1378 users online (268 members and 1110 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8 9 10
Results 136 to 149 of 149
  1. #136
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    In the Atlantic
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by CathyR View Post
    I have one problem with the idea that Darlie stabbed the boys first then self inflicted her injuries. The nightshirt shows blood evidence and tells a story. The results were clear but are ignored by many. Darlie's blood is under Damon's blood. That means she bled first then Damon's blood is on top of hers.
    That's on the back of her nightshirt, not the front. How did Damon's blood even get on the back of her nightshirt?

    It's more proof that Damon was stabbed, moved and then stabbed again...fatally after she inflicted her own wounds.

  2. #137
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    63
    Check out YouTube: look up Darlie Routier. There is a Robert Riggs video that speaks volumes!!


    ---
    I am here: [ame="http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=38.935570,-104.814292"]Google Maps[/ame]

  3. #138
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by Trooper514 View Post
    HiHater, read the boys autopsy reports, most especially Damon's. When you do you'll see that BOTH of his lungs were punctured. I have experience with punctured and collapsed lungs and with both lungs having been punctured, blood would be flowing in, air coming out and he would not be able to breath properly. He wouldn't have been able to speak. If she didn't stab them, how did Damon stand by her AFTER he was stabbed and say mommy or do ANY of the things she claimed he did. It does not correlate!
    The blood trail shows he moved around.

  4. #139
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by 2 percent View Post
    What part of the shirt are you talking about?

    The direction of the blood flow on the shirt also shows she was not lying down when slashed by the intruder. She lied about that.
    The blood on the pillow shows she was stabbed lying down. The pillow itself and the pillow case. Easier to see it on the pillow as the background is white and the case was a dark maroon and dark green.

  5. #140
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    LSU LSU LSU !!!
    Posts
    195
    The blood on the pillow was most probably deposited when Darlie went back to clean the hand print off the sofa.

  6. #141
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by Crow_Ascending View Post
    The blood on the pillow was most probably deposited when Darlie went back to clean the hand print off the sofa.
    The sofa was returned to the family with the hand print intact. Other blood on the sofa was also present. What evidence was submitted in court that shows any attempts to remove blood from sofa?
    The blood on pillow is not drops like on the vacuum. Deposited as she stood over it. It is more like a pool as a large area of blood deposit is seen.
    So she was laying down while trying to clean up the hand print?

    I am not following you here?

  7. #142
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    LSU LSU LSU !!!
    Posts
    195
    Luminol testing before the sofa was taken from the house showed that a handprint had been wiped from the sofa. Unlike the kitchen cleanup, no photographs were taken.

  8. #143
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Binghamton, NY
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by sindydee View Post
    The thing that puzzles me is, (the whole case lol) if there was an intruder then he must have been going there for 2 reasons. Firstly to break in and steel or secondly to harm someone. If you were going to burgle someones house surely you would want to make sure that no one is home. Why would you try and burgle a house that you can see has a tv on if you look through the window? Secondly, if you are going to cause harm to someone, wouldn't you take your weapon of choice with you? I would imagine that it has been methodically planned down to the last detail. (Unless you are completly insane and just decide you are going to break into someones house and kill whoever is there using what ever you can find). I know you often see in movies the killer picking up a knife in a kitchen wearing black gloves and then goes on to murder whoever is in the house, but I would imagine this is very rare in the real world.


    From the other point of view, maybe Darcie was in extreme shock. Who knows how we would act if we were in that situation. I think I would have passed out due to fright and shock to be honest.
    The mysterious "intruder" obviously was not a burglar. The moment a burglar realized someone was home they would have ran for an exit with the intention of hiding his/her face.

    You're correct. Burglars want to get in, get the stuff and get out without being detected. No real burglar is going to grab a kitchen knife and try to kill 3 people, then run past a wallet and jewelry. It only happens in really bad movies.

    Very few real burglars would enter a house they know to be occupied. Since Mom and her two boys were in the living room with lights on, all he had to do was peek through the curtains.

    The only murders that happen using weapons that are in the home are usually crimes of passion, the spontaneous ones. The vast majority of those are perpetrated by someone known to the victim. Killers don't go into a house to kill someone and hope they can find a weapon inside. There are very rare cases of this, like Richard Speck, but "very rare" is the operative phrase.

    The "shock" that happens to attack victims doesn't usually kick in until after the attack is over. During the attack, the body is in flight or fight stage. All the mental processes are hyper-engaged so as to beat off the attacker. The frontal cortex (cognitic thought/logic) shuts down a bit and the limbic brain (survival instinct) takes over. Our memory centers are located closer to the limbic brain than the f. cortex.

    It is virtually impossible that she remembered all those details but not the attacker's face. Sometimes when cops interview knife-mugging victims they dont' get a lot of detail about the mugger's face because the victim is so visually focused on the knife, where it is, which direction is it going, etc. How long would a knife-mugging take? 10 seconds? 20, tops?

    If someone is kneeling on top of you for a minute or so slicing at you with a knife and you're struggling with them, at some point you're going to glance at the attacker's eyes and face to quickly determine what their intent is. Sure, you'll be focused on the knife, but human instinct would also drive you to look at their face, at least for a few short seconds (and more than once). The image of that person's face and expression gets immediately and permanently burned into the limbic memory centers of your brain. It's a well-known and documented physical response to trauma. It's the very moment when your brain wouldn't go into black out stage.

    Her saying the only thing she doesn't remember is her being attacked is total BS and contrary to everything we know about attack trauma.

    If she forgot anything, it would be more the time period after she was being attacked, like her chasing him out or the 911 call time.

  9. #144
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Binghamton, NY
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by cami View Post

    I agree with you about the blade handle and shaft. If they remove it, I'll bet you some of Devon's blood is there.

    Why would one intruder take his knife and the other leave one knife there, yet they take a sock! Doesn't quite make sense to me.
    This is one of the things that I can't stop wondering about. In stabbings like these, blood will seep between the blade and the handles. Even a quick wash of the exposed blade won't wash it all away.

    Did they not do a blood search and/or DNA tests for blood trapped under the knife handles? That's Evidence Collection 101.

    The only piece of evidence I can't square is the sock. No one else but Darlie would take it and drop it 75 yards away as a way to plant evidence outside the house. Yet, if she dipped it in the boys' blood, wouldn't it be more saturated? All she had to do was pick it up and the blood on her hands would transfer.

    Granted, in her frenzied state of mind she wouldn't be thinking clearly about why an intruder would carry one of her husband's bloody socks outside.

    Also, if she took the sock down the alley after she stabbed both boys, shouldn't there have been even a drop or two of blood dripped off of her onto the ground or grass?

    I know they luminoled the house. Did they luminol the yard and alley as well, and that's how they determined there wasn't a speck of blood outside the house?

  10. #145
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Binghamton, NY
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by G.I.RattlesnakeJane View Post
    I think the sock could be an uninvited cling-on caused by static cling as the person passed thru the laundry room. A basket of clothes including socks were right by the doorway. The blood on it is a transfer stain.

    The knife was from the house why take it, taking the knife brought with them would mean less chance of tracing that weapon back to them.

    No blood from a 3rd party was ever found so why you think the person was bleeding from the arm.
    Damon killed first, Damon stabbed second, Darlie third and when Damon started moving around the killer had to go back after him this could also explain why Darlie was slashed and not stabbed more. The killer was interrupted by Damon not being dead. In a hurry the killer slices at her throat, goes after Damon but has to put the knife down in order to catch him. Stabs Damon some more and is standing there at the end of the couch when Darlie sees him. He might have decided that he is better off fleeing, than finishing the job.
    No matter who did the killing no one wanted to be caught.

    This would also explain wht he left Darlie's jewelry on the counter, time to leave, to prevent being caught. It is more important to flee the scene and get away than to spend anymore time in the house.
    I considered that the sock might have stuck to the "perp" inside the house. Once the killer is running at full speed down the alley, I doubt it would have clung to him for 3/4 of a football field distance. It would have fallen off 20' away from the fence once he killer got to full gallop.

    Here in NYS my socks static cling to other clothes out of the dryer, but I've never had one jump off the table and stick to me and travel that far.

    I don't have kids, but lots of people I know do. I know that shortly after bringing baby home one or both parents turn immediately into very light sleepers. The time span for light sleeper mode to fade away varies from person to person, but I've had it described to me in terms of years, not months.

    Also, the cry of a mother's kids is imprinted on her brain so that it wakes her up. Other extraneous sounds don't, like trains, bumps in the night, car horns, etc.

    Darlie has 3 kids. Drake was not yet a year old. She's been a light sleeper for, what, 6 years? She has "child cry imprint" on her brain for years. It's impossible that she was lying mere feet away from her boys while they were being stabbed. How probable is it that neither one of them made any noise whatsoever right after the first knife thrust? The sharp gasping alone would have woken her up, even if no noise (somehow magically) never emanated from either boys' vocal cords.

    She woke up after they'd been stabbed repeatedly? Not.

    A burglar would have grabbed the goodies on the counter as he passed them, BEFORE entering the LR, and stuffed them in his pockets before advancing through the house.


  11. #146
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by cami View Post
    That's on the back of her nightshirt, not the front. How did Damon's blood even get on the back of her nightshirt?

    It's more proof that Damon was stabbed, moved and then stabbed again...fatally after she inflicted her own wounds.
    There is no blood found on Darlie's nightshirt other than Darliee's. That is a fact. Why do so many people assume there is Damon's blood on the nightshirt. Oh, I know. The prosecution told you and you believed them. They framed Darlie, and most of the Darlie did it people lack a brain to actually scientifically figure these things out for themselves. Do not believe Cron, the DA, the blood spatter expert, the nurses, doctor's who had a rehearsal so the prosecution could manipulate the doctor to use the word "SUPERFICIAL" in a context few jurors would understand.
    This was all done to get a conviction of Darlie, when they themselves knew should did not do it.
    What detective, says someone committed the crime after just showing up without any forensic evidence? Only someone like Cron.
    My opinion is he is an out and out idiot.

  12. #147
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by OtisBinghamton View Post
    I considered that the sock might have stuck to the "perp" inside the house. Once the killer is running at full speed down the alley, I doubt it would have clung to him for 3/4 of a football field distance. It would have fallen off 20' away from the fence once he killer got to full gallop.

    Here in NYS my socks static cling to other clothes out of the dryer, but I've never had one jump off the table and stick to me and travel that far.

    I don't have kids, but lots of people I know do. I know that shortly after bringing baby home one or both parents turn immediately into very light sleepers. The time span for light sleeper mode to fade away varies from person to person, but I've had it described to me in terms of years, not months.

    Also, the cry of a mother's kids is imprinted on her brain so that it wakes her up. Other extraneous sounds don't, like trains, bumps in the night, car horns, etc.

    Darlie has 3 kids. Drake was not yet a year old. She's been a light sleeper for, what, 6 years? She has "child cry imprint" on her brain for years. It's impossible that she was lying mere feet away from her boys while they were being stabbed. How probable is it that neither one of them made any noise whatsoever right after the first knife thrust? The sharp gasping alone would have woken her up, even if no noise (somehow magically) never emanated from either boys' vocal cords.

    She woke up after they'd been stabbed repeatedly? Not.

    A burglar would have grabbed the goodies on the counter as he passed them, BEFORE entering the LR, and stuffed them in his pockets before advancing through the house.

    Now, why do you assume that the stock clung to the perpetrator. I figured he used the sock like a glove to cover his prints, but I will admit I could be wrong. So, I dropped this train of thought until they can do the DNA testing of the sock.

    Why do you say because some people with children are light sleepers, all people with children a re light sleepers. This I know is NOT true. So, that is pure conjecture.

    And, you assume the person who broke into the house was a burglar. As far as I can tell if someone did break into the house and do this he is a murderer, NOT a burglar.
    Since nothing as taken he cannot be a burglar. Do you think maybe someone hired a person to kill Darlie and the boys? it's possible, but I do not have any facts on this.

    The only facts I have is, the time frame does not work, the only blood on Darlie's nightshirt is Darlie's, there is a fingerprint in blood that doesn't belong to any of the Routier's, the doctor said that the child who was still alive when the police officer got there could have only survived 9 minutes with these wounds, there was a knife missing from the attack, and the silly string video actually shows absolutely nothing as to innocence or guilt. It is strictly a piece of film to make the jurors hate Darlie without needing proof that she did it.

    What proof is there that Darlie actually committed the murders? Let's see the the fingerprint dusting material the prosecution presented as screen residue? That the bloody fingerprint was not identifiable (even though a print isn't identifiable, it can still be used as evidence to disprove it to belonging to any of the Routier's- which has been done, the court transcripts were loaded with errors, the prosecution had a rehearsal, police officers took the 5th, etc. Doesn't any of this leave DOUBT in your head of any sort. Someone of intelligence would normally conclude there are too many mistakes by the prosecution to find someone guilty.

  13. #148
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    11,086
    Does she have an execution date yet?
    IMO

  14. #149
    See which direction cast off gets on the same place as the shirt Darlie was wearing.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8 9 10


Similar Threads

  1. Darlie's 16 versions
    By Pocono Sleuther in forum Darlie Routier
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 07-16-2017, 07:27 PM
  2. Regarding Jane Tanner and her many versions...
    By Isabella in forum Madeleine McCann
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 11-16-2012, 09:10 PM
  3. How many different versions are there ?
    By JaneInOz in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-23-2009, 09:25 AM

Tags for this Thread