Now, I will try and respond to specific inquiries. I think justice2 brought up whether Darlie and Darin knew each other was serious on the night of June 5th/morning of June 6th, 1996. My opinion is that Darlie had been pressing him for money, so that she could buy the tickets that they soon would need, at least since June 1st (but probably since late May) because that is when Darin first went to the bank for a loan. I think she kept pressing him in the days thereafter until the whole matter came to a boil in the early morning hours of June 6th. Thus, I think they were both taking each other seriously that morning. On another issue, one person thought that it was interesting that I would look at multiple cases in order to come to my conclusions. The fact of the matter is that this technique is not new with me: profilers use it all the time to narrow down the type of person that they might be looking for. It is very useful because a criminal defendant, even a emotionally-disturbed, garden-variety sociopath like Darlie, simply will not be able to successfully manipulate what we have seen in several intruder cases, the pattern that can be distilled from those cases, and that pattern applied to the facts of a particular case. Indeed, it is also true that the State of Texas can't manipulate the pattern for its own uses, and, thus, if we detect a good pattern, then it should be fair to both sides, which is what I want. It also works in reverse because I have taken the focus off several suspects because they did not fit any of the "phantom killer categories" (financially troubled, emotionally conflicted, emotionally troubled). In this case, Darin is financially troubled, but I was able to put him aside as the killer because the killing itself does not appear to be for money and the physical evidence does not indicate that he is the killer, although he appears to be an accessory after the fact.
In regard to Dr. Sam Sheppard, I thank Mary 456 for bailing me out on that one. Dr. Sheppard is an emotionally-conflicted killer. Some people still want to exonerate him, but I dont think there is anyone who can explain why the other suspects would have to stage the crime scene, as Dr. Sheppard quite clearly did. Anyone who is interested should read Gregg McCrary's analysis of the case at
www.crimelibrary.com. The reason that attorney Terry Gilbert and the son, Samuel Reese Sheppard, got to the wrong conclusion is because they started with the theory that Dr. Sheppard did not commit the crime. McCrary did crime scene analysis for a living and, thus, had a good idea about what he was looking at; Gilbert and Sheppard the son did not do it for a living and, thus, were discredited.
Another question that was asked was: does the Valerie Percy case belong on the intruder list? To me, that depends on your view of things. I think the authorities concluded that it was an "interrupted burglary," but it doesn't look like that at all when you closely analyze the evidence. The upscale location, a Chicago suburb, where that crime occurred was founded around 1891. Her murder was the first murder in the place in 75 years, the murder having occurred in 1966. I don't believe that there has been another murder there in the nearly 40 years that have passed. Valerie was struck in the head, apparently with a hammer, in order that the killer could stab her multiple times about the body. That indicates a specific intent to kill; the blows to the head likely occurred first and kept the victim from struggling with the assailant. Burglars are not usually that violent and like to keep their hands free to steal stuff, so it seems odd to me that the "burglar" was supposedly carrying a hammer, a knife, and the flashlight the stepmother described seeing. The coroner in the case concluded that the attack was personal and I agree. I also think from what we have seen in other cases that the killing did not involve financial troubles or emotional conflicts, and, thus, the killer is somebody who had a personal argument with Valerie that boiled over. The nightgown ending up around Valerie's shoulders, which one reporter said showed that the crime had "sexual overtones," is instead classic staging and, thus, the assailant was somebody who was afraid that if investigators took a look at the crime scene without that staging, they would have a pretty good idea of the killer's identity. Since the crime has never been solved and no trial has ever taken place, all I am saying is that the stepmother is a suspect. I believe that this case should stay on our list of "intruder cases" unless Jeana overrules me.
Finally, I think sharkeyes asked whether I would like to write a book about "phantom killer cases." Actually, if time ever permitted, I would like to write something much shorter, like a law review or law journal article, just to get the idea out there so that it could be expanded upon later on. My article would probably be called--and I am serious--"Tired of the Phantom" because I must have seen 25 or so cases involving the phantom. I am sure that we have not seen the last of the phantom or intruder. I haven't thought seriously about writing a book about the Darlie Routier case, but if I ever did, I would call it--and I am serious here, too--"Correct Killer, Wrong Reason." That title for some reason has been rattling around in my head.
I hope I answered most of the questions people had because I tried not to overlook anybody. As I indicated, I am not adamant about the solution I proposed, but I certainly felt we need to discuss it now, whether or not people accept it. I think your comments have been very intelligent and I look forward to reading even more responses, especially when the fourth and final section is published. Too, if anybody thinks that a case was wrongly included on the intruder list, which believe me was the tip of the iceberg, then don't hesitate to say so.
