PDA

View Full Version : Eagle--A few questions for you


Arielle
09-17-2003, 09:33 AM
I was reading on one of the other threads (about RGHC I think) about your preferred suspect. I was wondering if you would be willing to share some information on the type of person this suspect is. I seem to recall that you are a believer in some sort of conspiracy theory in regards to this case. Is that right? Would you be willing to post a brief synopsis of your theory and your suspect? I, for one, would find it very interesting.

Also, I was wondering, since you said your suspect was in Texas, do by any chance think that there might have been any connection between the Routier case and the Ramsey case? I know it is a very unpopular idea that Darlie might be innocent, but I for one think she is. And there are times when I think about the two cases and to me, there are many many striking similarities between the two. In the past, I think that only RGHC ever agreed with me that there could be a connection, because he thought Pachaly did both crimes. But then he thinks Pachaly is evil incarnate and has committed most of the controversial crimes of the century. So I tend to shy away from his support.

Thanks a bunch,

Arielle

Maxi
09-17-2003, 11:10 AM
Arielle, have you heard from RHGC recently? Do you have his email addy? I've lost it, but I'd like to get in touch to make sure he is okay.

Arielle
09-17-2003, 11:13 AM
Maxi, No. I've never talked to him other than on the fourms. I don't think I've seen him since the first time we went through all the changes. I too have been wondering about him.

Eagle1
09-20-2003, 09:38 PM
No, what I said was he MAY be in Texas, judging by so many strange things happening there.

It's really strange that RHGC would forget that he could get sued, imo. Prisoners sometimes study a lot and start keeping up with the news, maybe even use computers these days.

I didn't keep up with the Routier case, didn't even know it was in Texas, but you and RHGC certainly may be right that the same
perp may be connected to that case and some of these others, in my humble opinion. Thanks for the question. :dontknow:

In the other thread, I agreed with you and some others that a bigger picture may be revealed one of these days, and said I have complete "faith" the case will eventually be solved.

I'm not even ruling out perverted religion as a factor, there's been so many cult killings. One in Ohio recently, a Lundgren now on death row.

Patsy hinted or maybe actually said, there's a spiritual dilemma or aspect, which sounds like they may have been confused by a madman's unheard-of new doctrine. I'm not stating anything firmly as fact, just speculating like everyone else. Edited this for a little more clarity just now. :bigthumb:

Eagle1
09-20-2003, 09:44 PM
I can't imagine what a madman could have told the R's that would convince them to let JonBenet spend time with him, especially way past her bedtime when they had an early trip planned.

Didn't Patsy's sister say "We didn't mean for this to happen," as if they'd let someone take JonBenet out of their sight?

I don't think Pachaly could be Public Enemy #1 either, and maybe RHGC was lied to about Pachaly by a real perp. Sociopaths love to frame somebody they envy, maybe for having more business success.

I don't know anything about the Routier case, sorry. Maybe you can connect the two cases for all of us.

SisterSocks
09-21-2003, 01:43 AM
Darlie was guilty of killing her sons in a suberb of Dallas.


There have been much speculation about the Huge and dark bruises found on Darlie's arms ...Pixs that the jury didn't see and also tape that showed Darlie crying and praying at the gravesite,before the silly string birthday party at cemetary....

Eagle1
09-22-2003, 01:46 PM
I know next-to-nothing about the Routier case, but if she had large dark bruises, and I think a cut(?) that weren't shown to the jury, I wouldn't think that's a fair trial, at all!

How about you, Arielle? From England, right?

Arielle
09-22-2003, 01:48 PM
Okay Eagle, here you go. I have only read a little bit about the Routier case myself, and it was after I got involved in the Ramsey case, so maybe I was already predisposed to think in a certain way. Also, much of what I have read about the Routier case has been biased in favor of Darlie being innocent, so that has also helped me to come to my decision.

The basics of the case are as follows: The family was a "self made" rich family that started by building some sort of electronic widgets in their garage. Over time, they were quite sucessful at this business and to all outside eyes, were quite well off. Darlie was extremely attractive, in an overblown, "Texas babe" sort of way. (I feel like I can say this without being considered discriminatory being from Texas myself). Any how, apparently there were some problems in the marriage that weren't known to anyone. I am not sure about whether or not either had had an affair, but there were some tough issues to be faced. Also they seemed to be having some financial trouble (perceived by the prosecution as the motive).

The night of the murders, Darlie and her two older sons (7 and 5 I think) were watching TV on the first floor in the living room. Her husband and infant son were upstairs in bed asleep. Darlie claims that an intruder gained access to the house through the garage and she woke up to find him hovering over her with a knife. She fought him off, sustaining what were called "superficial" injuries. One of these superficial injuries was a cut to her neck that came within a fraction of an inch of severing her carotid artery.
She chased him through the kitchen and fought with him more. He left through the garage. Both children had been savagely attacked with a knife. One was dead and the other was barely alive. Darlie called 911 hysterical and called up to her husband for help.

There were several issues dealing with blood spatter on her shirt, wiped up blood in the kitchen and in the sink, that were used against her in her trial. I think that there are reasonable explainations for these inconsistencies, but I'm in the minority. The screen in the garage through which the "intruder gained access" was found to have been cut from the inside, with a knife from the kitchen (it had screen fibers inbedded in it). The boys were also killed with a knife from the kitchen. One piece of evidence strongly in her favor, is that there was a bloody sock found 2 blocks away that had the blood of one of the boys on it. According to her lawyers, she would not have had time to plant it.

That is the story in a nutshell.

The things that have always struck me as similar to the Ramsey case are as follows:
1) Both were rich families to all outward appearances.
2) Both men had made their money by starting their own technology business in their garage with their wives as helpers.
3) Both mothers were very close to their own families.
4) Both crimes used items found within the house for the crime.
5) There were overt signs of staging in both crime scenes.
6) The overt staging seemed to implicate the mother in both cases.
7) There did not seem to be a good motive for either mother to suddenly snap and kill her children.
8) The parents in both cases have stuck together throughout it all providing a united front of innocence.

The major differences in the two cases:
1) Darlie and Damon cooperated fully with police; now Darlie is on death row.
2) The amount of violence in the Routier case was significantly greater than that in the Ramsey case.

RGHC agreed with me in that the two family backgrounds seemed to be similar in respect to the homegrown electronics business. He beleived that Pachaly targeted men who were sucessful in a technological field where he was unable to succeed for whatever reason. So in that respect, he thought that Pachaly may have committed both crimes for that reason. I"m not sure which holiday, July 4 maybe, that the Routier crime would fit to go along with his theory. I personally don't believe in his Pachaly as master criminal theory. But I see so many things that are similar between the two crimes that I would be willing to believe that there could be a person or group out there targeting the children and wives of men who were successful in a particular industry for some reason.

For some people, killing the man would not be good enough. Getting to him through those people closest to him, his children and his wife, would be far better. Especially if this was aboout control rather than about revenge. Why do we protect the spouse and offspring of the President? So that no one can get to him through his family. So why couldn't the same be true in these two cases? Just becuase Damon Routier and John Ramsey seem to be very non essential people, doesn't mean that they aren't useful to someone.

However, this is only one of the many theories on these two cases I have floating around in my head. These thoughts are subject to change at any time.

Eagle1, I would really like to hear a little bit more detail about what you think is going on. I can only figure out about half of what you are saying. Something about cults and religion being the root cause, but I'm not sure how it applies.

Eagle1
10-06-2003, 09:01 PM
Thanks to both of you for the Routier info.

I think you meant to say she was "found" guilty, Sistersocks, right? You don't sound like you think she's guilty.

Is she going to get a new trial or something? I really have my doubts about her guilt after reading Arielle's pros and cons.

I did some editing in previous posts so they now read much better. You might want to just glance at them again. I didn't have any biggie theory about a cult madman, just saying I guessed correctly in the E. Smart case that somebody had said God told him to take Elizabeth, based probably on the Afghans thinking they'd get a certain number of virgins for terrorism, and on some of our own cult disasters. Just being impressionable and incorporating the news into the case, possible trends.

Arielle
10-07-2003, 10:17 AM
No, I am not from England. I'm a US Army brat, but have spent major portions of my life in Texas and other areas of the south. I now live in the wonderful state of Delaware. But for some reason I seem to speak with a slight British accent and many people have assumed I was from England. Must be my speech patterns. Don't know where I picked it up. My parents are midwesterners. My hubby is Texan through and through.

As for Darlie and pictures of her bruises, this seems to be in some debate. One juror says he never saw them, another says she is sure they were there. The cut was dismissed as "superficial" by the prosecution. It was something like 8 inches long and barely missed her carotid artery. But since it wasn't fatal it was called superficial. This was in comparison to the deep stab wounds to the chests of the two little boys.

I believe she has lost her appeals. It is very hard to get a new trial in a Texas death penalty case, from what I understand.

Ivy
10-07-2003, 11:23 AM
I know this isn't the right forum for discussing Darlie, but I'll add my two cents' worth anyway. On a documentary about the case, a physician demonstrated how easily Darlie could have cut her neck without fatally injuring herself. She could have pinched the skin on her neck and pulled it outward before cutting it. That aside, based on the blood droplets on the back of her shirt--which indicated they'd hit in a downward direction--I think Darlie is the killer. The blood droplets probably fell from the knife when she drew it over her shoulder in between stabs.

Eagle1
10-07-2003, 04:55 PM
If she planned to kill any of her children, wouldn't she have made it all three?

She probably didn't know where her carotid artery is, that doctor witness is forgetting. How could she know she wouldn't bleed to death? They really do sound hard-hearted in the Texas system.

Maybe we have a Darlie forum here and I'll check on it.

Arielle, somehow I got you mixed up with Jayelles, who's English, can't remember how. Sorry.

Eagle1
10-08-2003, 03:55 PM
Anyone know on which side of Darlie's neck this cut was?

There's a carotid artery on both sides, right? But who among us would know exactly where?

Arielle, maybe it's the double l's in your name and in Jayelle's that causes me to mix you up. Bear with me, girls. Sorry about that.

Arielle
10-08-2003, 04:40 PM
I beleve that the cut began in the upper portion of the right side of her neck and angled down across it to her upper left chest. It was several inches long. Darlie was right handed.

Eagle1
10-08-2003, 05:42 PM
That's like when the character we nicknamed Boots in the JBR case was suicided. Someone may remember details. I think he was left-handed but was stabbed in the left side. My opinion's probably slightly wrong too. I might be able to find my notes on that if nobody else remembers.

Nedthan Johns
10-08-2003, 10:27 PM
One piece of evidence strongly in her favor, is that there was a bloody sock found 2 blocks away that had the blood of one of the boys on it. According to her lawyers, she would not have had time to plant it.

Arielle: Another of my favorite cases, which I strongly lean towards Darlie's innocence. Have struggled with this one for a long time. The crime scene was one in which was so bloody, no way Darlie could have deposited the sock afterwards. The DA office believes she did it prior to killing her children, which I find hard to believe.

The hardest aspect of this case are the bruises to Darlies underarms and wrists, which I believe is compelling evidence of an intruder. Unless Darlie was smart enough to bang her arms on the counter top edges in her kitchen, could be the only other explaination, and still very hard to grasp. The fact that Darlie was suicidal and the family was in financial hardship within weeks of the crime however, make her a strong suspect.

I watched a documentary where Darlie took and passed a lie detector test. There was also one lone unidentifiable thumb print found on their coffee table. This is truly a who dun it case, and the fact that photos were kept from the jury who many of them now state would not have led them to a guilty verdict, means she should automatically get a new trial.

Eagle1
10-09-2003, 02:44 PM
I heartily agree with all the above that she should get a new trial. I read somewhere that she may, because of some new evidence, which if I remember correctly was the print.

justme23
11-16-2003, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by Nedthan Johns
One piece of evidence strongly in her favor, is that there was a bloody sock found 2 blocks away that had the blood of one of the boys on it. According to her lawyers, she would not have had time to plant it.

The hardest aspect of this case are the bruises to Darlies underarms and wrists, which I believe is compelling evidence of an intruder. Unless Darlie was smart enough to bang her arms on the counter top edges in her kitchen, could be the only other explaination, and still very hard to grasp. The fact that Darlie was suicidal and the family was in financial hardship within weeks of the crime however, make her a strong suspect.

I watched a documentary where Darlie took and passed a lie detector test. There was also one lone unidentifiable thumb print found on their coffee table. This is truly a who dun it case, and the fact that photos were kept from the jury who many of them now state would not have led them to a guilty verdict, means she should automatically get a new trial.

Ok, I see this post is a month and a half old, but I just found this board not that long ago and just last night bought the book on this case by Christopher Wayne Brown (actually after reading about this case in what areas I could find it).

Anyways, I wanted to comment... while I don't know (obviously haven't read the whole book yet) about how depressed or suicidal Darlie was, I can tell you by looking at bank statements (which are are actually pictured in the book) that these ppl were NOT in financial hardship... infact, in the 30 days before this happened they had deposited more than 11 thousand dollars into their joint account AND had 7 thousand at the time of arrest. I don't know about the lie detector either (specifically) except that Darlie passed and DARIN (Damon is her son.. someone was calling the husband Damon above) failed. Also, there are TWO unidentified prints in the house... one on the table and one on the doorknob either leading into the utility room or into the garage. There's also a third knife that was found in the back yard of a neighbors house that was never tested for blood or fingerprints. I didn't know if this would change your mind in any way, so I just wanted to share... hope I haven't offended anyone!

SisterSocks
12-02-2003, 07:05 PM
Yep gerber has got a booming business.

Blazeboy3
12-03-2003, 04:46 AM
Originally posted by JohnJC
There are many companies that sell life insurance for children. Gerber is one of them. Most parents buy insurance for their children so that they can have the cash value when they go to college. All of our kids have policies. The premium is LOW $10 a year until age 10 then $52 a year until age 21 where the premium goes up to normal rates. My wife had several whole life policies that were gifts to her when she was christened. They were for $1,500 and $2500. She used them for tuition for graduate school.
Under most employment life insurance plans through the parents' jobs the kids are insured in group plans. It is very common in families of executives.
JC
Yup..I agree...if you're employer provides such w/is common here in midwest!...and it's cheap if you are an "employee!"...!!! but NOT if you're "unemployed!!!"/disabled!":dontknow: