead.
DeleteIf it makes you feel any better, me "living the dream" everyday is basically groundhog day everyday. I wish I had something exciting to tell you.
Thank you. XOXO
DeleteHi Zed. "In regards to your above questions though....if it was Darlie who did this, then all logic goes out of the window. Because it's extremely difficult to try and understand a person who could do that to their own kids."
DeleteExactly. So why assume she did it? Especially when her husband's motive would have been much easier to understand. He was there. He had motive. He had opportunity. He had means.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI find it extremely puzzling that so many who've convinced themselves that "Darlie did it" are so willing to give Darin a pass. As I noted at the outset of the above post, if she'd died on the operating table, HE'd have been the leading suspect and would most likely be sitting on death row by now. Does that tell you nothing?
ReplyDeleteNo one has ever been able to come up with a credible motive for Darlie to kill her boys, not to mention the savagery of the assault. If Darin did it, the motive would be clear: a quarter of a million in insurance money -- meaning the primary victim was Darlie herself. The savagery of the assault on the boys would have been part of the staging.
Moreover, no one has ever been able to come up with a motive for her to claim she'd been unconscious while her throat was being slit. What would she have had to gain by concocting such a story?
Darlie claimed she was at the sink wetting towels to place on her children's wounds to stop the bleeding. It stands to reason that she'd have been going back and forth with bloody towels, rinsing them in the sink, which would account for the blood found there. And while she was doing that it's not hard to see how some of her own blood could also get into the sink. The notion that the blood got there while she was cutting herself is extremely speculative, as is so much of the other "forensic evidence." Just because some piece of evidence is "consistent with" what the prosecution wants to believe does not make it so.
The most telling piece of circumstantial evidence pointing to Darin is the extreme unlikelihood of Darlie slitting her own throat so deeply, simply as a ruse to throw off the police. Seems to me her throat had to have been slit by someone else -- and the only possible candidate, given the total lack of intruder evidence, would have been Darin. Which is why, as he himself stated, he'd have most likely been convicted if she had died. Since, as I've demonstrated, it's not that difficult to come up with a possible scenario starring him as the murderer, it's beyond comprehension that so many are so willing to give him a pass.
As for all that "forensic evidence," you'd think the public would have learned its lesson by now. Time after time innocent people have been convicted on the basis of misleading or false information provided by so-called forensic "scientists." As with handwriting analysis, forensics is not really a science, and depends much too heavily on largely subjective speculation.
Yet Darlie is sitting on death row, willing to take the rap for her husband? That makes no sense. And as listed below there are plenty of spouses who stay and defend their murdering spouses which makes no sense but would in a complex family dynamic where one is a psychopath and the other an enabler. As for the neck wound I know you can't get over that, but it did stop short of killing her, and there are plenty of other cases where a killer in order to remove blame from self stages self inflicted wounds - Van Breda is but one example.
DeleteIf you read the Habeas Corpus writ referenced in the above post, you'll see that Darlie has in fact finally recognized that Darin might indeed have been the mysterious "intruder." The reasons behind her initial testimony, where she seemed all too willing to rule him out, are encapsulated in that document.
DeleteLet's first take a look at the testimony.
From the cross-examination of Mr. Toby Shook, one of the prosecutors:
23 Q. Okay. So it's clear, your husband, 24 Darin, didn't commit this offense, did he?
25 A. No, he didn't.
1 Q. I mean, you know that for a fact, 2 don't you?
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. This jury can remove that issue from 5 their minds whatsoever, that Darin Routier did not kill 6 your sons?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. The man you saw walking away was not 9 your husband?
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. You saw that man go out into the 12 garage; is that right?
13 A. Out through the utility room into the 14 garage.
15 Q. And after that, you are wide awake 16 down in the kitchen, and then in the Roman room and in 17 the hallway.
18 A. Well, not wide awake at first, but 19 yes, I did become wide awake.
20 Q. Well, there is no way that if that had 21 been Darin, that he could have snuck in the house and 22 gotten back upstairs and then come back down?
23 A. No, I don't think so.
24 Q. So we can put that issue aside. The 25 murderer of your children is not your husband?
1 A. Yes, sir.
Note how eager the prosecutor is to rule Darin out. He is literally putting words in her mouth. A good defense attorney would have objected that the prosecution was leading the witness, but Darlie's lawyer remains silent. Why?
Because, as we learn from the Habeas Corpus writ, there was an arrangement between Darlie's family and her lawyer that the defense would not "go after" Darin (see above). That was a condition of the lawyer being hired in the first place. Obviously Darin's parents were eager to protect him, and besides, as we also learn, the lawyer had a conflict of interest as he was representing Darin in a different case. Clearly, this person should never have been hired as Darlie's lawyer -- but, since Darlie (like Patsy Ramsey) had convinced herself that the murderer HAD to be an intruder, she was willing to accept those conditions.
Note that the prosecutor never asks Darlie WHY she is so sure it wasn't Darin. He is satisfied with her assurance that it wasn't. No reason. And as I explain in my scenario above, Darin could easily have created the impression he had come from upstairs if he had re-entered the house from the front door.
The writ of Habeas Corpus (https://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Habeas/Habeas.html) makes it clear that she eventually changed her mind about Darin, as the possibility of his involvement comes up over and over again. The writ also contains very thorough and convincing refutations of the prosecution's presentation of the forensic evidence that has convinced so many she must be guilty.
Sent you an email.
DeleteWatching Darlie give her jailhouse interview another psychopath comes to mind - Susan Atkins. The little girl voice, the feigned sorrow, the slight smirk/smile when called out. Why make up an intruder story if the husband did it? It also woudln't be the first time a spouse stood by the murdering partner, at least initially (Rusty Yates, Leanna Taylor Harris). Death row is too good for Darlie.
ReplyDeleteIf you read Darlie's testimony carefully you'll see that she would have had no way of knowing whether or not her husband was "the intruder." It was dark and she only saw him for a fleeting instant and from behind. I see no basis for comparison with Susan Atkins, whose guilt was never in doubt.
Delete
ReplyDeleteI'd like to put paid to the DDIs' claim that Darlie must have slit her own throat over the sink, as there was no blood on the couch. In fact, there was, and on her pillow as well, and I've found some crime scene photos that prove it.
The pillow pics can be found at darliefacts.com. Pull down the menu bar, select Evidence, then Blood, then scroll down to the pertinent pics.
I found the couch pic by searching "Darlie Routier crime scene photos" and selecting the first choice, documentingreality.com. Scroll down to photo of blue leather couch with highlighted arrow to see Darlie's blood on the couch. Problem is, several of the photos on this site, below that of the couch, are of Devon in situ, Damon on the autopsy table. WARNING! GRAPHIC CONTENT.
Doc, I'm not assuming Darlie did it. I don't know enough about the case to assume anything.
ReplyDeleteAll I'm saying, is if it was Darlie, then nothing about this case would surprise me (including her slitting her own throat). So I don't think we can rule Darlie out simply because her throat was slashed. Maybe she even intended to take her own life but then couldn't go all the way with it?
If Darlie was to be ruled out, it would have to be by some other means.
There is two things that really interest me:
1. The sock
2. The fingerprints
My initial thoughts is the sock (down the alley) seems very staged. Did Darin have the opportunity/time to make a dash 150 yards down the street (and back again)?
There is also the bloody fingerprint found on the glass table in the Roman Room, the latent fingerprint on the utility room door and the bloody fingerprint on the same door.
They haven't tested these fingerprints yet (although they have approved it). I believe they are trying to raise money for these prints to be tested. The running of the three unidentified fingerprints through the FBI database has been put on hold due to the State-level testing. When the prints are finally run, however, if they demonstrate the presence of a third party in the Routier home who shouldn’t have ever been there, the evidence of an intruder will have been under the State’s very nose for over two decades while Darlie has sat on Death Row for a crime she insists she did not commit.
For me, the testing of these prints needs to happen. This will rule out an intruder...or....rule out an accomplice.
Is it possible Darin hired a third party to perform this deed? And promised him money once done (which we would suddenly have a lot of).
I also find it odd that on Darlie's 911 call she stated something along the lines "I've already picked the knife up. Oh no, we could have got prints from that".
ReplyDeleteTHAT IS ODD. If you're kids are dead/dying, the prints on the life are the last thing on your mind at that point in time.
I also don't understand how a knife carving into her neck, doesn't wake her up. Yet, her young boy prodding her shoulder with his fingers, did wake her up...again, doesn't make sense to me.
DeleteAnd no mother would act the way she did 8 days later at the birthday party at the gravesite. The way she spoke, full of smiles and a certain smugness....that sent shivers down my spine.
Of course, none of what I just wrote means she is guilty. But it's certainly hard to ignore!
You make some interesting points, Zed. Seems to me the sock may have been used by the assailant as a kind of glove, so his prints wouldn't be on the knife. Once out of the house he would not have needed it anymore, so got rid of it. If it was an intruder, then the distance from the house isn't a problem, as he may have decided to discard it at any time. No need to take it with him since there would be nothing on it to incriminate him. Alternately it could have been discarded just outside the garage and then picked up and moved by a stray dog or other animal attracted by the blood.
DeleteAnd yes it's hard to understand why having her throat slit would not have awakened her. But it's even harder to understand why she'd have made up a story like that if it weren't true. Which is why I think she may have been chloroformed or sedated with ether prior to the slashing.
As for her acting the way she did at the birthday party, once again it's also possible to claim that someone putting on a big act to cover up the murder of her own children would want to act that way either. If you truly believe your children are now angels in heaven looking down on you, then you might want to put on a happy face for their sake. I think that's what Darlie was feeling at the time. And we should not forget that she was under the influence of sedation at the time.
In regards to the sock. That had to be staged. It was placed perfectly on the ground....all laid out, perpendicular to the kerb. It was placed right next to a garbage bin and right next to a storm drain. The sock screamed "LOOK AT ME. PLEASE FIND ME". That is pretty obvious to me and that rules out an intruder completely.
DeleteAt this stage, if someone asked me what I thought happened with my limited knowledge on this case. I would say that I believe Darlie intended to kill herself and her two boys that night (hence why they slept downstairs). After slicing her own throat, she perhaps realised she couldn't do it....or....she saw that one of the young boys was still alive. She then panicked and everything unfolded from there.
ReplyDeleteYes, that's an interesting hypothesis. There are in fact people who've killed their children before killing themselves, to spare them the agony of dealing with the death of their parent. It's a sick thought process but suicide is also pretty sick.
DeleteNevertheless, the blood evidence appears to be consistent with the throat slash preceding the stabbing of the boys. If the blood evidence indicated that the stabbing came first, then her story would obviously be false and it would have been open and shut.
It's axiomatic that a perp first neutralizes the biggest threat first - in this case, Darlie.
DeleteThis also explains a knife slash rather than a stab wound to her throat, as the former would possibly slice her windpipe and larynx, making screaming impossible.
Let's try this again, with links this time:
ReplyDeleteCrime scene photos of bloodstains on Darlie's pillow and green leather couch
https://darliefacts.com/blood-evidence/
Crime scene photos of Darlie's bloodstains on green leather couch
https://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f237/darlie-routier-crime-scene-pics-112209/
WARNING: The latter site includes graphic photos of the dead boys.
Clearly Anony-P is incorrect. Darlie's knife attack occurred while she was sleeping on the couch, and was not self-inflicted over the kitchen sink.
Thanks CC. I see the blood on the pillow, but for the life of me I have no idea what the photo of the couch is supposed to mean. Why the rectangle? And what is the arrow pointing to? I don't see anything there, sorry.
DeleteI think the rectangle is highlighting papers, files and a rubbermaid-type storage container, and is unrelated to the arrow. Darin said he and Darlie updated their wills frequently, whenever they traveled, and were shopping for a file cabinet for their important paperwork.
DeleteI see a slightly darker area on the couch where Darlie's head would have been. Otherwise why the arrow?
Blood drops on the couch are also visible in the third photo of the pillow series, and are highlighted by a red arrow.
ReplyDeleteWas there any chloroform or ether found anywhere in the house or in the surrounding streets/alleys?
ReplyDeleteI can't only accept that for Darlie to have been sliced with no memory whatsoever, this must have been used.
If none was found......
*can only accept
Delete(Stupid mobile phone)
Also, a question for someone to answer:
DeleteOver the years, has Darin ever changed his mind and said that he believes Darlie could be responsible? Or is he still maintaining that she is innocent?
I have (I think) read most of Darin's interviews. The closest he ever came in my reading was in The Texas Monthly interview, 6/30/02, when he told Skip Hollandsworth he'd help her if he could, but not at the expense of his own life.
DeleteSorry for multiple posts, but just wanted to clarify something. As I do more research into this case, I have found a lot of reports that state the attack occurred on the children first (before Darlie was sliced). Doc/CC - out of curiosity, where did you read that the blood evidence pointed to Darlie being attacked first?
ReplyDeleteAlso, Ms. Routier wrote the beginnings of a suicide note in her diary a month before the slayings, prosecutors said. The diary also contained numerous entries that show Ms. Routier's concern for her children.
Apparently the diary wasn't just speculation and thoughts, it actually read like she was going to do something to herself.
If the above is all true, then Darlie is just looking more and more likely to me. However, I can't rule Darin out completely at this stage (hence my question above regarding chloroform/ether).
I don't know of any evidence that proves who was attacked first. It just seems logical to me to take the adult, and thereby the biggest potential threat, out first.
DeleteBut Doc may have better information, Zedley.
From https://darliefacts.com/blood-evidence/
Delete"Testimony by Bevel contradicted the physical evidence in the Routier case. For example, Bevel testified that because bloodstains on the right shoulder area of Darlie’s nightshirt contained a mixture of Darlie’s blood and each of her two children (one stain contained Darlie’s blood mixed with Devon’s and the other contained Darlie’s blood mixed with Damon’s) it showed that Darlie had to have been bleeding when the boys were stabbed. . . the prosecution’s own expert acknowledged she had to have been bleeding when she allegedly stabbed the boys."
Bevel's finding is also consistent with Darlie's contention that she was in contact with both boys after she discovered them dying on the floor, so it's far from proof that she was the one who stabbed them. In any case, her blood mixed with that of the boys is evidence that she could not have stabbed them first, before slitting her own throat in an attempted suicide or for any other reason.
A suicidal person intent on killing her children would have stabbed them first and then slit her own throat, no?
As for the chloroform or ether, or any other such drug, I doubt investigators would have thought to look for anything like that in the house. I haven't seen any discussion of the case that deals with such a possibilty, and it's possible the investigators never considered it. It's also possible that the shock of having her throat slit so deeply induced a state of short-term amnesia. In any case, I find it extremely unlikely that anyone would concoct such a bizarre scenario as a ruse, when much simpler and more readily believable alternatives were easily available. There was no need for her to claim she'd been rendered unconscious. All she needed to do was describe a struggle with someone wearing a mask.
Anyone interested in Mollie Tibbetts before there are "multiple sightings" or too many rumors circulated by the press? Lil? Disappearances are more my thing, if not - back to Darlie.
ReplyDeleteThere are over 90,000 missing persons in the US at any given time. While tragic, it's hard to really bear down on any single one from an investigative perspective, which is mostly what we do here.
DeleteLil's into it, and there are many websites. Reddit and acandyrose might get you started.
Sadly, Mollie has been found today. The suspect showed the police the location of her body. I had followed it some and tend not to believe "sightings" and this case is another one.
Delete