Darlie on American Justice tonight

New Posts

cami

cami

Keep your fork......
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
2,883
Reaction score
1,402
Website
Visit site
Mother on Death Row, 11:00 p.m. Eastern



On June 6, 1996, 911 operators in Rowlett, Texas received a call from 26-year-old Darlie Routier claiming that an intruder had broken into her home and viciously attacked her and her two oldest sons, 6-year-old Devon and 5-year-old Damon. Retrace the investigation that landed Darlie on death row. Hear from advocates, including one of the jurors, that the investigation was fatally flawed, and that key leads and photo exhibits were excluded from trial. Meet prosecution and defense attorneys and watch Darlie’s court testimony and footage of the graveyard birthday ceremony for her dead son that swayed the public sentiment against Darlie.
 
It was on in the DFW area last night. I did NOT think much of the presentation. It seemed to imply that she was framed or a rush to you-know-what. I do not think it is new.
But.....I watched every moment!
 
I just saw a special on A & E and have MAJOR questions. It seems she had been convicted from the silly string incident. At least that's how they portrayed it. What gives?
 
i watched it too. boy i'm confused... they did make her look innocent at the end... but i thought the 'new evidence' of someone seeing two men in the neighbourhood the night of the killings was kinda weak. i just don't understand WHY someone would just break into a house and kill two kids with no motive. yet i can see it on her part, i don't think it's her not wanting to lose her 'lifestyle' and the kids being in the way, didn't they ever think she might have had post partum depression as they had a baby? maybe she freaked out and imagined her kids were evil or something. it's happened before?

something about her interviews kinda creeps me out though. she seems rehearsed. i guess i lean more towards the guilty than the not guilty.
 
ISPTRAX said:
I just saw a special on A & E and have MAJOR questions. It seems she had been convicted from the silly string incident. At least that's how they portrayed it. What gives?
Click to expand...

It's all in how they portrayed it- she was not convicted on the basis of the silly string vide (although her supporters claim so over and over again). The jury did watch it a numerous times - but the evidence which convicted her is all in the transcripts (which luckily for us are available online- www.justicefordarlie.net). There is stacks of discussion on this board about some of that evidence but if you have something specific you want to address fire away and some of us will do our best to respond :)
 
Ok... I guess I just don't see a motive for a killing (not even post partem depression) and she seems freaked out in the transcripts/audio. Her husband, on the other hand, seems like a great big DUH during all this. I don't understand him. If she did it, he was in on it. How has he moved on? Has he divorced Darlie and moved on? Is he raising the baby that wasn't killed? So many questions...
 
ISPTRAX said:
Ok... I guess I just don't see a motive for a killing (not even post partem depression) and she seems freaked out in the transcripts/audio. Her husband, on the other hand, seems like a great big DUH during all this. I don't understand him. If she did it, he was in on it. How has he moved on? Has he divorced Darlie and moved on? Is he raising the baby that wasn't killed? So many questions...
Click to expand...
There are many different opinions on the motive so I won't go into that.

On the 911 call, she appears be hysterical, but if you listen closely you can tell that it is forced, esp when she gets to the point that she says in a very clear and very direct and very calm voice, "Someone came in here and did this intentionally, Darin!" I think Darin said something she didn't like to the policeman who had just arrived and she was setting him straight, either reminding him to stay focused or of a preset agreement between them.

I agree that they probably were both involved. It seems unlikely to me that either would be completely innocent if the other one did the killing. One thing for sure, if Darin were the killer, there is no way she didn't know it and no way she would sit on death row with her mouth shut all these years just waiting to die while he is on the outside living life as usual. By the same token, if she did it, there is no way he could be innocent and be convinced to lie to police for her within minutes of walking in on the slaughter of his children. I said "no way," but there is probably a tiny little window of maybe there. I just seriously doubt it.

According to everything I have heard, Darin is raising Drake as a single father, he is working (not sure where or what he is doing...the business he had is gone), and if he is dating, he is keeping it quiet. Never hear a word about him with other women. Surely there are reporters in Dallas who would love to get wind of that. So for all appearances, he is forever loyal, and it has been 9 years since the murders.
 
The most powerful forensics evidence I saw against Darlie was in a program several years ago. Among the points, the nightgown she wore was shown to have the kids blood droplets on the back of the gown, and there was a demonstration was made of how it could be explained...essentially as cast off from the knife as it would be plunged into a body and jerked back to the shoulder to stab again. Among other points, the broken glass fragments in the kitchen landed in her blood which should not have yet been on the floor, and the vacuum cleaner had been rolled through blood to the point it was turned over.

If anyone recalls that program or knows why those issues didn't come up in the program the other night, I'd be interested to know.
 
Lacy Wood said:
The most powerful forensics evidence I saw against Darlie was in a program several years ago. Among the points, the nightgown she wore was shown to have the kids blood droplets on the back of the gown, and there was a demonstration was made of how it could be explained...essentially as cast off from the knife as it would be plunged into a body and jerked back to the shoulder to stab again. Among other points, the broken glass fragments in the kitchen landed in her blood which should not have yet been on the floor, and the vacuum cleaner had been rolled through blood to the point it was turned over.

If anyone recalls that program or knows why those issues didn't come up in the program the other night, I'd be interested to know.
Click to expand...

I remember the program - think it was 'Invisible Intruder' by Medical Detectives. The reason it probably didn't come up in the A&E one the other night is because the agenda of a whole lot of the ones done on her is to cast doubt on her guilt rather than present the facts of the case as they are. Invisible Intruder is the only one I have seen which actually presents the evidence against her as it was without putting it aside for lengthy discussion about the smeared print on the table etc. As a matter of interest you can watch all the 'pro-Darlie' TV shows on the website www.justicefordarlie.net if you are interested. :)
 
Dani_T said:
I remember the program - think it was 'Invisible Intruder' by Medical Detectives. The reason it probably didn't come up in the A&E one the other night is because the agenda of a whole lot of the ones done on her is to cast doubt on her guilt rather than present the facts of the case as they are. Invisible Intruder is the only one I have seen which actually presents the evidence against her as it was without putting it aside for lengthy discussion about the smeared print on the table etc. As a matter of interest you can watch all the 'pro-Darlie' TV shows on the website www.justicefordarlie.net if you are interested. :)
Click to expand...
Thank you Dani_T, I did watch Medical Detectives but forgot the name. I agree with your assessment. I believe many who see programs with an agenda miss some of the best evidence. The demonstration of cast off blood going from the knife over the shoulder onto the back of DR's nightgown in that episode would be troubling to any theory of innocence.
 
Lacy Wood said:
The most powerful forensics evidence I saw against Darlie was in a program several years ago. Among the points, the nightgown she wore was shown to have the kids blood droplets on the back of the gown, and there was a demonstration was made of how it could be explained...essentially as cast off from the knife as it would be plunged into a body and jerked back to the shoulder to stab again. Among other points, the broken glass fragments in the kitchen landed in her blood which should not have yet been on the floor, and the vacuum cleaner had been rolled through blood to the point it was turned over.

If anyone recalls that program or knows why those issues didn't come up in the program the other night, I'd be interested to know.
Click to expand...

You're talking about Medical Detectives, now Forensic's Files on CourtTv. The episode is Invisible Intruder.
 
MistyM said:
i watched it too. boy i'm confused... they did make her look innocent at the end... but i thought the 'new evidence' of someone seeing two men in the neighbourhood the night of the killings was kinda weak. i just don't understand WHY someone would just break into a house and kill two kids with no motive. yet i can see it on her part, i don't think it's her not wanting to lose her 'lifestyle' and the kids being in the way, didn't they ever think she might have had post partum depression as they had a baby? maybe she freaked out and imagined her kids were evil or something. it's happened before?

something about her interviews kinda creeps me out though. she seems rehearsed. i guess i lean more towards the guilty than the not guilty.
Click to expand...


I believe Darlie did have Post Partum Depression--suicide ideation, the lack of sleep, the lack of parenting. Not psychosis but depression. And those diet pills she was taking didn't help matters.
 
texaslb218 said:
It was on in the DFW area last night. I did NOT think much of the presentation. It seemed to imply that she was framed or a rush to you-know-what. I do not think it is new.
But.....I watched every moment!
Click to expand...

Arts and Entertainment that's what it is, entertainment, not a forensics program.

What did posters think of Charlie the juror?
 
Cami,
You are right! I see a documentary like Bill Kurtis and I think "true." I am so used to his voice and his presentation! Hmmmmm. I forgot about the Entertainment part. But then, I sneak looks at Fox News too. I just remember how they sensationalize everything. Need to remember to think and not just take it in! :doh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 120 more.
Total: 4,011 (members: 121, guests: 3,890)

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
3,890
Total visitors
4,011
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,661
Messages
17,957,161
Members
228,583
Latest member
Vjeanine
Back
Top