Darlie Routier's Appeals & Court Rulings

Judge rejects another appeal by Darlie Routier

The judge who presided over Darlie Routier's 1997 death-penalty trial rejected the convicted child-killer's second appeal in a ruling released Wednesday.

More than two years after the writ appeal was filed by Ms. Routier's defense team, state District Judge Robert Francis found that the former Rowlett homemaker now on death row got a fair trial.

"The Applicant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence ... that anyone other than the Applicant was responsible or involved in the murders," Judge Francis wrote.

* * *


One of Ms. Routier's appellate attorneys, J. Stephen Cooper, said he was not surprised by the findings because the judge indicated in January that he would not hear court arguments on the matter.

* * *

He said a federal appeal is possible if the state appeals court agrees with the judge's findings and rejects the appeal.

An earlier appeal based on the fact that errors occurred during the trial also was rejected.

Ms. Routier was sentenced to death in 1997 for killing her 5-year-old son, Damon. She was also accused of killing her 6-year-old son, Devon, but was not tried for that death. She maintains that an intruder stabbed the boys before stabbing her in her Rowlett home.

The appeal challenged Ms. Routier's conviction by claiming a wide range of errors and mishandling by the original trial attorneys and prosecutors, including the following:

One bloody fingerprint was not analyzed properly and could have supported a defense claim that Ms. Routier's children were fatally stabbed by an unknown intruder. Judge Francis ruled that a fingerprint analyst used by the defense team used methodology that was "not sound" and that trial testimony about the print was accurate.

* * *

The intruder theory was buffeted by information that Ms. Routier's husband, Darin Routier, had searched for someone to stage a burglary of the house to collect insurance money. Judge Francis found no evidence that the slayings were part of a burglary.

* * *


The judge also concluded that the defense team had mounted an adequate defense during the trial.


http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/080504dnmetdarlie.165bd.html

Casshew said:

Jeana ~ your buddy Darlie, she just does not give up!

Click to expand...

Death row has NOT been kind to Darlie Routier. She looks absolutely horrible in that photograph. Hopefully, she's starting to get some idea about how the state feels about women who murder their children in their sleep.

I just want to introduce myself, I am Camilla, one of the Darlie posters from Mary's Guilty as Charged forum at Delphi.

I know Darlie is guilty, but it was a long process for me to arrive to that conclusion, to be sure.
If anyone needs some help with understanding the evidence, especially blood, Ill do my best to explain what I know.



c

Thanks for coming over Camilla. I'm hoping to get the discussion going once the Peterson case wraps up. Between the end of that case and the Lori Hackings murder trial (if there even is one), we'll need a good case to talk about. In the meantime, please feel free to post any links or other information that might get things started.

We've also got some posters here that are interested in the West Memphis Three case. Do you know of that one?

The blood droplets pointing downward on the back of Darlie's shirt are certainly inculpatory. So is the fact that she changed her stories regarding the so-called attacker. So is the fact that despite her apparent hysteria, she made sure to tell the 911 operator that she'd handled the knife and that her fingerprints might be on it.

And that's just for starters.

She did it.

the link wanted me to register...i'd love to see the photo. anyway...i have always been interested in this case also. look forward to more discussion. i wonder if a death warrant will be signed now?

Hi, all! I would love to participate in a discussion about Darlie. I followed her case, although not as closely as some I am following now....I saw a commercial on Court TV that they are airing a Darlie Routier special tomorrow night (8/15) at 10PM, EST. It may just be more of the same, but I am going to plan on watching it. Have a good weekend!

Jeana (DP) said:

Thanks for coming over Camilla. I'm hoping to get the discussion going once the Peterson case wraps up. Between the end of that case and the Lori Hackings murder trial (if there even is one), we'll need a good case to talk about. In the meantime, please feel free to post any links or other information that might get things started.

We've also got some posters here that are interested in the West Memphis Three case. Do you know of that one?

Click to expand...

Jeana--
Sorry if this is obvious to most--I am still new around here and don't know many details about posters, but do you think Darlie is guilty or innocent?
Thanks--
Karen

i was reading over at that other board...and got the impression from some posters that darlie has now filed habeas corpus implying that she has a suddenly- recalled repressed memory that her husband did it. ..anyone know details on this?

Ivy said:

The blood droplets pointing downward on the back of Darlie's shirt are certainly inculpatory. So is the fact that she changed her stories regarding the so-called attacker. So is the fact that despite her apparent hysteria, she made sure to tell the 911 operator that she'd handled the knife and that her fingerprints might be on it.

And that's just for starters.

She did it.

Click to expand...

You're right Ivy. And she didn't just "change her stories." She told 13 different stories. The woman never shed a wet tear UNTIL she did a behind prison walls interview after her conviction.

deputylinda said:

the link wanted me to register...i'd love to see the photo. anyway...i have always been interested in this case also. look forward to more discussion. i wonder if a death warrant will be signed now?

Click to expand...

She's about two years behind in the appeals process because of the transcript errors. We always thought that her best bet at getting a new trial would have been those errors. Once her appeal on that issue failed, I knew that the rest would as well.

AuntieKaren said:

Jeana--
Sorry if this is obvious to most--I am still new around here and don't know many details about posters, but do you think Darlie is guilty or innocent?
Thanks--
Karen

Click to expand...

Karen, she's definately guilty. I lived just across the lake from that family during the time of the murders. I remember being so scared that my children's beds and crib were moved into my bedroom. No one was more surprised than me when she was arrested. However, I know the assistant prosecutor in Darlie's case and know for a fact that they did a very thorough investigation - there is no way an "intruder(s)" did it.

deputylinda said:

i was reading over at that other board...and got the impression from some posters that darlie has now filed habeas corpus implying that she has a suddenly- recalled repressed memory that her husband did it. ..anyone know details on this?

Click to expand...

Nothing new Linda. Darlie found a supporter who was willing to pay legal fees, but the guy thought that Darin had to have done it and Darlie just didn't remember it. So, he arranged for Darin to take a lie detector test. Darin failed misserably. However, depending on which of the 13 versions you believe that came out of Darlie's mouth, she saw who did it and it wasn't Darin. She wrote a letter from jail while awaiting trial saying so. When confronted on the witness stand during her trial with that letter, she apparently broke down on the stand and was unable to continue testifying. Toby Shook tore her down completely. She didn't understand that anything she sent out of that prison was being monitored.

Moreover, after Darlie's conviction, her family started a website, as many do. One day I left a comment on the guestbook and started up a correspondence with Darlie's mother. It lasted a couple of months and we were pretty cordial to one another, even though she knew I believed in Darlie's guilt and want her executed. She told me in an e-mail that Darlie and Darin had a huge fight the night of the murders and Darlie asked Darin for a separation. I promised her I wouldn't tell anyone the nature of our conversations that kept that promise until I found out that she was trying to spread horrible lies about me. Then, I told everyone what Darlie Kee told me about that night and the fight and Darlie asking for a separation. She denied it for years. Then, Darin finally admitted it himself. All those dozens of supporters of Darlie's who believed Darlie Kee without hesitation started to hesitate. They wanted to know why they were being lied to by Darlie's family. I think it lost Darlie a lot of support - and rightfully so.

We knew from that day on that it was just a matter of time before they tried to save Darlie from drowning by using Darin as a life preserver. Unfortunately for Darlie, Darin stated to the presss that although he wanted to help his wife, he wasn't willing to change places with her. I've also heard from a reliable source that while they would have liked to arrest Darin as well as Darlie because they think he's scum, they simply didn't have any evidence that he was connected to the crime.

Darlie cannot win either way. If she implicates Darin in any of the crime or cover up, it will prove that she lied, but it won't negate the fact that they had mounds of evidence against her. If she says nothing, she still dies and he still walks free. If he comes out with all he knows, she still dies, and he may face some sort of trouble for whatever part he played in all this, but if they didn't have enough evidence to bring charges against him back when the evidence and investigation were fresh, I seriously doubt that they'll have anything to use against him now, even if Darlie rolls on him.

thankyou so much for updating for me!! will you please post when death warrant is signed? of course that will go big-time like carla faye...female execution always does. thanks again! fascinating about her mother too. and darin's comment. ha.

Ive always been on the fence about Darlie mostly due to the fact I think her husband was involved/knows more than hes telling whiich is troubling.


I think discussing this case is a great idea!!!!!

there's a lot of unexplained things. I'm on the fence too. What about a bloody fingerprint that they cannot match to anyone? Why was so little of the boys blood found on Darlie's PJ'S? Her blood was UNDERNEATHE theirs on her shirt. She had a lot of blood on her but VERY LITTLE was the boys. Why would she slice her neck first and then the boys? Why is her cut on her throat from right to left when she's right handed? It would feel much more natural to slice your throat left to right instead.

Those and more are my unanswered questions. According to that book about the boys, there was more than one knife used to kill them. Thus an explanation was given as to why she was only charged with one, not two murders. Because the murder weapons were supposedly different.

I'll think of more questions later.
I'm convinced enough that there is a SLIGHT possibility that she may be innocent. Based on that, I don't think she should be on death row because of those questions.

wouldn't they have tried to make her a deal to not pursue the death penalty if she gave them her husband? If she's still denying his involvement seems likely he's not involved but then who knows...

blueclouds said:

there's a lot of unexplained things. I'm on the fence too. What about a bloody fingerprint that they cannot match to anyone? Why was so little of the boys blood found on Darlie's PJ'S? Her blood was UNDERNEATHE theirs on her shirt. She had a lot of blood on her but VERY LITTLE was the boys. Why would she slice her neck first and then the boys? Why is her cut on her throat from right to left when she's right handed? It would feel much more natural to slice your throat left to right instead.

Those and more are my unanswered questions. According to that book about the boys, there was more than one knife used to kill them. Thus an explanation was given as to why she was only charged with one, not two murders. Because the murder weapons were supposedly different.

I'll think of more questions later.
I'm convinced enough that there is a SLIGHT possibility that she may be innocent. Based on that, I don't think she should be on death row because of those questions.

Click to expand...

I'll do my best to try and answer your questions, but Camilla is the "blood" lady. I'll email her and see if I can get her back here to help us out. The medical examiner never said that there were two knifes used. Also, only areas of the blade were tested. Her supporters want you to believe that this is the reason that she was only charged with one of the murders, but from what I've been told, its fairly common in these types of cases to leave a charge remaining in case there is a technicality. For example, Yates was only charged in the murder of three of her children, not all five. Same reason.

As for her neck, the prosecutor actually stood up in open court and demonstrated how easily it would be to cut her neck the way she did.

Its been said that Devon actually survived the first attack and tried to crawl to the front door and was attacked again, this time killing him. Its always been my contention that Darlie was at the wine rack cutting her neck and saw him trying to get away. She was already bleeding when she attacked him the second time.

Lets just for a second, say she's innocent. This is what happened:

Let's say you're in your family room with two of your kids and you wake up to someone walking away from the room and you follow him out. You discover that you've got blood on yourself and you turn around to find your children dying. The first thing you're going to want to do is call 911. She did that (eventually). The second thing you're going to want to do is to get some help (she also did that eventually), next what are you going to do? You're going to try and stop their bleeding, right? You're going to put pressure on their wounds. Once you realize, as Darlie did, that one or both of them are dying, you're going to hold them in your arms.

Darlie threw towels to her husband that she actually took the time to wet (for what we don't know) FROM THE OTHER ROOM. She never went near them. She never touched those boys. Even when the first officer arrived on the scene, Officer Waddell, TOLD her SEVERAL TIMES to put pressure on the wounds, she never touched them. She never held them. She never comforted them. Being a mother, that's the thing that always stuck with me. You'll hear a lot of people talk about the silly string video, about them playing "gansta rap" at the funeral or them burying the boys with knives in their coffin, but that doesn't bother me nearly as bad as the fact that Darlie stood there--just stood there and watched the lives drain out of her two babies. Explain to me how anyone could do that.

What it reminded me of is when you catch a kid with something they're not suppose to have or be doing and they try to distance themselves from it as quickly as possible. Darlie didn't want to get near them because she was guilty. She should have been covered with their blood because she was holding onto them for dear life and comforting them. She shouldn't have just had some dropplets on the back of her shirt from blood dripping from the knife while she prepared to plunge it in again and again and again.

The following was put together by a poster who was known as Dasgal and/or Jon Galt. She's an ex-cop and someone I consider to be a friend. I'd invite her here to talk with us, but she's so sick of hearing the name Darlie that I'm afraid she'd shoot me. There are actually 16 different versions of Darlie's story, not the 13 I mentioned.


THE MANY STORIES OF DARLIE ROUTIER - TOLD BY THOSE WHO SHE TALKED TO OR HERSELF.

Story 1

Q. Okay. What did she say, or where was she when this all started?

A. She said that she was downstairs in her house, sleeping on the couch. And her two boys were downstairs and they had been watching TV, a big screen TV. And that what started waking her up was her little boy started crying.

Q. Okay. Did she say...where her husband was when all of this was going on?

A. She said that he was upstairs with her little baby.

Q. Okay. So she had been downstairs with her two boys watching TV?

A. Yes.

Q. And that what woke her up was her 5 year old crying?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Then what did she say happened?

A. She said that her -- she felt a struggle like at her neck.

Q. Okay.

A. And the man started wrestling with her.

Q. Pokay. Did she say where she was w this struggle at her neck and the wrestling occurred?

A. She was on the couch.

Q. Okay. What's the next thing that she told you?

A. She said that she started yelling and that he ran off and he had dropped the knife and she picked it up.

Q. Okay. Did she say which way that he ran?

A. No, sir.

Q. Okay. Did she describe to you where she went to pick up the knife?

A. No.

Q. Did she tell you anything that happened when he was running away after she yelled out?

A. She said that he ran into a wine rack holder.

Q. Okay.

A. And that it made a big crack noise.

Q. He ran into a wine rack holder?

A. Um-hum.(Witness nodding head affirmatively).

Q. Okay. And, what happened when he ran into the wine rack holder?

A. Well, that's when she really think that's when she really started waking up. That's what she said.

Q. She heard a loud crack noise?

A. Um-hum.(Witness nodding head affirmatively).

Q. And then he dropped the knife; that right?

A. Um-hum. (Witness nodding head affirmatively).

Story 1

Q. Did she -- well, what's the next thing she told you?

Story 1

A. She said that she remembered that it was -- the knife came from her butcher block from her kitchen because it had a white handle on it.

Q. Okay. Now, were you asking her questions during this?

A. The only one that I asked her was how she knew it was hers. She said because it had a white handle.

Q. Oh, okay, regarding the knife?

A. Um-hum.(Witness nodding head affirmatively).

Q. What did she say she did then?

A. She turned the light on and she saw her two boys laying on the floor and she screamed. And she just, when she was telling me this, she just kept saying there was just blood everywhere. And then, she said her husband came downstairs, and that's when she had realized she had been stabbed. And he started doing CPR on the little boy and she called 911.

Q. Her husband came down after she screamed?

A. Um-hum.(Witness-nodding head affirmatively).

Q. And did CPR on the little boy?

A. Um-hum.(Witness nodding head affirmatively.)?

Q. And she called 911?

A. Um-hum.(Witness nodding head affirmatively.)

Q. Did she tell you anything else about what happened?

A. Well, she just said when her husband was doing CPR that he kept saying,"Hang in there, babies. Hang in there.,, And she said there was just blood everywhere.

Q. Okay. When she told you this story, what was her demeanor?

A. She was pretty calm when she was talking. I just remember looking at the cardiac monitor and her heart rate had gone up just a little bit.

Q. Okay. Was she crying at all when she she told you the story?

A. No, sir.

Q. Okay. Did you see her cry some during the night when you were with her?

A. I saw -- her eyes would get a little wet, but I never really saw tears-go-.down her face.