Lindy Chamberlain

[Breehannah6]

I have to say it was the same here with poor old Lindy and her baby Azaria,the prosection told us she had cut the babies throat on the front seat of the car and put the body in the camera bag their forensic person Joy Kuhl tesified to blood being everwhere in the front of the car!Turned out years laater to be rustproofing,there were so many blunders that came out after they had to release her years later.I am only glad she didnt die for it because most Aussies will now tell you a few years ago a dingo killed a 10year old boy, so no doubt from what I have seen of dingoes they would take a baby at a moments notice.
But to be fair to Darlie it doesnt add up the same as it didnt with Lindy,she seemed as tough as nails describing whilst holding her babies ripped and torn jumpsuit how the dingo had got the baby out to eat it without undoing all the presstuds she had people hating her because of how she dealt with it! And the same jumpsuit forensics said no canine saliva or hairs present,blood consistent with someone cutting the babys throat whilst holding it upright,also the tears were not made from canine teeth but scissors from their first aid kit!!!
I believed The Chamberlins were gulity as sin until it all came out years later,no wonder she left our country and went to USA.
I cannot fathom how someone like Darlie ,could in fact think it all up???
what did she gain?

[Jeana (DP)]

I have to say it was the same here with poor old Lindy and her baby Azaria,the prosection told us she had cut the babies throat on the front seat of the car and put the body in the camera bag their forensic person Joy Kuhl tesified to blood being everwhere in the front of the car!Turned out years laater to be rustproofing,there were so many blunders that came out after they had to release her years later.I am only glad she didnt die for it because most Aussies will now tell you a few years ago a dingo killed a 10year old boy, so no doubt from what I have seen of dingoes they would take a baby at a moments notice.
But to be fair to Darlie it doesnt add up the same as it didnt with Lindy,she seemed as tough as nails describing whilst holding her babies ripped and torn jumpsuit how the dingo had got the baby out to eat it without undoing all the presstuds she had people hating her because of how she dealt with it! And the same jumpsuit forensics said no canine saliva or hairs present,blood consistent with someone cutting the babys throat whilst holding it upright,also the tears were not made from canine teeth but scissors from their first aid kit!!!
I believed The Chamberlins were gulity as sin until it all came out years later,no wonder she left our country and went to USA.
I cannot fathom how someone like Darlie ,could in fact think it all up???
what did she gain?


Well in this case, unlike Lindy's case, there IS ample evidence - blood and other - to prove that Darlie is guilty. And, unfortunately for her, there are no dingos in Rowlett.

[HeartofTexas]

Right... possibly deer, but no knife-wielding dingos!

[beesy]

I have to say it was the same here with poor old Lindy and her baby Azaria,the prosection told us she had cut the babies throat on the front seat of the car and put the body in the camera bag their forensic person Joy Kuhl tesified to blood being everwhere in the front of the car!Turned out years laater to be rustproofing,there were so many blunders that came out after they had to release her years later.I am only glad she didnt die for it because most Aussies will now tell you a few years ago a dingo killed a 10year old boy, so no doubt from what I have seen of dingoes they would take a baby at a moments notice.
But to be fair to Darlie it doesnt add up the same as it didnt with Lindy,she seemed as tough as nails describing whilst holding her babies ripped and torn jumpsuit how the dingo had got the baby out to eat it without undoing all the presstuds she had people hating her because of how she dealt with it! And the same jumpsuit forensics said no canine saliva or hairs present,blood consistent with someone cutting the babys throat whilst holding it upright,also the tears were not made from canine teeth but scissors from their first aid kit!!!
I believed The Chamberlins were gulity as sin until it all came out years later,no wonder she left our country and went to USA.
I cannot fathom how someone like Darlie ,could in fact think it all up???
what did she gain? Darlie gained nothing but a death sentence, but she shed a couple of things, 2 young boys
Nothing at all like the Lindy case. I remember the Aussie police being upset that Lindy had a black dress for the baby. That is a really weak reason to suspect a mother of murdering her baby. There is nothing like that in Darlie's case. There was no rustproofing on her white carpet which turned red that night either. I keep saying it, but if it needs to be said again, I will. There is more solid forensic evidence against Darlie than in most murder cases. She has used up all of her state appeals. You mentioned Lindy was set free when the blunders were discovered several years later. Darlie has been sitting on Death Row since 1997. Her attorneys have tried every trick in the book to get her a new trial and they can't get one. So that's why it's different than Lindy's case. If not, Darlie would have been granted a new trial already.

[beesy]

Right... possibly deer, but no knife-wielding dingos! If there are any Buffy the Vampire Slayer fans out there, you'll remember that Oz had a band called Dingos Ate My Baby, maybe they did it:bang:

[Goody]

I believed The Chamberlins were gulity as sin until it all came out years later,no wonder she left our country and went to USA.
I cannot fathom how someone like Darlie ,could in fact think it all up???
what did she gain?
What do you mean "someone like Darlie?" How is she so different from Susan Smith, another young mother who kept her children clean and well nourished until she drove them into the lake and then lied about it to escape detection? Nothing Darlie "thought up" took much creative genius. I think anyone who set out to commit such a crime and get away with it could think the same thing up.

[Breehannah6]

In Susan Smiths case as well as some other cases it was over a man who didnt want to involve themselves with a mother,weak excues yes I agree.

With Lindy no excuse at all, religous nuts we were told and it was years later it turned out to be rustproofing Joy Kuhl the pathologists claimed it was blood and even worse of a baby under 6months as they have a different haemaglobin,
When she gave birth to her next baby they whisked it away as soon as it was born, So strong was all this blood eveidence ,no canine saliva hair or the cuts in the babys jumpsuit .They claimed as I said the spray pattern of blood in the front of their car was cosistent with Lindy cutting baby Azarias throat whilst holding her upright! There were lots of red faces and jobs lost many years later when things were re-analised.
The point I am making is that Lindy would have been sat in the same kind of cell as Darlie ,if she had of been in this predicament in Texas.

I have watched programs and read up on this and still think somethings isnt quite right, I think hubby had a hit on his 3 life insurances he didnt come downstairs until she was screaming.
Trauma is a great thing we all see events in a different way and Darlie isnt a rocket scientist thats for sure.
It could have been hubby opened front door for hitman, then assisted in cutting screen went upstairs prior to the nasty business ,maybe someone did go out through the screen ,the person that took the missing knife and dropped the bloody sock that may have been used to contain victims screamming whilst attacked!
Its a hard call none of us were there but I sure dont think they have lined up all the ducks with this case

[beesy]

In Susan Smiths case as well as some other cases it was over a man who didnt want to involve themselves with a mother,weak excues yes I agree. That's not weak, it's just plain stupid. Are you trying to convince us that Darlie is innocent because she didn't kill her boys for another man????????
With Lindy no excuse at all, religous nuts we were told and it was years later it turned out to be rustproofing Joy Kuhl the pathologists claimed it was blood and even worse of a baby under 6months as they have a different haemaglobin, People are murdered everyday with no "excuse", no motive. I realize Lindy was innocent, but Darlie is not Lindy. Darlie is Darlie. Stop comparing cases. You're comparing apples to oranges. Darlie had plenty Darlie reasons for killing her boys. Things that seem senseless to us, but weren't to her. How can you say that at least Susan Smith had an excuse? A stupid man!? Please!

The point I am making is that Lindy would have been sat in the same kind of cell as Darlie ,if she had of been in this predicament in Texas.
That's doubtful, Lindy would have received a new trial if there was as much evidence of mess-ups as you say there was. TX doesn't kill everybody. Do you think those jurors wanted Darlie to be guilty? Nobody wants to think a mother could kill her children, but it happens and it did happen. All of those judges who have looked at her appeals, do they just want her to die for the heck of it? This is not a conspiracy. I believed her at first too, but if you know anything about blood evidence at all, there's just no other answer. There is no way an unknown person could have been in that house without leaving some trace of himself. If so, it would have been found by now. Don't you think Darlie's supporters are trying to find something, anything? They can't, it's not there.

I have watched programs and read up on this and still think somethings isnt quite right, I think hubby had a hit on his 3 life insurances he didnt come downstairs until she was screaming. Have you read books? Have you looked at the pix? Have you read any of these posts? Court TV and A&E programs are wonderful, but they usually show the other side unless the person admits to the crime. They should not be used as a primary source of information. You're debating with people who have done all of the above and much more.
The Routiers blew the 10 grand they got for the boys on their funeral, plus they needed more money to pay for that. I hope Darin didn't pay this invisible hit man because he forgot something. According to Darlie's story, the "intruder" saw her running behind him. He had no doubt that he left her alive. She wasn't unconscious, she was very much alive. A grown man easily could have overpowered her. By your theory, he wouldn't have been worried about time since you say Darin already knew he was down there killing his family. He didn't need to make a break for it. And when else would Darin have come downstairs? Before she began screaming?

It could have been hubby opened front door for hitman, then assisted in cutting screen went upstairs prior to the nasty business ,maybe someone did go out through the screen ,the person that took the missing knife and dropped the bloody sock that may have been used to contain victims screamming whilst attacked!
:banghead: excuse me, was I snickering?
It could have been aliens too, but it wasn't. There is no missing knife, the sock had 2 dots of blood on it, it wasn't a "bloody" sock. The sock contained no saliva. It contained Darlie's skin cells. There is no evidence that any of the victims were gagged, especially the boys. Nobody went out thru the screen. There is evidence pointing against that. Have you decided how this "intruder" got out of the backyard? The back gate was closed and was very difficult to maneuver. An intruder would not have taken the time to close it behind himself. By going out the window, you would have no other way out except for the backyard gate. Why isn't there any blood along this route? There is not any high velocity blood spatter going out the front door either.
[QUOTE]
Its a hard call none of us were there but I sure dont think they have lined up all the ducks with this case

No, actually it's not a hard call. All the ducks are in a row and they all point to Darlie.

[Cowgirl]

In Susan Smiths case as well as some other cases it was over a man who didnt want to involve themselves with a mother,weak excues yes I agree.

With Lindy no excuse at all, religous nuts we were told and it was years later it turned out to be rustproofing Joy Kuhl the pathologists claimed it was blood and even worse of a baby under 6months as they have a different haemaglobin,
When she gave birth to her next baby they whisked it away as soon as it was born, So strong was all this blood eveidence ,no canine saliva hair or the cuts in the babys jumpsuit .They claimed as I said the spray pattern of blood in the front of their car was cosistent with Lindy cutting baby Azarias throat whilst holding her upright! There were lots of red faces and jobs lost many years later when things were re-analised.
The point I am making is that Lindy would have been sat in the same kind of cell as Darlie ,if she had of been in this predicament in Texas.

I have watched programs and read up on this and still think somethings isnt quite right, I think hubby had a hit on his 3 life insurances he didnt come downstairs until she was screaming.
Trauma is a great thing we all see events in a different way and Darlie isnt a rocket scientist thats for sure.
It could have been hubby opened front door for hitman, then assisted in cutting screen went upstairs prior to the nasty business ,maybe someone did go out through the screen ,the person that took the missing knife and dropped the bloody sock that may have been used to contain victims screamming whilst attacked!
Its a hard call none of us were there but I sure dont think they have lined up all the ducks with this caseOooooh, we Texans are just bloodthirsty monsters who are jealous of this bimbo and want to execute her for nothing. Darlie sure was lucky that the murderous "intruder" decided to stop stabbing and changed to scratching her with a knife, huh? Maybe he didn't want to mess up her beee uuu tiful boobs, huh?

Just tell me how the "intruder" got that damned knife out of the kitchen butcher block, cut the screen with it, and got it back in the butcher block from outside the house and I will break her out myself.

The ducks lined up for 12 reasonable people to say, she did it. And no one would climb out a screen when the door is open, would they? Sheesh. I am so glad this case has been tried and that biatch is just waiting on a date with the grim reaper.

You can bash the TV representations, but their versions line up with the evidence. Darlie's story, or stories, don't fit the evidence. So I am going to go with the ones that don't include aliens and seem to fit the facts. So did the jury.

[Cowgirl]

Well in this case, unlike Lindy's case, there IS ample evidence - blood and other - to prove that Darlie is guilty. And, unfortunately for her, there are no dingos in Rowlett.Haha, besides, there is something a little strange about

"Howdy, ya'll. Cain't ya see, a dingo stabbed ma babies..."

[Linda7NJ]

:laugh: Haha, besides, there is something a little strange about

"Howdy, ya'll. Cain't ya see, a dingo stabbed ma babies..."

Too funny! You don't think her husband was involved as well? I do.

BTW You better not leave this forum! While everyone here may not appreciate your sense of humor, *I* do, and what else REALLY matters?:D

I do understand what you mean, I am having a heck of a time staying off a particular thread on the Ramsey board!:sick: I just keep reading the posts, shaking my head and refusing to post my opinion as it would only lead to trouble. I may loose sleep ...."restraint" isn't my strong point! LOL

[Goody]

In Susan Smiths case as well as some other cases it was over a man who didnt want to involve themselves with a mother,weak excues yes I agree.
The motive is not the important fact. Besides, I don't think Susan has ever stated publicly what her motive was. We are just getting the police's summation of motive based on the facts as they know them. I think Susan probably felt trapped and overwhelmed by her responsibilities and lack of help from the children's father, and the boyfriend's rejection was probably just more confirmation of that. However, whatever actually drove her that day was probably not just her feelings of lost love but a combination of things, just like Darlie, that went way beyond just one single motive.

With Lindy no excuse at all, religous nuts we were told and it was years later it turned out to be rustproofing Joy Kuhl the pathologists claimed it was blood and even worse of a baby under 6months as they have a different haemaglobin,
When she gave birth to her next baby they whisked it away as soon as it was born, So strong was all this blood eveidence ,no canine saliva hair or the cuts in the babys jumpsuit .They claimed as I said the spray pattern of blood in the front of their car was cosistent with Lindy cutting baby Azarias throat whilst holding her upright! There were lots of red faces and jobs lost many years later when things were re-analised.
The point I am making is that Lindy would have been sat in the same kind of cell as Darlie ,if she had of been in this predicament in Texas..
I don't think so. Lindy's case would have never made it thru Texas courts. You are forgetting that there was compelling physical evidence against Darlie that could not be explained any other way but that she was the killer. There was no such evidence against Lindy.

I have watched programs and read up on this and still think somethings isnt quite right, I think hubby had a hit on his 3 life insurances he didnt come downstairs until she was screaming.
Trauma is a great thing we all see events in a different way and Darlie isnt a rocket scientist thats for sure.
It could have been hubby opened front door for hitman, then assisted in cutting screen went upstairs prior to the nasty business ,maybe someone did go out through the screen ,the person that took the missing knife and dropped the bloody sock that may have been used to contain victims screamming whilst attacked!
Its a hard call none of us were there but I sure dont think they have lined up all the ducks with this case
Darin could not have been involved in the murders without Darlie knowing it, so if you believe he did it, then you have to believe that Darlie is covering up for him. And there is not a single blade of evidence indicating that Darlie would give up her life to save his. No way would she sit on death row for almost ten years now if she knew he did it.

If Darin hired a hitman to kill her for insurance money, she would have been the target. Instead it is easy to see the children were the targets. They were the ones with the deadliest wounds, which is the key element in determining who the target in a murder scene is....i.e. the one with the deadliest wounds.

There is no blood evidence at all to tie Darin to the scene before he said he became a part of it. All of the blood evidence points to Darlie and only Darlie.

I am all for wanting her to be innocent, but not if I have to throw out compelling evidence against her to do it.

You are right that there are a lot of unanswered questions, little mysteries left unsolved in this case, but what remains does not question Darlie's guilt. It questions Darin's and it questions what happened to bring on the attack on the children, it questions clear motive, but if we have the answers to it all, we would have nothing to exonerate her because we can't undo the blood evidence or the fiber evidence and that is what it would take to exonerate her at this point.

[Goody]

And no one would climb out a screen when the door is open, would they?
Esp when they would have to walk a narrow path in the dark amongst stacks of boxes (for the upcoming garage sale) to even get to that screen. But of course he would have brought his handy-dandy flashlight along with him to fix that little problem. He brought the flashlight but not the knife. Weird intruder, that guy.

And let's not forget that once he made it through that obstacle course of a garage to the window and stepped out of it onto the patio, he still had to get to the gate , that broken gate, and thru it without tripping the motion detector that would trip the flood light in the back yard. (He must have been casing the place for some time to know how to avoid that motion detector) Then he had to walk down the drive (after picking up that heavy gate and closing it so the neighbors wouldn't notice someone had been there) and he had to walk down the drive under the big street light across the street, make it to the alley and then down the alley for 75 feet without being seen where he dropped the bloody sock and disappeared into the night never to be heard of again.

Don't forget there is another street light on the corner and then three spotlights on the water fountain in their front yard, which was kitty corner from the street light on the corner. That puts two street lights within about a half of block of each other along the side of the house where the driveway and entrance to the alley were. The guy must have felt like he was on stage. He couldn't have picked a better lit up house in the subdivision.

[Goody]

The ducks lined up for 12 reasonable people to say, she did it. .
The ducks are quacking...Darlie, Darlie, :woohoo: Darlie!

[Goody]

You don't think her husband was involved as well? I do.


How do you think Darin was involved?

[cami]

:laugh:

Too funny! You don't think her husband was involved as well? I do.

BTW You better not leave this forum! While everyone here may not appreciate your sense of humor, *I* do, and what else REALLY matters?:D

I do understand what you mean, I am having a heck of a time staying off a particular thread on the Ramsey board!:sick: I just keep reading the posts, shaking my head and refusing to post my opinion as it would only lead to trouble. I may loose sleep ...."restraint" isn't my strong point! LOL

LOL, I do too. I won't even bother to reply to posts like that as my sarcasm would be overflowing the board.

[Breehannah6]

Nothing at all like the Lindy case. I remember the Aussie police being upset that Lindy had a black dress for the baby. That is a really weak reason to suspect a mother of murdering her baby.

They didnt think she killed her because of the dress,or that the word Azaria stood for sacrifice in the wilderness!lol
They thought that because the worlds leading forensic expert Joy Kuhl who we brought in from Scotland,said that the substance in the car (front passenger area was foetal blood ! That there was blood in their camera bag, it all added up to the fact that she killed her by slitting the babys throat in the car and stuffing her body in the camera bag,she later disposed of the body after they left the campground they even checked in .
he septic tank at the motel they stayed in the next day!

I don't think so. Lindy's case would have never made it thru Texas courts. You are forgetting that there was compelling physical evidence against Darlie that could not be explained any other way but that she was the killer. There was no such evidence against Lindy

Why wouldnt it? there was compelling evidence against the Chamberlians at the time ,we didnt jail her because she put the baby in a black dress and we didnt like the look of her!!LOL
Aussies were as sure as you Texans that she had done this for years!

People are murdered everyday with no "excuse", no motive. I realize Lindy was innocent, but Darlie is not Lindy. Darlie is Darlie. Stop comparing cases. You're comparing apples to oranges. Darlie had plenty Darlie reasons for killing her boys. Things that seem senseless to us, but weren't to her. How can you say that at least Susan Smith had an excuse? A stupid man!? Please!

I dont think so they both killed their children,their husbands were also suspected, their stories didnt hold water with the law, they both came across as uncaring mothers (Lindy held the jumpsuit her baby had died in and described how the dingo would get the body out to eat it without undoing anymore of the clips!) We thought she had a reason to kill ehr baby postnatal depression. I didnt say she had an excuse(Susan Smith ) I said it was a really lame excuse! There had to be more to it the same as Dianne Downs.

Have you read books? Have you looked at the pix? Have you read any of these posts? Court TV and A&E programs are wonderful, but they usually show the other side unless the person admits to the crime. They should not be used as a primary source of information. You're debating with people who have done all of the above and much more.

So you are right? what more can you have done attended the crime scene?conducted the DNA ? maybe you can explain why you have such expert knowledge.I dont understand how you cant see that 2 people can look at the same thing as see it quite different! Maybe I look for the good in people and you dont ,but we are entitled to post what we think!
The Routiers blew the 10 grand they got for the boys on their funeral, plus they needed more money to pay for that. I hope Darin didn't pay this invisible hit man because he forgot something. According to Darlie's story, the "intruder" saw her running behind him. He had no doubt that he left her alive. She wasn't unconscious, she was very much alive. A grown man easily could have overpowered her. By your theory, he wouldn't have been worried about time since you say Darin already knew he was down there killing his family. He didn't need to make a break for it. And when else would Darin have come downstairs? Before she began screaming?


I cant believe those boys never made a sound whilst they were attacked and murdered? I just have some kind of feeling he is involved somewhere along the line and I am not the only one

That's doubtful, Lindy would have received a new trial if there was as much evidence of mess-ups as you say there was

She never got a new trial ,they just released her when they found the clothing she said the baby had been wearing folded up neatly in a pile in a cave many years later!! And there was no way they could have put them there! They never admitted they were wrong she has fought years to have her name cleared ,the best she got was a pardon! It was when she tried to fight to clear her name the blunders were discovered.
The law sometimes aid the ducks to line up, but in reality the really didnt!
How many times does it come out that someone is innocent Riley Fox,s father springs straight to mind ,why did he confess?
Sorry but I dont believe everything I read and hear anymore I gave up being a media sheep after Azarias clothes were found!
I am just offering my view, not to incite a riot in here, maybe you do know more than me about Darlie , but Lindys another story !

[Breehannah6]

Esp when they would have to walk a narrow path in the dark amongst stacks of boxes (for the upcoming garage sale) to even get to that screen. But of course he would have brought his handy-dandy flashlight along with him to fix that little problem. He brought the flashlight but not the knife. Weird intruder, that guy.

And let's not forget that once he made it through that obstacle course of a garage to the window and stepped out of it onto the patio, he still had to get to the gate , that broken gate, and thru it without tripping the motion detector that would trip the flood light in the back yard. (He must have been casing the place for some time to know how to avoid that motion detector) Then he had to walk down the drive (after picking up that heavy gate and closing it so the neighbors wouldn't notice someone had been there) and he had to walk down the drive under the big street light across the street, make it to the alley and then down the alley for 75 feet without being seen where he dropped the bloody sock and disappeared into the night never to be heard of again.

Don't forget there is another street light on the corner and then three spotlights on the water fountain in their front yard, which was kitty corner from the street light on the corner. That puts two street lights within about a half of block of each other along the side of the house where the driveway and entrance to the alley were. The guy must have felt like he was on stage. He couldn't have picked a better lit up house in the subdivision. Then how did Darlie plant the sock without being seen? or Darin as some have suggested? She took a hell of a risk!
We had one here called Elizabeth Knight who skinned her hubby!! (she had worked in the abaitors) hung his skin on a hook ,then gone to the ATM to get some of his cash out this was early hours of the morning but she was seen coming back by a neigbour who looked out of her window!
If I had of done this no way would I have risked taking a walk with a sock , I cant see how someone would risk this ,to add what little it did to the alibi,evidence ,ect.....

[cami]

Then how did Darlie plant the sock without being seen? or Darin as some have suggested? She took a hell of a risk!
We had one here called Elizabeth Knight who skinned her hubby!! (she had worked in the abaitors) hung his skin on a hook ,then gone to the ATM to get some of his cash out this was early hours of the morning but she was seen coming back by a neigbour who looked out of her window!
If I had of done this no way would I have risked taking a walk with a sock , I cant see how someone would risk this ,to add what little it did to the alibi,evidence ,ect.....

Darlie lived in that neighbourhood Breeanna, surely she knew to avoid the light and stay in the unlit shadows of the alley.

Darlie and/or Darin needed to get rid of that sock for some reason. Obviously leaving it in or at the crime scene meant something for them, something incriminating.

Yes, it was a hell of a risk but the risk of it being left at the crime scene was deemed greater that night.

Only if Darlie talks will we ever know what that risk was, why did they need to get rid of that sock.

[beesy]

.


They didnt think she killed her because of the dress,or that the word Azaria stood for sacrifice in the wilderness!lol
Oh, good God, do not laugh at me girl. I was just throwing that in as an interesting tidbit I recall from the case. If people are charged with murder over 1 thing, then we're all in trouble. Jeez
[QUOTE]
They thought that because the worlds leading forensic expert Joy Kuhl who we brought in from Scotland,said that the substance in the car (front passenger area was foetal blood ! That there was blood in their camera bag, it all added up to the fact that she killed her by slitting the babys throat in the car and stuffing her body in the camera bag,she later disposed of the body after they left the campground they even checked in .
he septic tank at the motel they stayed in the next day!

Why do you have it in your head that because her case was screwed up, then Darlie's was too? Joy Kuhl didn't testify at Darlie's trial lolSo you are right? what more can you have done attended the crime scene?conducted the DNA ? maybe you can explain why you have such expert knowledge.I dont understand how you cant see that 2 people can look at the same thing as see it quite different! Maybe I look for the good in people and you dont ,but we are entitled to post what we think! Of course, you are entitled to post what you want, but you need to be prepared to back up your theories which you have not done in any way shape or form. I'm backing up my theories. Most of us, Darlies or the ones who know Darlie did it, have read most of the trial transcripts, interviews, listened to the 911 tape til we throw up, watched the Leeza show interviews, plus read the books, read the posts, gone over gory photos til our eyes bleed, is that enough? I believed Darlie for a long time too, so do not tell me about looking for the good in people. Besides, you're awful quick to the look for the bad in Darin, blaming him for setting up a hit, for goodness sake. That's the least believable theory out there.
I cant believe those boys never made a sound whilst they were attacked and murdered? I just have some kind of feeling he is involved somewhere along the line and I am not the only one

Yes, Darin was involved. He did not hire anybody nor did he plan the murders in any way. There is no evidence which points to that at all. Darin helped her after she killed Devon and attacked Damon. Please read some other posts on other threads so we don't have to keep repeating ourselves.
She never got a new trial ,they just released her when they found the clothing she said the baby had been wearing folded up neatly in a pile in a cave many years later!! And there was no way they could have put them there! They never admitted they were wrong she has fought years to have her name cleared ,the best she got was a pardon! It was when she tried to fight to clear her name the blunders were discovered.
The law sometimes aid the ducks to line up, but in reality the really didnt!
I never said Lindy received a new trial. I said she would have if she had been in TX. And what exactly is a pardon in Australia. In America, it means you were wrongly convicted and you're all free and clear. You're saying her name hasn't been cleared so I don't understand where the pardon part comes in.
[QUOTE]
Sorry but I dont believe everything I read and hear anymore I gave up being a media sheep after Azarias clothes were found!
It appears to me you're the media sheep once again with Darlie. Everything you've said for her has been put out there in the media by her supporters. To see the true Darlie, one must dig deeper than the surface media and face the truth

I am just offering my view, not to incite a riot in here, maybe you do know more than me about Darlie , but Lindys another story !
Well, you can't expect to come on here, say things you don't know much about and not expect to be rebuked. The last time I checked, this was a Darlie board. I've never ever said I know much about Lindy's case.

[Goody]

Then how did Darlie plant the sock without being seen? or Darin as some have suggested? She took a hell of a risk!
We had one here called Elizabeth Knight who skinned her hubby!! (she had worked in the abaitors) hung his skin on a hook ,then gone to the ATM to get some of his cash out this was early hours of the morning but she was seen coming back by a neigbour who looked out of her window!
If I had of done this no way would I have risked taking a walk with a sock , I cant see how someone would risk this ,to add what little it did to the alibi,evidence ,ect.....
That is amazing, isn't it? The only thing I can say is that Darlie was not in the habit of planning burglaries or murders so she might have taken the risk. One thing we know for certain is that someone took the risk because the sock was there, 75 feet down the alley, and the only routes to the alley from Darlie's was thru the back yard and out the gate or out the front door and around the house to the drive where the gate was. It seems less likely an experienced thief/criminal would take the risk than a family member trying to mislead police. It was 2:00 am or so, so how much of a risk was she really taking. If she got there and back without being seen, it must not have been as big of a risk as you think.

[Goody]

I cant believe those boys never made a sound whilst they were attacked and murdered? I just have some kind of feeling he is involved somewhere along the line and I am not the only one

!
I agree with you, but I would like to point out that they tested sound from the family room to the master bedroom upstairs with the door closed where Darin was supposedly sleeping. The sound did not carry that far. So he is safe as far as being expected to hear the attack. However, he claims he heard the wine glass break. It is totally nuts to think that he could hear a shattering glass but couldn't hear the screeching cat or the boys' screams or Darlie's screams. I think he was downstairs when the glass broke and that the sound was much louder than he thought it would be, and that is why he thought he would be able to hear it upstairs. Even hear a wine glass shatter in a quiet house? For me that is a weak point for Darin that points to his involvement, at least after the fact.

Another thing that I think points to Darin being downstairs sooner than he claimed is his claim that Darlie was yelling "Devon, Devon, Devon" and that is why he ran to Devon and thought the glass coffee table had injured him when it fell over. That sounds like a very real description to me, but it doesn't make sense for her to be yelling Devon's name when she didn't even go near Devon to see how badly he was hurt or if he was even hurt at all. Damon is the one she supposedly looked at before calling Darin to come downstairs. I am thinking that maybe Devon was the only one killed or wounded when Darin came downstairs, and that would put him downstairs before Damon was attacked, which means Devon was probably dead longer than they claimed.

I am going to work up a list of things that bother me about Darin so I hope you will look for the thread and add some of your own, too. Give me a couple of days though.

[Dani_T]

Why wouldnt it? there was compelling evidence against the Chamberlians at the time ,we didnt jail her because she put the baby in a black dress and we didnt like the look of her!!LOL
Aussies were as sure as you Texans that she had done this for years!

Hi,

I'm an aussie too and so am familar with the Chamberlain case- though if you want to talk to someone on here who knows a lot about that case AND Darlie's case then Mary's your gal.

But just to give my 2 cents- yes there was a grave miscarriage of justice for Lindy and much of it was done in the eyes of the media. However, it is a big leap to then say that on the basis of the Chamberlain case that we can't trust the blood and DNA evidence or expert testimony in the Routier case, or for that matter any other case.

Most of us here do not work from the media presentation of the Routier case. I for one put very little stock in how Darlie appeared on TV footage etc. What we are concerned about referring to is the crime scene photos, the evidence which was presented and trial and the testimonies from all the witnesses.

If the argument in her defense is simply - 'Mistakes have been made elsewhere in the world' then it is really no defense at all and if you want to make it stick you need to be petitioning the release of all criminals who were convicted by forensic evidence rather than multiple eye-witness reports.

Sorry but I dont believe everything I read and hear anymore I gave up being a media sheep after Azarias clothes were found!

There is a difference between being critical and analytical with what you read (either in the media or elsewhere) and just saying 'none of it can be trusted'.

[Dani_T]

Yes, Darin was involved. He did not hire anybody nor did he plan the murders in any way. There is no evidence which points to that at all. Darin helped her after she killed Devon and attacked Damon. Please read some other posts on other threads so we don't have to keep repeating ourselves.


Beesy- that's just your opinion. It might be helpful, particularly when there are newbies around to make it clear what it established fact and what is just theories by us.

[beesy]

Beesy- that's just your opinion. It might be helpful, particularly when there are newbies around to make it clear what it established fact and what is just theories by us. First of all, I was agreeing with her that Darin was involved. And secondly, yes of course that's just my theory. No matter the evidence unless Darlie and/or Darin confess than all of these posts by everyone are theories. There are no established facts except for two boys being murdered while Darlie, Darin, Drake, Domain, and that screaming cat were in the house. Then of course, all the things which happened after the murders. Of course we know Darlie had surgery, that she and Darin were on TV, that she was arrested..blah blah. Thirdly, it's just my opinion, but it's right...:razz:

[Breehannah6]

I live in a rural area and at night sound travels for miles,as it has been raised by someone else as well as myself I find it hard to believe(not that I know) that her husband heard nothing. Those boys would have screamed she couldnt gag both of them and kill them at the same time, maybe if she did it they went into shock seeing their mum try to killl them who knows ,the cats another story!

I just keep thinking if she wanted why didnt she kill the hubby,and lie and say as she has done it was an intruder and he tried to fight him.Lets face it she would have hit pay dirt with the insurance,attention,and sympathy.
IF she is as shallow and vain as I read its seems silly to cut herself so badly were its so visible.I can only think was this a suicide murder but she chickened out of it but then she would have killed the baby too!
I have read she was on diet pills very nasty effects they have ! I have seen her on TV and she isnt likable thast why I recall back to Lindy as she was VERY unlikable which makes it harder for them.
I still say why move the sock? if she was so clever then why not cut the screen outside ,leave back gate open you know set it all up as it appears she had lots of time if hubby didnt hear her until she screamed? Or as I said did he?
I am not a Darlie supporter I am just not 100% sure I have reasonable doubt she acted alone ,which makes me think WHAT THE?????? theres so many questions like
1)If he is in on it why doesnt she say so?
2) Why if he caught her didnt he tell police?
the list just goes on.......................................:(

[beesy]

[QUOTE][QUOTE]I live in a rural area and at night sound travels for miles,as it has been raised by someone else as well as myself I find it hard to believe(not that I know) that her husband heard nothing. Those boys would have screamed she couldnt gag both of them and kill them at the same time, maybe if she did it they went into shock seeing their mum try to killl them who knows ,the cats another story Rowlette, TX is not a rural area. It is a suburb of Dallas Ok, Devon was stabbed twice. The first stab obviously did not kill him right away. He would have bled out most likely though. The next stab killed him so fast his eyes were open and a shocked look frozen on his face. IMO he fought with her at least some. Most likely picking up his feet and kicking at her. There were bruises on his feet and a slice/nick on his buttocks, indicative of raising his feet up. None the less, his death was pretty quick. Damon was asleep and was stabbed in the back. He most likely was injured too much right away to scream, maybe moan. There is no evidence that either boy was gagged. I, and others, believe that Darin did hear something and ran downstairs. I feel very strongly that he was a part of this whole thing. Most likely not killing the boys, but with everything else. Actively involved, not just concocting a story. I do not believe there was a hired killer of any sort.
I just keep thinking if she wanted why didnt she kill the hubby,and lie and say as she has done it was an intruder and he tried to fight him.Lets face it she would have hit pay dirt with the insurance,attention,and sympathy.
IF she is as shallow and vain as I read its seems silly to cut herself so badly were its so visible.I can only think was this a suicide murder but she chickened out of it but then she would have killed the baby tooShe didn't want to kill Darin or Drake. It was not planned out and thought through enough to kill for insurance money. Something like that is usually well thought out and the killer really tries to fool the police. There wasn't much fooling here.
Darlie knew she had to make the attack on herself believable. She did not know how close she came to that vein. It was a very shallow cut. I've read it could have been stitched up in the ER, but the Dr. wanted to make sure because he knew there were 2 dead victims. The scar is barely visible now. So think, where would you cut yourself? The arms maybe, the legs. Could you plunge a knife into your belly or chest? She had a cut on her right arm and the cut on her throat which also went down her shoulder a bit. Darlie claims she was asleep on the sofa when she and the boys were attacked. She says both boys had already been stabbed and Damon woke her up by pushing on her shoulder and saying "Mommy". When she woke up she saw a "blur" got up, followed the blur into the kitchen where he threw down the knife and ran out the utility room door. She also says that Damon stood up and followed her into the entry way and she told him to lie back down. If Darlie was really cut before she woke up, which is what she says, why would an intruder lean over her in that awkward way to slice her throat? He stabbed Devon in the chest and Damon in the back, but he ignored Darlie's easy to get to stomach and chest and reached up to cut her throat. Makes no sense. Most killers do not change MO's in the middle of a crime. Did you know that Damon was still alive when the paramedics got to the house? At some point, Darlie made a 5:39 mins phone call to 911. The first PO arrived at about 3 mins. Most people get off the phone with 911 once help arrives. Waddel saw that Damon was still alive, but felt his duty was as a cop first, not a medic. He told Darlie to help Damon, but she did not, either did Darin. The next PO arrived and they did a cursory search and then allowed the medics in. Damon was still alive, but neither parent was with him. He was alone, choking to death on his own blood. He died at the scene in the arms of a medic, not his mother. Are you a mother? Would you hold your dying son? Even if you knew nothing about first aid, wouldn't you comfort him, kiss him? There's another issue involved there too. The ME said Damon could have lived 8-9 mins. after the fatal stab wound. So, let's start the clock: Darlie says both boys were stabbed before she was attacked. She also says Damon was still alive then, that he woke her up. So she follows the blur into the kitchen, picks up the knife, puts it on the counter and starts screaming for help. She calls 911 and babbles on for over 5 mins. The 1st PO is there, Damon is alive, the 2nd is there, Damon is still alive, they do a quick search, Damon is still alive, the medics get there, Damon is still alive. He died about 1-2 mins. after the medic got to him. So how did Damon live all that long time after his fatal wound? He couldn't have, there's not enough time for him to still be alive. All of that is longer than 8-9 mins. Plus another interesting tidbit, Damon's blood was found on top of Darlie's blood, which means he was stabbed again after she cut herself. Now, you can say, they screwed up with the blood sampling, but you cannot get around that timeline. That is not something which could screwed up by shoddy work. Darlie agrees that Damon was still alive. We know when the 1st PO arrives because we hear him on the tape. There is no mucking that stuff up.
I still say why move the sock? if she was so clever then why not cut the screen outside ,leave back gate open you know set it all up as it appears she had lots of time if hubby didnt hear her until she screamed? Or as I said did he
Well, your questions tell you something, don't they? They tell you it's crazy to think an intruder left by the window in the garage, avoided the motion detector, which stayed on for 18 mins. after being triggered, and wasn't on. Closed the gate behind himself, so polite, and dropped the sock as he ran down the alley. So he's got very good eye sight and he's very coordinated.
I do not believe the sock was a plant. You said yourself it didn't add or take away from her story. Whoever threw it(I think Darin) was most likely aiming for the trashcan or sewer drain which were right there.

I am not a Darlie supporter I am just not 100% sure I have reasonable doubt she acted alone ,which makes me think WHAT THE?????? theres so many questions like
1)If he is in on it why doesnt she say so?
2) Why if he caught her didnt he tell police?
the list just goes on.......................................:(
I do not believe she acted alone either. That doesn't make her innocent, however, it makes her a co-conspirator with Darin, IMO Dani..If either of them tells on the other, they can't do so without implicating themselves. If she says, "Darin helped with this or that", she's admitting to murder. If he says "I did this or that," he's admitting to accessory or more.
If you look at the crime scene photos and listen to the 911 tape, you will get a better understanding of everything. Having me answering your questions does not seem to be enough for you, so do some digging around on your own. The site is justicefordarlie.com

[Dani_T]

She calls 911 and babbles on for over 5 mins. The 1st PO is there, Damon is alive, the 2nd is there, Damon is still alive, they do a quick search, Damon is still alive, the medics get there, Damon is still alive. He died about 1-2 mins. after the medic got to him. So how did Damon live all that long time after his fatal wound? He couldn't have, there's not enough time for him to still be alive. All of that is longer than 8-9 mins

Waddell was there around 3.30 mins into the call. Walling arrived and was inside no later than 6mins. The medics were in the house within 1-2 minutes. It is tight but it fits into the 8-9 minute mark. However, I'm also not sure that we should take that 8-9minute so strictly. It seems to be the golden rule held by both the Darlies AND the anti's. But when you read the testimomy there is a lot of caveats which the doctor makes clear.

9 Q. Dr. Townsend-Parchman, can you give us
10 your best estimate as to how long this child would have
11 survived after he had received the last of the series of
12 six wounds?
13 A. Minutes.
14 Q. I know you said a matter of minutes,
15 but --
16 A. It's minutes.
17 Q. But I mean --
18 A. My very best estimate, and it's an
19 estimate, would be that -- if we're still assuming that
20 all four stab wounds were inflicted at the same time.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. That --
23 Q. Or at approximately the same time.
24 A. Yes, approximately the same time. That
25 from that moment until the time he collapsed, because of
1 blood loss and difficulty breathing, would be a few
2 minutes.
3 Q. Less than five minutes. Would that be
4 fair to say?
5 A. Likely.
6 Q. Likely. All right.
7 A. And that, from the time he collapsed,
8 until he actually expired, would probably be another few
9 minutes.
10 Q. Okay. So, from the time that he
11 received all of these injuries, he could have lasted as
12 little as two or three minutes, or as much as maybe five
13 or six minutes, something like that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. Even conceivably a little bit longer.
17 Q. Maybe as much as eight or nine minutes?
18 A. You can't tell.

I think to hold to the 8-9 minutes as a hard and fast rule doesn't help anything really. The doctor is talking in estimates and is going on the assumption that all the wounds were made at the same time, or at least in the same attack (rather than a good number of minutes later)

Also

Devon was stabbed twice. The first stab obviously did not kill him right away. He would have bled out most likely though. The next stab killed him so fast his eyes were open and a shocked look frozen on his face.

Not according to the Doc

13 caused the death of Devon Routier -- stab wounds caused
14 the death. Correct?
15 A. Yes, multiple, sharp, force injuries.
16 Q. Can you tell us how those stab wounds
17 would have actually caused this child's death?
18 A. Well, the mechanism of death would be
19 that the child bled to death, bled out.
20 Q. All right. Is this a situation where
21 he would have died instantly?
22 A. No. It's fairly rapid, probably within
23 a few minutes.
24 Q. Okay. So we're talking, perhaps five
25 minutes to actually lose enough blood to actually die --
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
70
2 MR. DOUGLAS MULDER: Object to leading.
3 THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the
4 question.
5
6 BY MR. GREG DAVIS:
7 Q. All right. Do you have any idea, an
8 approximation of how much time would have been necessary
9 for this child to die?
10 A. I would say probably, again, a few
11 minutes. I can't give an actual number, but the low end
12 of a few minutes.

[Dani_T]

And secondly, yes of course that's just my theory. No matter the evidence unless Darlie and/or Darin confess than all of these posts by everyone are theories.

Without wanting to be pedantic - that's not true. There are many posts on here which discuss the actual physical evidence. Sure there might be some theorising about what that means ... but there are issues of fact and issue of theory. I only suggested it because when people come to the board and are new to the case it is helpful if they can fairly readily differentiate known fact from theory.

[cami]

Maybe I look for the good in people and you dont ,but we are entitled to post what we think!

Yet you think Darin is responsible without one shred of evidence to tie him to the murders and Darlie innocent, despite overwhelming physical evidence that screams she is guilty, because you look for the good in people. LOL


****sarcasm off****

[beesy]

[QUOTE=Dani_T]Waddell was there around 3.30 mins into the call. Walling arrived and was inside no later than 6mins. The medics were in the house within 1-2 minutes. It is tight but it fits into the 8-9 minute mark. However, I'm also not sure that we should take that 8-9minute so strictly. It seems to be the golden rule held by both the Darlies AND the anti's. But when you read the testimomy there is a lot of caveats which the doctor makes clear.

9 Q. Dr. Townsend-Parchman, can you give us
10 your best estimate as to how long this child would have
11 survived after he had received the last of the series of
12 six wounds?
13 A. Minutes.
14 Q. I know you said a matter of minutes,
15 but --
16 A. It's minutes.
17 Q. But I mean --
18 A. My very best estimate, and it's an
19 estimate, would be that -- if we're still assuming that
20 all four stab wounds were inflicted at the same time.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. That --
23 Q. Or at approximately the same time.
24 A. Yes, approximately the same time. That
25 from that moment until the time he collapsed, because of
1 blood loss and difficulty breathing, would be a few
2 minutes.
3 Q. Less than five minutes. Would that be
4 fair to say?
5 A. Likely.
6 Q. Likely. All right.
7 A. And that, from the time he collapsed,
8 until he actually expired, would probably be another few
9 minutes.
10 Q. Okay. So, from the time that he
11 received all of these injuries, he could have lasted
12 little as two or three minutes, or as much as maybe five
13 or six minutes, something like that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. Even conceivably a little bit longer.
17 Q. Maybe as much as eight or nine minutes?
18 A. You can't tell.

I think to hold to the 8-9 minutes as a hard and fast rule doesn't help anything really. The doctor is talking in estimates and is going on the assumption that all the wounds were made at the same time, or at least in the same attack (rather than a good number of minutes later) As you said, this is based on the 1-attack theory. I believe Damon was attacked 2x by his mother, or maybe even the 2nd time by Darin. I don't start my clock until after the fatal wound. Like you said, it's a theory. I just happen to think it's a good one. And I even think Damon was stabbed the final time while Darlie was on the phone with 911. So I'm not holding fast to the 8-9 mins, but you just used up nearly all of your time in your theory. You've got Waddel at 3:30 mins. Walling used up 3 additional mins, medics reaching Damon after about 1-2 mins. And we know Damon died after the medic(can't spell his name) got there. Maybe as long as 2 mins. later. Of course those are proven facts. So you say Damon was stabbed all 4 times before Darin came downstairs, right? And then we've got the time for Darlie to do whatever Darlie did before she called 911. That's a longer time for Damon to have lived after the attack than my 8-9 mins. which is closer to the estimate the good Dr. gives.
Not according to the Doc

13 caused the death of Devon (http://thefullm.com/?go=devon&url1=http%3A%2F%2Fwebsleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fnewrep ly.php) Routier -- stab wounds caused
14 the death. Correct?
15 A. Yes, multiple, sharp, force injuries.
16 Q. Can you tell us how those stab wounds
17 would have actually caused this child's death?
18 A. Well, the mechanism of death would be
19 that the child bled to death, bled out.
20 Q. All right. Is this a situation where
21 he would have died instantly?
22 A. No. It's fairly rapid, probably within
23 a few minutes.
24 Q. Okay. So we're talking, perhaps five
25 minutes to actually lose enough blood to actually die --
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
70
2 MR. DOUGLAS MULDER: Object to leading.
3 THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the
4 question.l
5
6 BY MR. GREG DAVIS:
7 Q. All right. Do you have any idea, an
8 approximation of how much time would have been necessary
9 for this child to die?
10 A. I would say probably, again, a few
11 minutes. I can't give an actual number, but the low end
12 of a few minutesI know what he said, but that confuses me. I've read this too. Springer mentions how most people who die with a frozen face die instantly. If a person bleeds out for 5 mins or so, they would most likely close their eyes, right? I've heard that other places too. Maybe too much Crossing Jordan LOL It's also mentioned in Helter Skelter. Jay Sebring died with a look of terror on his face. It was said to be instantly. I don't know if that's why they said it was instantly. I just sort of assumed it was. I know Devon (http://orgsvet.com/?go=devon&url1=http%3A%2F%2Fwebsleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fnewrep ly.php) would have bled out if she had left him alone. That one throws me. Do they mention his eyes being open, because I do think that is a clue to cause of death, isn't it? Not method of death, but cause.

[beesy]

Without wanting to be pedantic - that's not true. There are many posts on here which discuss the actual physical evidence. Sure there might be some theorising about what that means ... but there are issues of fact and issue of theory. I only suggested it because when people come to the board and are new to the case it is helpful if they can fairly readily differentiate known fact from theory. Dani, I said we discuss facts, evidence, etc. I really didn't know that was necessary to even state though. We quote books, transcripts, etc.How could we not be discussing physical evidence? We do not know everything though. For instance don't you feel she injured herself which forced her to become a victim? That's a theory. I believe in the 2-attack theory, others don't....those are the things I was talking about.

[Goody]

First of all, I was agreeing with her that Darin was involved. And secondly, yes of course that's just my theory. No matter the evidence unless Darlie and/or Darin confess than all of these posts by everyone are theories. There are no established facts except for two boys being murdered while Darlie, Darin, Drake, Domain, and that screaming cat were in the house. Then of course, all the things which happened after the murders. Of course we know Darlie had surgery, that she and Darin were on TV, that she was arrested..blah blah. Thirdly, it's just my opinion, but it's right...:razz:
aaaahahahahahahahahhaahahh! You are something, girl. But you could throw in an imo every once in awhile, esp for newcomers who don't understand the evidence as well as you do.

[Goody]

I live in a rural area and at night sound travels for miles,as it has been raised by someone else as well as myself I find it hard to believe(not that I know) that her husband heard nothing. Those boys would have screamed she couldnt gag both of them and kill them at the same time, maybe if she did it they went into shock seeing their mum try to killl them who knows ,the cats another story!
Like I said, police tested the residence for noise. They had policeman stand in the family room and holler while others were in Darin's room upstairs. They could not hear him yell. So that proved that if Darin was in the master bedroom with the TV on and the door closed, he probably would not heard the screaming downstairs, That knocks out any theory that he should have heard something.

I have lived in rural areas myself and know what you are talking about, but the Routiers did not live in a rural area. They lived in a small town of about 40,000 population with an expressway nearby. It was probably quiet, but no so quiet that noise would travel like it does out in the country.

Unless you can conduct a test in their home that proves otherwise, I think you just have to accept what the police determined through their testing. They were not Darin Routier fans. If they could prove he was involved, they would probably arrest him in a heartbeat. But their tests proved he would not have heard what was going on in the family room under the conditions that were present that night.

I just keep thinking if she wanted why didnt she kill the hubby,and lie and say as she has done it was an intruder and he tried to fight him.Lets face it she would have hit pay dirt with the insurance,attention,and sympathy.!
She was not after insurance money. Remember people who commit murder, esp if it is a sudden reaction to something, do not have the time that we have to think up all of the many things they should have done. She did what occurred to her to do that night or within a few days of the crime. It was not a well thought out plan, but I think it had too much detail to be completely impulsive.

IF she is as shallow and vain as I read its seems silly to cut herself so badly were its so visible.I can only think was this a suicide murder but she chickened out of it but then she would have killed the baby too!.!
I don't know how shallow and vain she really was. I think people may exaggerate that view because they don't like what she did. I think Darlie was probably typical of most young women her age who have aspirations of seeing their names up in lights. And I think she was drawn to those dreams because of low self esteem and a need to prove herself worthy. And I think Darin encouraged those dreams because of his need for a trophy wife. Their entreapeneurism probably fueled the belief that it was not out of her reach. I think they had a strong sense of entitlement that caused them to take risks other people might not.


I still say why move the sock? if she was so clever then why not cut the screen outside ,leave back gate open you know set it all up as it appears she had lots of time if hubby didnt hear her until she screamed? Or as I said did he?

No one knows why the sock was dumped in the alley. We don't know if it was part of other things dumped in the sewer, which was right there near where the sock was found, and that the sock is the only thing that didn't make it down the drain, or if the sock was deliberately placed there to mislead authorities. For a long time I have thought it was deliberately placed to mislead, but if so, I have never understood why Darlie and Darin were so upset that they were not told about the sock's existence for a few weeks. That makes me feel they didn't know it might be found, and that tells me that it very well might have been part of other things dumped in that sewer. In haste, the sock was dropped and not noticed in the dark. Since the police did not check out the sewer, we will never know what other evidence might have been dumped there.

As for the gate, it was never opened, imo. I doubt if she would have even thought about leaving it open. That was a big mistake on her part though. It was heavy with a broken latch. It hung crookedly. One had to pick it up and slide it across the concrete to open or close it. A stranger fleeing from a murder scene would certainly not go thru all that trouble. Only someone who lives there would stop and close it neatly. But that is neither here nor there because there is no evidence that anyone was even in the backyard that night. There is no reason to think the gate was opened or closed, except for Darlie's statements that "he went that-away."

I am not a Darlie supporter I am just not 100% sure I have reasonable doubt she acted alone ,which makes me think WHAT THE?????? theres so many questions like
1)If he is in on it why doesnt she say so?
2) Why if he caught her didnt he tell police?
the list just goes on.......................................:(
1. Because she would have to confess. She implicate him without implicating herself and she still hopes to get a new trial in her federal appeals.

2. That is the question of the year. No one knows why Darin chose to stick by her. Some believe he is soooooooo innocent that he is in denial and can't believe she did it, and some believe they have some kind of evil conspiracy going on that keeps them both quiet. Whatever the reasons, she is teh one who is going to die for it, and it looks like she is going to die alone for it.

[Goody]

[QUOTE]
I know what he said, but that confuses me. I've read this too. Springer mentions how most people who die with a frozen face die instantly. If a person bleeds out for 5 mins or so, they would most likely close their eyes, right? I've heard that other places too. Maybe too much Crossing Jordan LOL It's also mentioned in Helter Skelter. Jay Sebring died with a look of terror on his face. It was said to be instantly. I don't know if that's why they said it was instantly. I just sort of assumed it was. I know Devon (http://orgsvet.com/?go=devon&url1=http%3A%2F%2Fwebsleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fnewrep ly.php) would have bled out if she had left him alone. That one throws me. Do they mention his eyes being open, because I do think that is a clue to cause of death, isn't it? Not method of death, but cause.
Devon was laying on his back staring at the ceiling, eyes open. I don't recall anyone talking about the expression on his face though. I think it means he was awake when he died, but not necessarily killed instantly. In fact, I think the MEs said he bled out. That would take a few minutes.

[HeartofTexas]

I didn't recall that there was a sewer that was never checked... I bet that's exactly what happened to the sock. They dumped the rest of the stuff in the sewer but dropped the sock en route. Good idea, Goody!

[Dani_T]

So you say Damon was stabbed all 4 times before Darin came downstairs, right? And then we've got the time for Darlie to do whatever Darlie did before she called 911. That's a longer time for Damon to have lived after the attack than my 8-9 mins. which is closer to the estimate the good Dr. gives.
As I highlighted in my post the estimate the Doc gave was based on all of those stabs being made at the same time (or approx the same time). The Doc emphasised that and then made it clear that it was all just an estimate. I'm less and less convinced that the 8-9 min rule does us any favours. There is no evidence that Damon was attacked whilst Darlie was on the phone. I think it highly unlikely that she could just grab the knife while she is talking to the operator and stab Damon a few more times and then carry on. Your theory is also contingent on the fact that Darin was in on the whole thing and was OK with her stabbing Damon in front of him - again something I think there is little evidence for.

I know what he said, but that confuses me. I've read this too. Springer mentions how most people who die with a frozen face die instantly. If a person bleeds out for 5 mins or so, they would most likely close their eyes, right? I've heard that other places too.

Well I'm inclined to go with the qualified medical practioner who did the autposy myself.

[smurfette]

I have been lurking here for a while and really enjoy reading all the posts from you guys who are so knowledgable about this case. I taught school in Rowlett for seven years, although not at the school that Damon and Devon attended and I lived my whole life in Garland which is right next door to Rowlett. So that's why I've had some interest in this.

I am curious about what other things you believe might have been thrown in the sewer? I hadn't ever heard of this possibility before.

Thanks.

[HeartofTexas]

Welcome to WS, Smurfette!

I am the LEAST knowledgeable poster on the Darlie forum, so please be sure to remember that! And I also just heard about the sewer possibility from Goody's post. Keeping that in mind, I'm wondering if another pair of Darin's jeans might have been thrown in the sewer. I guess Darlie's underwear could have been thrown there, too, although they could just as easily have been put in the laundry hamper. I hope some of the other posters might have some better ideas.

[Goody]

I didn't recall that there was a sewer that was never checked... I bet that's exactly what happened to the sock. They dumped the rest of the stuff in the sewer but dropped the sock en route. Good idea, Goody!
Afraid I can't take credit for it. It has come up dozens of times. I was defintely not the first. In fact, I rejected it for the longest while, but once this stuff digested, it seems to be the only sensible conclusion.

[beesy]

[QUOTE]As I highlighted in my post the estimate the Doc gave was based on all of those stabs being made at the same time (or approx the same time). The Doc emphasised that and then made it clear that it was all just an estimate. I'm less and less convinced that the 8-9 min rule does us any favours. There is no evidence that Damon was attacked whilst Darlie was on the phone. I think it highly unlikely that she could just grab the knife while she is talking to the operator and stab Damon a few more times and then carry on. Your theory is also contingent on the fact that Darin was in on the whole thing and was OK with her stabbing Damon in front of him - again something I think there is little evidence for.Yes, I agree with you that it should'nt be seen as a hard proven fact. I said as much also. Many people disagree with the final story the DA suggested in court. I think Damon was only stabbed once, not a few times, while Darlie was on the phone. I came to that conclusion when I heard the "Damon, Damon, Damon" on the tape. In my mind there is evidence. As I said before, we all have theories. Alot of other people believe the 2-attack theory also, just not my whole theory..LOL:twocents:


Well I'm inclined to go with the qualified medical practioner who did the autposy myself.I know you're getting really annoyed at me. I'm not trying to be bossy here, so sorry if I seem that way. Right here, you say you agree with the professional on Devon's cause of death. You are however, willing to give his statements more leeway when discussing the 8-9 mins. Damon lived after the fatal wound.
I certainly repect the Dr., but I'm just giving some leeway on this. I need to do some more research on in general if it means anything when someone dies with his eyes open. The movies and TV use it all the time because it's so freaky. LOL
Check out my post to Goody below. My problem with Devon bleeding to death while awake is wondering if Darlie would have left him alone. If somebody has their eyes open and is bleeding to death for several mins. it's obvious they are alive. Would she have been satisfied with that?

[beesy]

Devon was laying on his back staring at the ceiling, eyes open. I don't recall anyone talking about the expression on his face though. I think it means he was awake when he died, but not necessarily killed instantly. In fact, I think the MEs said he bled out. That would take a few minutes. Yeah, I know he was on his back. I think he's got a freaked out look on his face and I have read it other places too. Not in the trial transcripts, but books and interviews. Of course Darin agreed on the Leeza Show that the knife went thru Devon's body and nicked the subflooring and that's not true. The ME did say Devon bled out which could take up to 5 mins. Do you think Darlie would have been satisfied with that or do you think she'd stab him until he appeared truly dead? Maybe Darin interrupted her or something? I agree that he was awake, I'm just curious as to why she trusted that he'd bleed to death especially if it took several mins. Darlie had no medical training nor did she research crime cases and post on message boards...lol...I don't know if she would have just said "oh well, he'll die." Maybe that gives us some backup for our theory that Darin saw more than he says he did? If he interrupted her and they argrued, Devon would have died during that time.
So, honestly, please think about if Darlie would have left him alive with his eyes open or if something else happened.

[Breehannah6]

Yet you think Darin is responsible without one shred of evidence to tie him to the murders and Darlie innocent, despite overwhelming physical evidence that screams she is guilty, because you look for the good in people. LOL


****sarcasm off****I think if she is guilty then so is he you see it all doesnt add up but if you include him then it paints a very different version of how 2 kids can be stabbed at the same time without one running for help or something!:rolleyes:
I seriously think if theres no intruder then they are both in on it!

[Dani_T]

I know you're getting really annoyed at me. I'm not trying to be bossy here, so sorry if I seem that way. Right here, you say you agree with the professional on Devon's cause of death. You are however, willing to give his statements more leeway when discussing the 8-9 mins.

That's because she (hmm why am I thinking she? Oh well let's run with it) qualifies nearly every second word in that section about the minutes with 'estimate', 'assuming', 'can't tell'. She is making educated guesses at the length of time Damon could have lived based on numerous variables. On the other hand she looked at Devon's wounds and as a medical practioner determined the cause of death which was bleeding out. Not an individual stab wound which stopped him cold. All you're basing you theory on is the fact that his eyes were open (which itself seems only to be a report from an author of a true crime book).

I'm not angry at you at all. Just slightly bemused.


Check out my post to Goody below. My problem with Devon bleeding to death while awake is wondering if Darlie would have left him alone. If somebody has their eyes open and is bleeding to death for several mins. it's obvious they are alive. Would she have been satisfied with that?
Well Damon had crawled across the floor and was still breathing when she called 911 so you tell me.

[bensmom98]

[/b][/color]

All you're basing you theory on is the fact that his eyes were open (which itself seems only to be a report from an author of a true crime book).

Um, actually I believe there is a picture of Damon's deceased body and his eyes are open. I think it can be found on that website that her family made for her. Does anyone know the picture that I am referring to?

[Dani_T]

Um, actually I believe there is a picture of Damon's deceased body and his eyes are open. I think it can be found on that website that her family made for her. Does anyone know the picture that I am referring to?
I'm not talking about Damon having his eyes open (though I wouldn't be suprised if he did because the paramedic said he saw the light just fade out of them when he died). It was Devon we were discussing in that respect. It may be that he did die with his eyes open- but the point is that doesn't mean instantaneous death (eg. Damon didn't die quickly and his eyes were probably open), especially when you have the doctor who did the autopsy testify that he died from bleeding out and not from a sudden stab wound that stopped his heart in its tracks.

[beesy]

I'm not talking about Damon having his eyes open (though I wouldn't be suprised if he did because the paramedic said he saw the light just fade out of them when he died). It was Devon we were discussing in that respect. It may be that he did die with his eyes open- but the point is that doesn't mean instantaneous death (eg. Damon didn't die quickly and his eyes were probably open), especially when you have the doctor who did the autopsy testify that he died from bleeding out and not from a sudden stab wound that stopped his heart in its tracks. I said that once. Once you quoted the transcript I asked questions. Goody said she thought Devon dying with eyes open shows he was awake. That sounds good to me. You never offered me ideas on if dying with your eyes open in general, not just Devon, meant anything. Asking is much different than telling.

[Goody]

Um, actually I believe there is a picture of Damon's deceased body and his eyes are open. I think it can be found on that website that her family made for her. Does anyone know the picture that I am referring to?
I think that is Devon. Damon's photo was taken with him laying on his belly; the photo is of his back where the wounds were.

Devon was laying on his back staring upward. Both boys had their eyes open, but you can't see them because of a censor strip. In Damon's case, I think his face is turned away but trial testimony pretty much agrees that his eyes were open when he died. Trial testimony also describes Devon's eyes being open and staring toward the ceiling,.

[Goody]

I said that once. Once you quoted the transcript I asked questions. Goody said she thought Devon dying with eyes open shows he was awake. That sounds good to me. You never offered me ideas on if dying with your eyes open in general, not just Devon, meant anything. Asking is much different than telling.
It is not likely that Devon slept thru all the stabs. That should be enough to wake anyone, no matter how soundly they sleep.

[Mary456]

Since the police did not check out the sewer, we will never know what other evidence might have been dumped there.

Sergeant Ward did check the sewer, Goody.

"I laid down and shined my flashlight down looking at the base and then it kind of runs off at a funny angle. I looked down the drain as far as I could and there was nothing inside the drain." (This was just a couple of hours after the murders).

Also, it's very unlikely that either Darin or Darlie would take the time to remove the manhole cover & then replace it. Those suckers are heavy & you really need some type of tool to pry them up.

[Goody]

Sergeant Ward did check the sewer, Goody.

"I laid down and shined my flashlight down looking at the base and then it kind of runs off at a funny angle. I looked down the drain as far as I could and there was nothing inside the drain." (This was just a couple of hours after the murders).

Also, it's very unlikely that either Darin or Darlie would take the time to remove the manhole cover & then replace it. Those suckers are heavy & you really need some type of tool to pry them up.
Well, Mary, the picture I saw shows a sewer drainage thing in the side of the curbing so why would he have to remove a manhole cover?

[Goody]

Sergeant Ward did check the sewer, Goody.

"I laid down and shined my flashlight down looking at the base and then it kind of runs off at a funny angle. I looked down the drain as far as I could and there was nothing inside the drain." (This was just a couple of hours after the murders).

Also, it's very unlikely that either Darin or Darlie would take the time to remove the manhole cover & then replace it. Those suckers are heavy & you really need some type of tool to pry them up.
Sgt Ward looked down the storm drain (which I have been calling the sewer) with a flashlight (still dark out) but couldn't see anything because the drain angled off. They didn't have the key to open the manhole cover and never did get it. So anything that managed to go all the way down the drain was lost to investigators If you've ever lost anything down a storm drain you know the angle is sudden and near the surface. You cannot see the sewer from the storm drain.
1 Q. Okay. Did you see any blood inside
2 the trash container?
3 A. No, sir, I did not.
4 Q. Did you find anything else inside the
5 trash container beside the grass clippings?
6 A. Just grass clippings.
7 Q. Didn't find another sock in there?
8 A. No, sir.
9 Q. Didn't find any shoes inside the
10 garbage container?
11 A. No, sir.
12 Q. How about just in the area surrounding
13 the garbage container. Did you find any other socks?
14 A. No, sir, I did not.
15 Q. How about shoes?
16 A. No, sir.
17 Q. Just this one sock?
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. Now, if I may, let me just step back
20 so that you and the jury can see what I'm going to point
21 at here. Does there appear to be a storm sewer drain
22 here right next to the garbage container?
23 A. Yes, sir, there is.
24 Q. Okay. Is there a manhole cover right
25 there?
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
1268

1 A. Yes, sir.
2 Q. Right next to it?
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. Okay. Now, let me ask you, Sergeant
5 Ward, did you ever have an opportunity to look inside
6 that storm sewer?
7 A. Yes, sir. We didn't have a key to it
8 at the time, but I laid down and shined my flashlight
9 down looking at the base, and then it, it kind of runs
10 off at a funny angle. It doesn't run true with the
11 alley, the drain doesn't. And I looked down the drain as
12 far as I could.
13 Q. Okay. When you looked inside the
14 drain, did you see any blood?
15 A. No, sir.
16 Q. Did you see any other socks?
17 A. No, sir.
18 Q. Did you see any shoes?
19 A. No, sir.
20 Q. Did you see anything inside that drain
21 when you looked in it that morning?
22 A. No, sir, I did not.

I still think it makes more sense that they were dumping more than just one sock.. However, another interesting fact about where the sock was found is that it was behind Gary what's his face's house, and he was the fellow Darlie was telling people was the "real" killer. She had to back off of that in court when the prosecution brought him in to show that he didn't match her description of the killer at all. So maybe the sock was a plant in a lame effort to make police think he did it. No worse than the thud on Kato's wall the night Nicole and Ron were killed. Lucky for him he was on the phone instead of just watching TV alone.

[beesy]

I think that is Devon. Damon's photo was taken with him laying on his belly; the photo is of his back where the wounds were.

Devon was laying on his back staring upward. Both boys had their eyes open, but you can't see them because of a censor strip. In Damon's case, I think his face is turned away but trial testimony pretty much agrees that his eyes were open when he died. Trial testimony also describes Devon's eyes being open and staring toward the ceiling,. If you maxi the pix, there are no censor strips on the website. Damon's head is turned to the side, like you said, but it looks like his eyes are closed. Of course these pix were taken at the hospital, not where Damon actually died.

[bensmom98]

I think that is Devon. Damon's photo was taken with him laying on his belly; the photo is of his back where the wounds were.

Devon was laying on his back staring upward. Both boys had their eyes open, but you can't see them because of a censor strip. In Damon's case, I think his face is turned away but trial testimony pretty much agrees that his eyes were open when he died. Trial testimony also describes Devon's eyes being open and staring toward the ceiling,.


Thank you Goody - I meant Devon.

[Dani_T]

I said that once. Once you quoted the transcript I asked questions. Goody said she thought Devon dying with eyes open shows he was awake. That sounds good to me. You never offered me ideas on if dying with your eyes open in general, not just Devon, meant anything. Asking is much different than telling.

Ok./ I've had a loooooong weekend, I admit I am not thinking very coherently at the moment- but you've lost me.

You said you though Devon died suddenly because his eyes were open.

I quoted the transcripts that shows the doc who did the autposy said cause of death was the bleeding out from the stab wounds and that he would have taken a few minutes to die.

Regardless of whether he had his eyes open or not I'm going with the doc's cause of death because she knows what she is talking about. He may or may not have been awake (though if his eyes were open then it suggest he was- just like Damon was).

I have no idea what dying with your eyes open means generally.

[Goody]

If you maxi the pix, there are no censor strips on the website. Damon's head is turned to the side, like you said, but it looks like his eyes are closed. Of course these pix were taken at the hospital, not where Damon actually died.

The paramedic may have closed his eyes.. We know Damon was awake until the end because of trial testimony. The paramedic said he saw the last flicker of life go out in his eyes. He didn't say he let out a breath and closed his eyes. I'd say that is enough evidence to prove his eyes were open. Plus Darlie and Waddell and Walling all said Damon's eyes were open until the paramedics were allowed in. That pretty much covers it, I would think.

[Goody]

Thank you Goody - I meant Devon.
No problem, Ben's Mom.

[accordn2me]

[QUOTE]
As you said, this is based on the 1-attack theory. I believe Damon was attacked 2x by his mother, or maybe even the 2nd time by Darin. I don't start my clock until after the fatal wound. Like you said, it's a theory. I just happen to think it's a good one. And I even think Damon was stabbed the final time while Darlie was on the phone with 911. So I'm not holding fast to the 8-9 mins, but you just used up nearly all of your time in your theory. You've got Waddel at 3:30 mins. Walling used up 3 additional mins, medics reaching Damon after about 1-2 mins. And we know Damon died after the medic(can't spell his name) got there. Maybe as long as 2 mins. later. Of course those are proven facts. So you say Damon was stabbed all 4 times before Darin came downstairs, right? And then we've got the time for Darlie to do whatever Darlie did before she called 911. That's a longer time for Damon to have lived after the attack than my 8-9 mins. which is closer to the estimate the good Dr. gives.
I know what he said, but that confuses me. I've read this too. Springer mentions how most people who die with a frozen face die instantly. If a person bleeds out for 5 mins or so, they would most likely close their eyes, right? I've heard that other places too. Maybe too much Crossing Jordan LOL It's also mentioned in Helter Skelter. Jay Sebring died with a look of terror on his face. It was said to be instantly. I don't know if that's why they said it was instantly. I just sort of assumed it was. I know Devon (http://orgsvet.com/?go=devon&url1=http%3A%2F%2Fwebsleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fnewrep ly.php) would have bled out if she had left him alone. That one throws me. Do they mention his eyes being open, because I do think that is a clue to cause of death, isn't it? Not method of death, but cause.
Did you know your Devon links are to ads for porn?

[Goody]

Did you know your Devon links are to ads for porn?
O, Beesy, it is. Did you put that in or has someone hacked into your computer? I am so computer illiterate so I don't know if that is how someone could pull a fast one on you or not, but something sure went amuck. Seems unlikely it is coincidence though unless you accidently plugged into the wrong link during a search. I bet that is what happened. You want to clean that little bugger up.

[beesy]

O, Beesy, it is. Did you put that in or has someone hacked into your computer? I am so computer illiterate so I don't know if that is how someone could pull a fast one on you or not, but something sure went amuck. Seems unlikely it is coincidence though unless you accidently plugged into the wrong link during a search. I bet that is what happened. You want to clean that little bugger up. Oh dear! Oops! No, for some reason, I underlined "Devon" which created the link. Didn't mean for it to link to anything, much less icky stuff. Sorry all! :blushing: Of course, I had to check it out..lol..I'll PM the law so she can edit it...too funny

[Goody]

Oh dear! Oops! No, for some reason, I underlined "Devon" which created the link. Didn't mean for it to link to anything, much less icky stuff. Sorry all! :blushing: Of course, I had to check it out..lol..I'll PM the law so she can edit it...too funny
I wonder how many Darlie sleuthers ended up at this guys site. LOL!

[beesy]

[QUOTE=Breehannah6]She never got a new trial ,they just released her when they found the clothing she said the baby had been wearing folded up neatly in a pile in a cave many years later!! And there was no way they could have put them there! I was rereading some of the posts and this one confuses me. Why did folded up clothes in a cave make Lindy innocent? Do they now agree that a dingo killed the baby? If so, who folded the clothes? Or am I reading this wrong? Most likely...
I just read several articles about the case. I realize you've studied it much more than I, but from what I read the reporters said the jumpsuit and diaper were found folded, but they weren't. They were found a week later, right?
Then several years later, police found the little matinee jacket Lindy said the baby was wearing. I think they said it was near dingo lairs and was not folded. So, from what I understand the jacket also being found is what made the police realize they needed to re-examine everything?
And I noticed that this case is truly a case of shoddy police work. No pix were taken of the "crime scene". There was evidence that a dingo had dragged something away from the tent. No pix were taken of the paw prints near the tent. No pix were taken of a little depression which looked like the dingo had put down it's burden to rest. A policeman picked up the jumpsuit, then placed it back to take pix. Like you said, tons of blunders. Nothing at all like Darlie's case. There is tons of forensic evidence, many pix and many blood samples taken. Just on and on...I can see why the Lindy case upsets you so. She did get screwed, but Darlie didn't.
Source:
http://www.crimelibrary.com/fillicide/azaria/

[beesy]

Ok./ I've had a loooooong weekend, I admit I am not thinking very coherently at the moment- but you've lost me.

You said you though Devon died suddenly because his eyes were open.

I quoted the transcripts that shows the doc who did the autposy said cause of death was the bleeding out from the stab wounds and that he would have taken a few minutes to die.

Regardless of whether he had his eyes open or not I'm going with the doc's cause of death because she knows what she is talking about. He may or may not have been awake (though if his eyes were open then it suggest he was- just like Damon was).

I have no idea what dying with your eyes open means generally. Ok, so I got obssessed with the eyes open thing. :crazy: What it comes down it to is I don't want Devon to have bled to death. Ugh! I guess I need to face it though:furious:

[beesy]

:laugh:

I wonder how many Darlie sleuthers ended up at this guys site. LOL! Maybe they enjoyed checking it out :blushing:

[kez]

Lindy & Michael were both officially cleared of Azaria's murder by the NT Court of Appeals on Sept 15 1988 and declared innocent [convictions quashed] In 1992 they received a settlement from the NT govt for wrongful imprisonment. [not that money makes it better!]

The clothing that turned up [matinee jacket]was important in that Lindy had claimed Azaria was wearing it as well as the jumpsuit,nobody believed her. It backed her version of events when it turned up and led to more investigation & re testing.

The matinee jacket was not folded, it was found not far from where they found the jumpsuit initially in an area with a lot of dingo lairs, it was found in a cave. The only reason it was ever found was because a tourist had been found dead after falling & they were doing a scene search. The matinee jacket had vegetation & forensic evidence consistent with Lindy & Michaels version of events. Lindy was released once it was found as it added to the already growing evidence of a wrongful conviction [ faulty forensics relating to the blood in the car & evidence of scissor cuts on the jumpsuit]

Up until this time, dingo deaths & maulings were not reported, not sure why? Anyway, people generally believed that dingo's were harmless, which is what caused people to think that Lindy killed Azaria. Since then, we have had several deaths related to dingoes, even a 10 yr old was killed :-( so if it happened now, noone would have probably doubted her.

I don't see any similarity between the 2 cases at all, although I haven't followed Darlie's case very well.


Beesy, I hope this helps to clear up your Q's, not make it more confusing as I'm not sure if I explained it all very well.

[Goody]

[QUOTE=kez]Up until this time, dingo deaths & maulings were not reported, not sure why? Anyway, people generally believed that dingo's were harmless, which is what caused people to think that Lindy killed Azaria. Since then, we have had several deaths related to dingoes, even a 10 yr old was killed :-( so if it happened now, noone would have probably doubted her.

QUOTE]

I don't know. Not long ago a three year old was attacked by neighborhood dogs here in the states and one of the parents was convicted of murder, only to discover some years later that it was a dog attack. A wrongful conviction can and does happen, esp in the deaths of children when parents do not have the money to do expensive testing to prove their innocence. Forensic experts can make mistakes.

That did not happen to Darlie though. She had one of the best criminal attys in the area, and even in these many years after the conviction has never hired outside forensic experts to dispute the state's case. The most her attys have ever said about the expert's in their case is they "could have" been wrong because of x. y, and z. They never say "the experts are wrong because our tests prove it." Or even, "the blood could have been caused by blah-blah-blah and our tests prove it could happen that way." You'd think in ten years they would have something significant to free her if there was anything out there to be had.

[kez]

I don't know. Not long ago a three year old was attacked by neighborhood dogs here in the states and one of the parents was convicted of murder, only to discover some years later that it was a dog attack. A wrongful conviction can and does happen, esp in the deaths of children when parents do not have the money to do expensive testing to prove their innocence. Forensic experts can make mistakes.

That did not happen to Darlie though. She had one of the best criminal attys in the area, and even in these many years after the conviction has never hired outside forensic experts to dispute the state's case. The most her attys have ever said about the expert's in their case is they "could have" been wrong because of x. y, and z. They never say "the experts are wrong because our tests prove it." Or even, "the blood could have been caused by blah-blah-blah and our tests prove it could happen that way." You'd think in ten years they would have something significant to free her if there was anything out there to be had.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that mistakes aren't still made, I just meant specifically to the Chamberlain case, if it had happened now with all the cases of dingoes attacking people. I'm sure wrongful convictions are still happening, especially if people can't afford to pay for their own testing to check the results.

I agree with you about Darlie, why hasn't an effort to have forensic evidence re-tested if it can prove her innocence? I think if it was me, I'd go for a cheaper attorney & pay for the evidence that proves my innocence to be re-tested & used in appeal rather than sit in a jail as a convicted murderer.

[beesy]

[QUOTE]
Lindy & Michael were both officially cleared of Azaria's murder by the NT Court of Appeals on Sept 15 1988 and declared innocent [convictions quashed] In 1992 they received a settlement from the NT govt for wrongful imprisonment. [not that money makes it better!] That's what I assumed a pardon was in Austraila. Breehannah6 said that Lindy never had her name cleared and all she got was a pardon. Since in the States they are really the same thing I couldn't figure out what she meant by pardon. Made no sense to me.
The clothing that turned up [matinee jacket]was important in that Lindy had claimed Azaria was wearing it as well as the jumpsuit,nobody believed her. It backed her version of events when it turned up and led to more investigation & re testing.
The matinee jacket was not folded, it was found not far from where they found the jumpsuit initially in an area with a lot of dingo lairs, it was found in a cave. The only reason it was ever found was because a tourist had been found dead after falling & they were doing a scene search. The matinee jacket had vegetation & forensic evidence consistent with Lindy & Michaels version of events. Lindy was released once it was found as it added to the already growing evidence of a wrongful conviction [ faulty forensics relating to the blood in the car & evidence of scissor cuts on the jumpsuit
I read that in the article I gave as my source. Breehannah6 said it was folded and found in a cave, which didn't make sense so I did some digging on my own. I'm not sure if she thinks the dingo folded the jacket or what..lol
I don't see any similarity between the 2 cases at all, although I haven't followed Darlie's case very well only that parents and children are involved...I noticed in the article that no photos were taken around the camp or of dingo prints. That little depression which they said looked like the dingo had dropped something should have been a big clue as well as the drag marks and paw prints. They also should have paid more attention to the blood spatter in the tent. And besides all that, saying a dingo took her baby is not the best cover in the world. If people thought they were fairly harmless, that's a pretty dumb story for her to invent if she had killed the baby.
In Darlie's case, there are photos galore, tapes, interviews, blood spatter evidence that was well documented and other evidence which doesn't fit any type of intruder theory, be it a dingo or a hired hit man.
Beesy, I hope this helps to clear up your Q's, not make it more confusing as I'm not sure if I explained it all very well Yes, thank you. Everything you said makes perfect sense. In most cases, the easiest thing is normally the right thing. When you start wading thru a bunch of muck, it gets too complicated and it usually doesn't fit into the story. The thing which makes the most sense with the Lindy case is that a dingo stole her baby. Once they started trying to prove that Lindy had time to kill the baby, bury it, rebury it, tear the clothes and so on, things got too convoluted and it just doesn't work. So what's the thing that makes the most sense with Darlie? That she killed the boys and injured herself. Nothing else works

[beesy]

I don't know. Not long ago a three year old was attacked by neighborhood dogs here in the states and one of the parents was convicted of murder, only to discover some years later that it was a dog attack. A wrongful conviction can and does happen, esp in the deaths of children when parents do not have the money to do expensive testing to prove their innocence. Forensic experts can make mistakes[/color] I remember that case. The girl was even still alive when her parents or parent(which?) found her and she mumbled "the dogs did it" before passing out. Is that the one? There was something about how the cuts didn't look like bite marks or nails. Did they get a new trial? I know they(or he/she?) were released. I recall that somehow they did find some bruises which looked like paw prints. I don't know if they had to exhume her or not.



[QUOTE]That did not happen to Darlie though. She had one of the best criminal attys in the area, and even in these many years after the conviction has never hired outside forensic experts to dispute the state's case. The most her attys have ever said about the expert's in their case is they "could have" been wrong because of x. y, and z. They never say "the experts are wrong because our tests prove it." Or even, "the blood could have been caused by blah-blah-blah and our tests prove it could happen that way." You'd think in ten years they would have something significant to free her if there was anything out there to be had. Even without alllllllllll the evidence they have, this right here shows she's guilty. Nobody to dispute any of the evidence, no testing, only her word and Darin's. I bet if she hadn't received the DP, everybody would think she is guilty. Most of these people are using Darlie in their campain against the DP.

[kez]

How's this for coincidence? LOL, just as we were discussing it
A 25-year-old woman has walked into an Alice Springs newspaper office claiming to be Azaria Chamberlain.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,16385163-421,00.html

Lindy was definitely cleared, I don't know why Breehannah6 thinks she hasn't been or where she heard the jacket was folded. Lindy has come back to Oz with her husband Rick Creighton and is on the Speakers circuit. They were building a guesthouse on the Oz coast at one stage, but I'm not sure if that went ahead.


That article is pretty good reference too, I also like this one, which is http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/chamberlain/chamberlainhome.html it's got partial police interviews as well as a basic chronology and summarises the various coroners hearings accurately. It also has some photo's from the time. Lindy also has a site in progress http://www.lindychamberlain.com/

I have no clue why they didn't follow standard crime scene procedure, I also don't understand why the aboriginal trackers were basically all but ignored, especially in that area. I've always been amazed that she was convicted, eyewitness & tracking evidence was discounted as well as forensics being incorrect. :doh:

I guess what I think is, Darlie and her supporters have had a long time to disprove any incorrect evidence and hasn't. The Chamberlains and their supporters re-tested, re-interviewed and re-investigated,they didn't just talk about it, they did it.

[beesy]

[QUOTE]
How's this for coincidence? LOL, just as we were discussing it
A 25-year-old woman has walked into an Alice Springs newspaper office claiming to be Azaria Chamberlain Thanks for the link. Um, hmmm well, she's not the prettiest young lady I've ever seen, bless her heart. Of course she went to the paper first, not the cops.:rolleyes: I like the flashbacks she has. She can remember being 9 weeks old. LOL

[kez]

Thanks for the link. Um, hmmm well, she's not the prettiest young lady I've ever seen, bless her heart. Of course she went to the paper first, not the cops.:rolleyes: I like the flashbacks she has. She can remember being 9 weeks old. LOL

You're welcome Beesy. I thought that was interesting too, I can't even remember when I was under 10! LOL
I don't think she looks at all like the other 3 children. It's strange the way they worded the first story released, it was the male who encouraged her to go to the media. My head just spins sometimes!

[accordn2me]

A wrongful conviction can and does happen, esp in the deaths of children when parents do not have the money to do expensive testing to prove their innocence. Forensic experts can make mistakes.:clap:

That did not happen to Darlie though. She had one of the best criminal attys in the area, and even in these many years after the conviction has never hired outside forensic experts to dispute the state's case. The most her attys have ever said about the expert's in their case is they "could have" been wrong because of x. y, and z. They never say "the experts are wrong because our tests prove it." Or even, "the blood could have been caused by blah-blah-blah and our tests prove it could happen that way." You'd think in ten years they would have something significant to free her if there was anything out there to be had. If the judge would grant them access to the evidence, maybe they would test it.

Mulder, bless his heart, may have been "one of the best criminal attys in the area" at one time, but he came across as a bumbling idiot in Mark Tolle's court room. That would be accordn2me reading the transcripts.:razz:

[Breehannah6]

No I am so dumb I thought a dingo folded the clothes!lol NOT!

The first inquest the coroner said that there was person or persons unknown involved in the disposal of this babies body!Long before they arrested her charging her with murder. The drag marks (,that actually led to the home of a person who owned a cross dingo dog that was never seen again after that night)were NEVER reported that all came out years later.
The gist of it is
if you read the book is that a dingo cross mutt took the baby back home and the owner disposed of the dog clothes and baby! The Australian public were never given the whole picture! They did take photos of the blood splatter on the tent,but lets face it the Northern Territory was really outback in 1980. I suppose people would believe it if it happened today but the fact is it was reported aborigines had children that had been attacked and we all said what a "load of rubbish".
The point I am making is when kids die the first people they look at is the parents! and if they dont look the part we then convict them in the media.
I am aware that someone in here is from Oz and if she is over 45years old she will admit we didnt think police had made mistakes and we all believed Lindy Chamberlain was as guilty as you think Darlie is! In hindsight we all say yeah it wasnt the same there were heaps of blunders and yes a baby was taken by a dingo but in 1980 we thought she was as guilty as sin and the NT police had done a great job !!! I think it was all very dodgey all of a sudden she was released when they found the matinee jacket all low and behold years later her story suddenly may have been true.
If we had the death penalty here in Oz she would have got it! So large was the public beliefe she did it and was hated for it! I am not sure how many years she was in jail quite a few! She had her supporters too! Who we thought were other religous nuts! people blackbanned companies when they heard the gave to the Seven Day Aventists Church to help her legal fees.
I said the reason I think the 2 are the same is not because of the way the deaths of the children took place but the public opinions, and the fact they were both mothers accused of killing their own young children.
I can see that unless I totally agree and say I think Darlie and she alone is totally guilty then I best post nothing in this particular forum. So this will be my last post!

[Goody]

[QUOTE] I remember that case. The girl was even still alive when her parents or parent(which?) found her and she mumbled "the dogs did it" before passing out. Is that the one? There was something about how the cuts didn't look like bite marks or nails. Did they get a new trial? I know they(or he/she?) were released. I recall that somehow they did find some bruises which looked like paw prints. I don't know if they had to exhume her or not.

I think new experts proved the injuries were canine. Working from memory though so don't carve that in stone.

[Goody]

Thanks for the link. Um, hmmm well, she's not the prettiest young lady I've ever seen, bless her heart. Of course she went to the paper first, not the cops.:rolleyes: I like the flashbacks she has. She can remember being 9 weeks old. LOL
Hey, Beesy, some people remember being in the womb. Couldn't prove it by me, but that is what they say.

[Goody]

I said the reason I think the 2 are the same is not because of the way the deaths of the children took place but the public opinions, and the fact they were both mothers accused of killing their own young children.
I can see that unless I totally agree and say I think Darlie and she alone is totally guilty then I best post nothing in this particular forum. So this will be my last post!
I am sorry you feel that way. I don't think anyone meant to chase you away.

Many of us don't think that Darlie and Darlie alone is responsible for this. I for one am not convinced she acted alone. There just isn't evidence to back it up. If there were, I would be all over it, trust me on that one!

As for your comparing the two cases, about the only thing they do have in common is that they were both accused of killing their own children. I don't think there is that much public opinion sympathetic to Darlie, but she has some supporters who continue to believe in her innocence. I don't know how they can study the evidence and think that, but each to his own.

I hope you change your mind and post again. You can disagree with us all you want and we will probably argue our postions, but please don't take it personally. We are just responding to your words, not your person.

[kez]

Hi Breehannah6,

I lived in Townsville at the time, I've followed the case because my daughter was around the same age as Azaria. No, I'm not quite that age, if it was me you were referring to, but yes, many Aussie's felt she was guilty & that the NT police were wondeful. I think Lindy was arrested & convicted not only because of inept investigation & faulty forensics but also because of political interference as well as public prejudice. Tourism would have died there if they had admitted the dingoes were a problem. At the time, forensics was also a new science here, although that is not an excuse. This is just my opinion though.

Lindy was in jail for 3 years, is the book you are talking about written by Phil Ward? The Chamberlains dismissed his theory about Ding the domesticated dingo during the royal commission in 1997/98 and the publisher was sued for defamation & lost.
I'm not sure though if that's the book you are talking about.

I totally agree with you about the parents being looked at first, as they should & then rule them out & work from there. As far as I am aware though, sadly for Lindy, she was the only person I have heard of convicted for not looking the part with evidence & witnesses that didn't match the prosecutions theory.

I don't think you're dumb, if you have that impression, I apologise. I just didn't know where you had gotten that info from & that's what I was replying to. Anyway, I really didn't mean to upset you at all or to the point where your leaving this forum [Darlie] Over the years so much info, both true & false has come out, it gets confusing to remember it all, well for me anyway LOL

[beesy]

[QUOTE=Breehannah6]No I am so dumb I thought a dingo folded the clothes!lol NOT!
[QUOTE]She never got a new trial ,they just released her when they found the clothing she said the baby had been wearing folded up neatly in a pile in a cave many years later!! And there was no way they could have put them there!
Isn't this your post? Unless I'm reading it wrong, you are saying the baby's clothes were "folded up neatly in a pile"? So I am wondering who folded the clothes. They weren't folded. Even without reading an article I could figure out that clothes left in a dingo laire would not be folded. Maybe aliens..
The drag marks (,that actually led to the home of a person who owned a cross dingo dog that was never seen again after that night)were NEVER reported that all came out years later Well I did read several different articles and all of them say that one of the volunteers saw the paw prints and drag marks, and the depression that night. He showed them to several other people. Whether he told the police that night and they forgot such an important clue or whether the men never told anybody else I don't know. Either way it supports your "cops are idiots" theory.
They did take photos of the blood splatter on the tent,but lets face it the Northern Territory was really outback in 1980. I suppose people would believe it if it happened today but the fact is it was reported aborigines had children that had been attacked and we all said what a "load of rubbish Well, again I read that they didn't. They just looked at it and it showed high velocity. By not taking the pix they boosted their theory that Lindy was quiltly. She didn't go into the tent and shake the baby. And when most dogs pick up something they shake it around in their mouths for a bit, bingo, high velocity blood spatter. Besides, I tend to doubt you since you said the clothes were found folded:doh:

The point I am making is when kids die the first people they look at is the parents! and if they dont look the part we then convict them in the media. Wrong again, someone close to the victim is always looked at first. You are more likely to be killed by a loved one than by an unkown person. Not with just kids and parents. Look at the stats
[QUOTE]we didnt think police had made mistakes and we all believed Lindy Chamberlain was as guilty as you think Darlie is!Of course police make mistakes. It does not happen with as much evidence as there is against Darlie. They had very, very little evidence to even charge Lindy, much less convict her. In hindsight we all say yeah it wasnt the same there were heaps of blunders and yes a baby was taken by a dingo but in 1980 we thought she was as guilty as sin and the NT police had done a great job !!! I think it was all very dodgey all of a sudden she was released when they found the matinee jacket all low and behold years later her story suddenly may have been true . Again Darlie has used up all of state appeals. The defense has been working like all get out looking for evidence to get her a new trial. Lindy got out after a few years, something happened to prove her innocense. No matter how it happened, it did. Something would have come up by now to free Darlie especially as hard as her supporters are working. They've been working on it since '97

If we had the death penalty here in Oz she would have got it! So large was the public beliefe she did it and was hated for it! I am not sure how many years she was in jail quite a few! She had her supporters too! Who we thought were other religous nuts! people blackbanned companies when they heard the gave to the Seven Day Aventists Church to help her legal fees.
I said the reason I think the 2 are the same is not because of the way the deaths of the children took place but the public opinions, and the
fact they were both mothers accused of killing their own young children :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
I can see that unless I totally agree and say I think Darlie and she alone is totally guilty then I best post nothing in this lar forum. So this will be my last post I think Darin was involved in the cover up possibly more. He didn't hire a hit man though. Most of us feel Darin was involved somehow so you don't have to say she did it alone. You are asking questions, we are answering them. You just don't like what we are saying and have chosen to ignore all the evidence we've given you. Blood in the front seat was not enough to convict Lindy, and it's truly a shame that she was.There was reasonable doubt coming out the ying yang in that case. So 1 person gets screwed and everybody else who is convicted is innocent too. I don't care what you believe about Darlie. Not once have you said, "gee, that is a little suspicios" and there have been plenty of times you could have said that. I'd like for you to stay, but you continue asking the same questions and don't appear to be learning anyhing. Your call though

[Jeana (DP)]

I'd like for you to stay, but you continue asking the same questions and don't appear to be learning anyhing. Your call though[/b][/color]


Beesy, pull your claws back in and have a bowl of milk and move on. She knows its her call whether she stays or not. :slap:

[beesy]

Beesy, pull your claws back in and have a bowl of milk and move on. She knows its her call whether she stays or not. :slap: ouch, my eye. You don't have to hit me you meanie poo-poo head. Bees don't have claws nor do they drink milk, but I'll pull my stinger in and go find some honey, OK?

[beesy]

found a link to a reverse speech interpretation of an interview with the Chamberlains
http://www.reversespeech.com/azaria.htm

[accordn2me]

Hi Breehannah6,

many ******** felt she was guilty & that the ******* police were wondeful. I think ****** was arrested & convicted not only because of inept investigation & faulty forensics but also because of political interference as well as public prejudice. ******** would have died there if they had admitted ********** were a problem. At the time, forensics was also a new science...., although that is not an excuse. This is just my opinion though.


I totally agree with you about the parents being looked at first, as they should & then rule them out & work from there. As far as I am aware though, sadly for ******, she was convicted for not looking the part with evidence & witnesses that didn't match the prosecutions theory.

I don't think you're dumb, Over the years so much info, both true & false has come out, it gets confusing to remember it all, well for me anyway LOL
:clap:

kez,

I hope you don't mind my altering your post a bit. Since I don't know the Lindy case at all, I just wanted to borrow your statements that directly paralleled the Routier case.

Brehannah6, it's the posters like you that keep us ADD people interested in this case. Beating a dead horse with the see it no other way, she's definitely guilty diehards gets entirely boring at times. Just know that one poster, accordn2me :razz:. relishes your fresh, open mind on the subject. Please don't let one or two rotten apples poison the orchard. Stay and let's share some worms....:D

[Goody]

:clap:

kez,

I hope you don't mind my altering your post a bit. Since I don't know the Lindy case at all, I just wanted to borrow your statements that directly paralleled the Routier case.

Brehannah6, it's the posters like you that keep us ADD people interested in this case. Beating a dead horse with the see it no other way, she's definitely guilty diehards gets entirely boring at times. Just know that one poster, accordn2me :razz:. relishes your fresh, open mind on the subject. Please don't let one or two rotten apples poison the orchard. Stay and let's share some worms....:D
What reason is there to believe that Lindy is guilty? Dogs kill babies all the time. Why would dingos be any different?

And how would she get rid of the body and get back to the tent without being missed if she did do it? She would have had to have taken that body pretty deep into the bush, wouldn't she?

[beesy]

Brehannah6, it's the posters like you that keep us ADD people interested in this case. Beating a dead horse with the see it no other way, she's definitely guilty diehards gets entirely boring at times. Just know that one poster, accordn2me :razz:. relishes your fresh, open mind on the subject. Please don't let one or two rotten apples poison the orchard. Stay and let's share some worms....:D The main problem I have with Brehannah6 is that she is comparing the 2 cases. What she believes about Darlie's guilt matters little to me. I just don't like the fact that she is making her decision about Darlie's guilt or innocense based on what happened to Lindy.

[ElleaBoo]

Being aussie I can tell you that the case of Lindy was made up mostly of speculation and here say. The case of Lindy still divides a nation. You still have people saying " I know she did it". I do not believe that she murdered her baby. Not long ago a older man came forward to say that he and a mate found the body of Azaria and chose to bury it in the backyard of a friends house. It proved to be untrue. Also a lady came forward to say she was the missing baby this also proved to be untrue. Lindy was tried by media long before she even had her day in court. :behindbar From what I have read about the Darlie case she cannot be compared to Lindy in anyway. After reading the case of Darlie I do believe she is not telling the whole truth. Gaps in her stories( the many differnet versions) make her look guilty. At the end of the day it is about those 2 innocent little boys.