New Evidence

Kitty5001 · #1 07-20-2006, 01:59 PM

Read the attached document for reconsideration of denied motion to test DNA filed 3 months ago-found at the link below-I know some of this is old but there are some new peices of evidence that I have never seen before and are not mentioned in any of the transcripts etc. references to facial hair found at the scene etc. interesting.

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Habeas/Reconsid.pdfhttp://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Habeas/Reconsid.pdf

cami · #2 07-21-2006, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitty5001

Read the attached document for reconsideration of denied motion to test DNA filed 3 months ago-found at the link below-I know some of this is old but there are some new peices of evidence that I have never seen before and are not mentioned in any of the transcripts etc. references to facial hair found at the scene etc. interesting.

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Habeas/Reconsid.pdfhttp://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Habeas/Reconsid.pdf

Grasping at straws don't you think? If Darlie plucked facial hair from an intruder wouldn't she have some of his dna under her nails? Hair like this is useless really but I don't fault them for trying to test it. I'm still reminded of MacDonald who swore for thirty years the hair clutched in his wife's hand belonged to her killer. How right he was, dna results released this March prove the hair is his. It too was facial hair. We all drop hair daily and we all have unsourced hair in our homes, it comes in via many ways.

rachellee · #3 09-20-2006, 12:48 PM

Did they check under the boys nails for dna? I read something about the small scratches on Darlie's face or chin.

Kitty5001 · #4 09-20-2006, 02:45 PM

ooh ..very good point , I hadn't thought about those scratches and swollen upper lip being inflicted by the boys but the scratches were small and that does sounds like a likely scenario. I know that they did bag the hands but only after they were buried and they had to go back and unearth the graves to do that. I am not sure that they found anything though? If they had, that certainly would have been a huge part of the prosecutors evidence against her.

rachellee · #5 09-20-2006, 03:58 PM

Yes that is true we would of heard about that one. I'm listening to 911 call now this case has consumed me for the last couple of weeks i wanted her to be innocent so bad i'm even coming up with some pretty lame excuses for her but always go back to she had to have done this the more i read and find out about the case the more i am convinced of her guilt. So sad....

Kitty5001 · #6 09-21-2006, 09:39 PM

I am in the same boat exactly- at first I had all kind of what if's and played devils advocate pretty well until I really looked at all the evidence and the facts-took the emotion out of it and I realized that unfortunately she did do this. It would be great that I was proven wrong as I am sure that no one wants to think that she did but it sure reeks of guilt that's for sure.

rachellee · #7 09-22-2006, 12:18 PM

Hey Kitty! I also saw on some of the media I think it was called million dollar mysteries i'm not sure but on the justicefordarlie website and they said which i know the media isn't exactly always right but they said Darin had took out Darlie's life insurance only 3 months before? I don't know i'm going to keep reading posts around here some are really good.

Kitty5001 · #8 09-22-2006, 02:34 PM

The media said Darin took out this life insuance policy? Really. I wonder where they got their information from. Can you cut and paste that report on the forum here? That would put a big twist on things considering he tried to hire someone to burglarize their home just months prior to the murders also

Mary456 · #9 09-22-2006, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rachellee

i know the media isn't exactly always right but they said Darin had took out Darlie's life insurance only 3 months before?

Don't know where you heard this, rachellee, but it's incorrect. Both Darlie & Darin had life insurance policies, but they were purchased years before the murders. Insurance really had nothing to do with this crime.

Mary456 · #10 09-22-2006, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitty5001

That would put a big twist on things considering he tried to hire someone to burglarize their home just months prior to the murders also

Hi, Kitty. The burglar story was dreamed up by Darlie's defense in an attempt to get her a new trial. There's no truth to it. If there was, Darin would have named the people he hired to burglarize the house so they could be investigated. Never happened.

julianne · #11 09-22-2006, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary456

Hi, Kitty. The burglar story was dreamed up by Darlie's defense in an attempt to get her a new trial. There's no truth to it. If there was, Darin would have named the people he hired to burglarize the house so they could be investigated. Never happened.

Didn't Darin admit that he had discussed with someone (forget who) the possibility of having a 3rd party perform a "robbery"? If it was all dreamed up by Darlie's defense, why would Darin admit to having that discussion? Didn't the person he discussed this with also admit to the conversation? He (Darin) said that it was just a conversation, though, and he never actually followed through with the plan, so he never hired anyone. Therefore there was nobody to name as the "hired crooks", since it was just a conversation and supposedly nothing ever panned out. I could be wrong....

Goody · #12 09-23-2006, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by julianne

Didn't Darin admit that he had discussed with someone (forget who) the possibility of having a 3rd party perform a "robbery"? If it was all dreamed up by Darlie's defense, why would Darin admit to having that discussion? Didn't the person he discussed this with also admit to the conversation? He (Darin) said that it was just a conversation, though, and he never actually followed through with the plan, so he never hired anyone. Therefore there was nobody to name as the "hired crooks", since it was just a conversation and supposedly nothing ever panned out. I could be wrong....

Then how did the would-be burglars who killed the kids know where to go and when? Darin claims he asked Darlie's stepfather if he knew anyone who would do rob his house and Darlie's stepfather claims that he told Darin "no." Their claims are just too vague. Unless he did actually hire someone to do it, there aren't any burglars to bungle the job and kill his kids. Mary is right. It is just a story cooked up to try to get Darlie a new trial.

julianne · #13 09-23-2006, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goody

Then how did the would-be burglars who killed the kids know where to go and when? Darin claims he asked Darlie's stepfather if he knew anyone who would do rob his house and Darlie's stepfather claims that he told Darin "no." Their claims are just too vague. Unless he did actually hire someone to do it, there aren't any burglars to bungle the job and kill his kids. Mary is right. It is just a story cooked up to try to get Darlie a new trial.

Okay, gotcha. Makes sense to me.

I've always pretty much been on the fence about this case, but now, I'm leaning towards thinking that she did it, but then I go back to thinking she's innocent. Maybe that's just because I don't WANT to think she did it. I WANT to be able to blame a "bad guy", for lack of a better word. Of course, the silly string has always been bizarre to me. Not just the act of spraying it--but also the fact that she had a whole face full of makeup on & her hair was done up. It really really bothered me that she cared how she looked to other people, so soon after losing her little boys so tragically. I know if that kind of tragedy ever befell me, it would be a very very long time before I gave a crap about what I looked like. To me, in the face of heartache, such superficial & shallow things like doing your hair and makeup DAYS later just doesn't compute for me.

Still, it's hard wrapping my brain around the fact that she did it. So many unanswered questions...

rachellee · #14 09-23-2006, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary456

Don't know where you heard this, rachellee, but it's incorrect. Both Darlie & Darin had life insurance policies, but they were purchased years before the murders. Insurance really had nothing to do with this crime.

I heard this on the "Million dollar mysteries" show it is one the website justice for darlie and in the clip it says that darin did that. I thought it was pretty bogus or surely more would be brought up about it. I guess i need to stick with the trial transcripts. It is so hard to know what to believe because alot of stuff is misleading. What do you think about the holes in Darlie's shirt that were from someone pulling her shirt and stabbing but they actually didn't stab her there just left holes? Did that make any sense??

Goody · #15 09-23-2006, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by julianne

Okay, gotcha. Makes sense to me.

I've always pretty much been on the fence about this case, but now, I'm leaning towards thinking that she did it, but then I go back to thinking she's innocent. Maybe that's just because I don't WANT to think she did it. I WANT to be able to blame a "bad guy", for lack of a better word. Of course, the silly string has always been bizarre to me. Not just the act of spraying it--but also the fact that she had a whole face full of makeup on & her hair was done up. It really really bothered me that she cared how she looked to other people, so soon after losing her little boys so tragically. I know if that kind of tragedy ever befell me, it would be a very very long time before I gave a crap about what I looked like. To me, in the face of heartache, such superficial & shallow things like doing your hair and makeup DAYS later just doesn't compute for me.

Still, it's hard wrapping my brain around the fact that she did it. So many unanswered questions...

I think most people who post on this case have some of the same feelings. You'd think that if a mother decided to kill their child, they would pick as near a painless method as possible instead of something so gruesome, but knives are often used in domestic killings, I think because you don't have to explain or get rid of the murder weapon if your "intruder" uses one from your own kitchen. And intruders very often do just that so the weapon won't be traced back to them like ballistics on a gun.

I noticed the mother of little Abby who was slashed and stabbed by the kidnapper was cut straight across her neck instead of on a downward slope the way Darlie was. More confirmation that Darlie's wound was self inflicted. Plus Abby's mom had many, many cuts that Darlie did not have.

Goody · #16 09-23-2006, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rachellee

....... What do you think about the holes in Darlie's shirt that were from someone pulling her shirt and stabbing but they actually didn't stab her there just left holes? Did that make any sense??

I think Darlie was trying to make it look like someone had pulled her by the shirt while trying to stab her and just missed knicking her skin. Not very convincing. If it had happened that way, I would expect to see some knicks, even if just scratches or very shallow cuts. So my conclusion is that those cuts in the shirt were just part of the staging.

Mary456 · #17 09-23-2006, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rachellee

I guess i need to stick with the trial transcripts.

It's the only way to fly! Some of those shows - not to mention what's on Darlie's website - are so misleading, it breaks my heart, lol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rachellee

What do you think about the holes in Darlie's shirt that were from someone pulling her shirt and stabbing but they actually didn't stab her there just left holes? Did that make any sense??

I agree with Goody. The cuts in Darlie's shirt were part of the staging. There were no corresponding wounds in her skin...the chance of that happening are next to none.

Mary456 · #18 09-23-2006, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by julianne

It really really bothered me that she cared how she looked to other people, so soon after losing her little boys so tragically.

That's nothing, Julianne. Shortly after the murders, Darlie and Darin were removing the wreaths, teddy bears, etc., that friends had placed in the Routier's yard. Darin was throwing the stuffed animals to Darlie; when she made a good catch, she'd jump up & clap like a cheerleader. She'd toss it back to him & then he'd chuck it in their car.

How sick is that? Sounds like it came from one of the TV shows, but it didn't. It's in the transcript. Their neighbor across the street, Nelda Watts, saw the whole thing & testified during the punishment phase. Hard to believe, isn't it?

ETA: Your dancing tree is really something. I love it.

Kitty5001 · #19 09-25-2006, 03:04 PM

EW that is just terrible that a mom would catch and toss these momentos and act like it's a big game. sick.

Ok I have realized something that I can't explain- if she planned to do this (even just minutes before) why in the heck would she keep the knife (her own) in the house? why wouldn't she have dropped the murder weapon when she dropped the sock yards away. If any "planting" of evidence were to be done it sure would have been the murder weapon rather than a sock you would think. OR if not dropping it down the storm drain why not hide it or wash it off and put it back in the butcher block-I mean if she was really trying to stage the scene to cover her own hind end. Just doesn't make sense for her to say- I picked up the knife and voila here it is still in my kitchen after I did it. I don't know about that??????????????????????

Jeana (DP) · #20 09-25-2006, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitty5001

EW that is just terrible that a mom would catch and toss these momentos and act like it's a big game. sick.

Ok I have realized something that I can't explain- if she planned to do this (even just minutes before) why in the heck would she keep the knife (her own) in the house? why wouldn't she have dropped the murder weapon when she dropped the sock yards away. If any "planting" of evidence were to be done it sure would have been the murder weapon rather than a sock you would think. OR if not dropping it down the storm drain why not hide it or wash it off and put it back in the butcher block-I mean if she was really trying to stage the scene to cover her own hind end. Just doesn't make sense for her to say- I picked up the knife and voila here it is still in my kitchen after I did it. I don't know about that??????????????????????

I think that makes perfect sense. What doesn't make any sense is why an intruder would break into a house with the sole intention of murdering Darlie and not brining his own or their own weapon along. She's claimed all along that SHE was the reason that the intruder came into the house. That SHE was the target. That SHE was attacked first. Why take the risk of going in there for that "sole" reason and not be armed?

enigma · #21 09-26-2006, 12:37 PM

[quote=julianne]
Of course, the silly string has always been bizarre to me. Not just the act of spraying it--but also the fact that she had a whole face full of makeup on & her hair was done up. QUOTE]

Look again....at the silly string tape.....makeup and hair done up? I think not, at least not the way Darlie does it. Maybe you do your makeup like that but not Darlie. She was a young woman who just wanted to look pretty but on the silly string video I saw no makeup and hair done up.
JMHO

enigma · #22 09-26-2006, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary456

That's nothing, Julianne. Shortly after the murders, Darlie and Darin were removing the wreaths, teddy bears, etc., that friends had placed in the Routier's yard. Darin was throwing the stuffed animals to Darlie; when she made a good catch, she'd jump up & clap like a cheerleader. She'd toss it back to him & then he'd chuck it in their car.

How sick is that? Sounds like it came from one of the TV shows, but it didn't. It's in the transcript. Their neighbor across the street, Nelda Watts, saw the whole thing & testified during the punishment phase. Hard to believe, isn't it?

Mary, correct me if I am wrong on this but I thought it was later found out to be Darlie's sister in this little scene.

Kitty5001 · #23 09-26-2006, 02:20 PM

Where does she say that she thinks she was the target? Plus she was not attacked first and she knows that because she looks at the boys after in the light and sees they are stabbed -that is in her own words- at no time does she say she is attacked first.

Jeana (DP) · #24 09-26-2006, 03:11 PM

[quote=enigma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by julianne

Of course, the silly string has always been bizarre to me. Not just the act of spraying it--but also the fact that she had a whole face full of makeup on & her hair was done up. QUOTE]

Look again....at the silly string tape.....makeup and hair done up? I think not, at least not the way Darlie does it. Maybe you do your makeup like that but not Darlie. She was a young woman who just wanted to look pretty but on the silly string video I saw no makeup and hair done up.
JMHO

That she even considered her looks during that time period is inconceivable.

Jeana (DP) · #25 09-26-2006, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitty5001

Where does she say that she thinks she was the target? Plus she was not attacked first and she knows that because she looks at the boys after in the light and sees they are stabbed -that is in her own words- at no time does she say she is attacked first.

Yeah, I think she did. Are you now trying to say that the boys were the intended target? Why would anyone break in to murder two little boys? Wasn't Darlie's "beauty" the reason someone tried to break in and rape her not knowing that the boys were downstairs?