Darlie's 16 versions

DebC said:

And why didn't she scream when she was 'struggling' with him?

Click to expand...

Good question, but an even better one is why did it take her so long to scream?

According to Darlie, she told a walking, talking Damon, stabbed through the liver and lungs, to "stay where he was" and then

- followed the intruder to the utility room & picked up the knife

- turned around and went back through the kitchen, turned on the light

- placed the knife on the kitchen counter

- examined Damon's wounds (which would have required lifting his shirt) and told him to lie down, to which he replied, "Ok, Mommy."

- Then started screaming, "Devon, Devon, Devon!!"

Supporters say there were at least two intruders. One stabbed the boys, while the other one stuffed the sock in Darlie's mouth (hence her DNA on the sock and lack of screaming).

They took the sock with them and accidentally dropped it in the alley where their getaway car was waiting. But wait...if they took the sock, that means it wasn't in her mouth, which brings us back to the original question:

Why did it take her so long to scream?

OK, look, one night about 16 years ago, I was at a friends apartment. She and I were preparing to go on a weekend trip to Reno. She was newly separated and preparing to divorce her husband. He was a large guy, not tall but very muscular and broad (not fat). It was a small one bedroom with a little kitchen, a little (15 x15) living room and only one door. She was very afraid of him, to the point that after I arrived, she stuck a chair under the doorknob. We were talking and laughing, while she finished up minor details (food and water for the cat). I was seated in the living room on a loveseat. The front door was diagonally to my right (I was in the opposite corner from the door) my knees facing the kitchen area that was directly infront of me. The was a knock at the door and then someone trying the door handle. The knocker demanded to be let in. It was her estranged husband. My friend came into the room and faced the door and asked that he please go away. In the next six seconds he kicked the front door in (literally off its hinges in less than ten seconds). The door flew back and hit my friend and in came her husband. She didn't have time to react at all, she put up her hands to keep the door off her. I was completely immobilized. They were between me and the door. He had a very large knife, a carving knife and he grabbed her hair and was just swinging away. My point is, during this whole time, SHE DID NOT SCREAM AT ALL, but was fighting desperately. After what seemed like an eternity but was actually just a few moments, she yelled "help me!". It was like a flame had been lit under me. I couldn't get to the door, so I ran past them, into the kitchen and grabbed the phone (a cordless) and called 911. I reached 911 was in the process of speaking with the operator ( a man I will never forget) when the Husband came into the kitchen, knife in hand, walked right up to me, stuck the point in my throat and told me to put the phone down. In that moment, I learned what the phrase "scared spitless" means. I could not speak. I could not scream. the 911 operator, God bless his soul, could hear everything and very calmly told me 'I can hear him, do as he says, set the phone down but DO NOT DISCONNECT the call.' I did exactly that. It was at this point that I finally heard my friend screaming at the top of her lungs out the front door. I'd say ten minutes had passed. Her husband ran out of the kitchen, I followed, my friend was outside, no longer screaming but was yelling at a security guard (a skinny slip of a guy). As the husband ran out the door, I saw him toss the knife behind the couch. He ran down the walkway as the police drove up. This long story is meant to portray that every circumstance is different and what you think might happen if you are in the situation, very well might not happen.

An interesting side note to this, is the ex was charged and pled guilty but I was never talked to, not by the police, not my the DA, not by the defense, nobody. He was never charged for assaulting me (he actually did cut my throat). That very same night our boss(she and I worked at the same place) was killed in a car crash, too. Heavy stuff.

The reason why it took Darlie so long to scream, is that she was too busy stabbing her two boys to death, cleaning up the crime scene, planting evidence, breaking wine glasses and turning over the vacuum, cutting her own throat(took a few times hence the "hesitation" wound, which a person would pull back when they felt pain) and then and only then when the "entire" scene was set, did she then scream.

It all took time and of course she did not want anyone, including Darin on the scene until it was all "played" out and set up to what she "thought" was her satisfaction. Had to do this rather quickly as one would wonder why she took so long to bring attention to the crime.

How can a child, who is stabbed in the lungs say anything. This again was proven in court to be false. BTW, the more I read the more "confused" I get because first there were two men, then one, then she told the child to lay down and he answered. Then he says Mommy, then he did not. Then the intruder puts a sock in her mouth, and in other stories he does not. He fights him after he "mounts" her. Then she fought him hand to hand and he did not mount her.

Gee, I can't even "get the stories" straight. No wonder Darlie cannot. The truth ONLY needs one story as it is the truth. A whole book with 16 chapters could be written each one detailing each different story as told by Darlie.

s_finch said:

Sorry to ask questions on basic info, I try to read up and not ask about basic info but I wasn't aware there was a two knife theory. Was this supported by prosectors, forensics???? As far as dna on/in the sock, was Darlie's the only dna found on it/in it?

Click to expand...

No, it is not supported by forensics, nor is it supported by the prosecution. It's a defense theory because Devon's blood was not found on the murder weapon.

There was five blood drops of the boys found on the sock and Darlie's dna in the toe of the sock...the source of her dna is skin cells.

s_finch said:

The bolded part has bothered me as well as the fact that, according to her, her boys didn't wake her while being stabbed. I have three kids and they always make plenty of noise at the slightest injury, like stubbing a toe. If one was stabbed (God forbid), even while sleeping, they'd be screaming like a banshee. In DArlie's story there's no noise, no sound except for the wine glass breaking. Strange.

Click to expand...

Darlie's lying her face off that's all. She's sleeping downstairs because the baby is rolling in his crib and keeping her awake yet she sleeps through the stabbing deaths of her two boys? Sure you did Darlie....that's why she had to invent the Traumatic Amnesia.

s_finch said:

The bolded part has bothered me as well as the fact that, according to her, her boys didn't wake her while being stabbed. I have three kids and they always make plenty of noise at the slightest injury, like stubbing a toe. If one was stabbed (God forbid), even while sleeping, they'd be screaming like a banshee. In DArlie's story there's no noise, no sound except for the wine glass breaking. Strange.

Click to expand...

Darlie's lying her face off that's all. She's sleeping downstairs because the baby is rolling in his crib and keeping her awake yet she sleeps through the stabbing deaths of her two boys? that's why she had to invent the Traumatic Amnesia.

Anubis said:

My point is, during this whole time, SHE DID NOT SCREAM AT ALL, but was fighting desperately. In that moment, I learned what the phrase "scared spitless" means. I could not speak. I could not scream.

Click to expand...

I don't doubt your experience one bit, Anubis. I think many of us have experienced something so frightening that it left us momentarily speechless. Sort of like a nightmare where you're trying to scream, but nothing will come out.

If Darlie had been attacked & was fighting back, I wouldn't consider it suspicious that she didn't scream during the actual attack. But think about the time it took for her to go through all those motions after an intruder left the house and before she screamed.

Darlie held off on the screaming because she had to stage the scene before Darin came downstairs.

Btw, I'm sorry you had such a terrifying experience. I could literally feel the fear while reading your post.

CyberLaw said:

How can a child, who is stabbed in the lungs say anything. This again was proven in court to be false. BTW, the more I read the more "confused" I get because first there were two men, then one, then she told the child to lay down and he answered. Then he says Mommy, then he did not. Then the intruder puts a sock in her mouth, and in other stories he does not. He fights him after he "mounts" her. Then she fought him hand to hand and he did not mount her.

Click to expand...

No, that poor boy said "mommy", he said it when he woke up and his mother was stabbing him to death.

I have often wondered if DARLIE was not the one who used the sock to put over the boys mouths while she attacked them to keep them quiet and is why her DNA (no blood from her) was found on the sock and why the boys could not cry out. Something sick happened that night and I am sorry, with all that blood in the house, if there was really an intruder/s there would have been SOMETHING found outside that house. JMO

I wanted to add something else to my previous post. Were there ever any abrasions found in the boys mouths? I was just curious about the 5 drops of blood found on the sock and to me would be consistent with someone forcefully putting something in their mouth causing the drops of blood which were found on the sock. It would make sense to me why her DNA was found only, from probably putting her hand inside the sock. There was so much blood everywhere I am trying to figure out how ONLY drops were found on this sock. I am new here so apologize if this has been previously discussed.

Darshana said:

I wanted to add something else to my previous post. Were there ever any abrasions found in the boys mouths?

Click to expand...

No injuries to the boys' mouths, inside or out.

Darshana said:

I was just curious about the 5 drops of blood found on the sock and to me would be consistent with someone forcefully putting something in their mouth causing the drops of blood which were found on the sock. It would make sense to me why her DNA was found only, from probably putting her hand inside the sock. There was so much blood everywhere I am trying to figure out how ONLY drops were found on this sock. I am new here so apologize if this has been previously discussed.

Click to expand...

The most likely conclusion, imo, is that Darlie covered the knife handle with the sock to avoid leaving fingerprints. DNA from her skin cells was in the toe area, and the nickel-sized bloodstain lined up pretty well with the sock contacting the bodies as she stabbed. The boys didn't have spurting wounds, so there wouldn't necessarily have been a lot of blood on the sock.

Darshana said:

Something sick happened that night and I am sorry, with all that blood in the house, if there was really an intruder/s there would have been SOMETHING found outside that house. JMO

Click to expand...

If not outside, then certainly in the garage or around the window that the intruder supposedly exited. There was no blood at all in those areas, nor on the fence gate which the intruder had to go through to get out of the backyard.

It might be possible if he'd just stabbed the boys & immediately run out of the house, but Darlie's story of being slashed, bleeding, & fighting with an intruder - who doesn't leave a single smear on his way out - defies common sense.

CyberLaw said:

Then the intruder puts a sock in her mouth, and in other stories he does not.

Click to expand...

Ya know what's funny about the sock in the mouth story?

Darlie never said that, not in any of her statements, and not when she testified.

The "sock in the mouth" theory was dreamed up by her supporters, years after she was convicted, to explain away her DNA on the sock.

The only issue I have with her covering the knife handle is why she made such a point to the 911 dispatcher that she had picked up the knife leaving her prints on them.

Why.

Because at some point she may have or may have thought that she did leave fingerprints on the knife.

She uses the sock to cover the knife. Then she has to plant the sock away from the house, therefore tying to set up evidence of an "intruder" who ran out of the house. But, the knife is near the boys. She then picks up the knife, again plants it "as in a way" that the intruder would leave. Ah, she leaves her fingerprints on the knife. The only way that she can cover that no "intruder" fingerprints would be on the knife, and not ONLY Darlie's is to say" darn it all, I picked up the knife. Darn it all. We may have been able to get the fingerprints of the "intruder" oh well I guess the only fingerprints that will be found on the knife, is mine because darn it all, I picked it up and moved it from the room with the cut screen. You see the intruder dropped it on the way out. Al, but alas, we all know why Darlie's prints were the only ones on the knife. Because she left them there, not the "phantom" fingerprint intruder.

I posted my theory regarding this on another thread, but I'll repeat if it's okay. I think, and it's only my opinion, that she covered her hand with the sock, stabbed the boys with a knife, then ran out the back, down the alley and threw that knife in the storm sewer. She didn't notice that she dropped the sock and it didn't go in the sewer. She comes back and finds Damon still alive and crawling toward the door, goes in the kitchen and gets the second knife and comes back to finish the job. In my opinion, that would also answer the questions regarding the "two different knives" theory. I think her original thought was that if she got rid of the knife it would prove her "intruder" theory. No weapon found. Then after she had to return to the crime scene, she needed another story about why her fingerprints would be on the knife...hence, the "I already picked it up" story.

I have not followed this case as much as others, but my opinion is that she is innocent.

weasel said:

I posted my theory regarding this on another thread, but I'll repeat if it's okay. I think, and it's only my opinion, that she covered her hand with the sock, stabbed the boys with a knife, then ran out the back, down the alley and threw that knife in the storm sewer.

Click to expand...

The police checked the storm sewer, though, and there was nothing in it.

weasel said:

She comes back and finds Damon still alive and crawling toward the door

Click to expand...

Yes. She thought Damon was dead when she ditched the sock, then returned to find him still alive and crawling across the room. Darlie stabbed him again, probably twice, but without the sock this time. That's why she was so concerned about her fingerprints being on the knife.

I personally don't think she was trying to implicate an intruder by throwing the sock in the alley. She could have simply thrown it in the back yard, where the police would be sure to find it. Why risk taking it so far from the house?

I believe she was trying to get rid of the sock, hoping that it wouldn't be found, because it tied her to the murders through DNA or heck, even fingerprints. (Obviously, fingerprints can't be lifted from a sock, but Darlie probably didn't know that). She may have been aiming for the drain or the trash can and missed.

Just my 2 cents. Guess we'll never know what was actually going through her mind.

Edited to add: Darlie needn't have worried about fingerprints on the knife, because none were found. The handle was made of a material that didn't pick up fingerprints. The joke is on her, lol!

I have a question in regards to the sock that was found. If they were able to find Darlie's DNA (no blood) in the sock, could the sock be tested for other DNA? If an intruder used the sock, wouldn't something else have come up besides Darlie's DNA? I understand too a deer hair was found on it.