Should Darlie have a new trial?

Should Darlie Routier be given a new trial?

  • Total voters
    502

New Posts

philamena said:
I want her to get a new trial because then all those claiming Darlie is innocent will realize that Darlie truly is the killer of her children.
Click to expand...
But she is now on Death Row, isn't she? I would be scared that if she got a new trial she would get LWOP.
 
accordn2me said:
Thanks Mary.

I don't think "it's safe to say that Darin's jeans didn't help either side's case" so that's why they weren't admitted into evidence. Apparently, Mulder didn't think he needed to use anything tested or found before he came on board. This would be in keeping with the agreement to hire him - to keep the jury from hearing evidence that would implicate Darin.
Click to expand...

That makes sense. The whole Mulder/Darin issue is suspicious to say the least.

IMO the jeans, along with other evidence, should be sent off to be tested, after all there are newer and better ways of testing evidence than there were in the 90's.
 
I voted yes.

I wouldn't say I am on the fence, but maybe I am.

I am a mother and I guess I want to believe that a mother couldn't do this to her own, and so brutally - but we all know that is not true.

But again, if there is a fingerprint in the blood, stray pubic hair - before we put her to death - shouldn't this be checked? If not by trial, some other way?
 
hellolovely said:
I voted yes.

I wouldn't say I am on the fence, but maybe I am.

I am a mother and I guess I want to believe that a mother couldn't do this to her own, and so brutally - but we all know that is not true.

But again, if there is a fingerprint in the blood, stray pubic hair - before we put her to death - shouldn't this be checked? If not by trial, some other way?
Click to expand...

The fingerprint has been tested. They can not rule Darlie out. There is no new evidence to test. She is grasping at straws.
 
hellolovely said:
oomph - kicked off the fence by WhityWendy!
Click to expand...

:innocent: anytime! No seriously, I have been there and felt the same exact things in regards to this case. I spent over a year contemplating everything and after weighing everything I read in the transcripts along with posts here by some very SMART posters, there is no doubt any longer in my mind. I actually became very sad when I discovered that Darlie murdered her boys.
 
accordn2me said:
I think for the blood to have ran down his body and into his underwear like that, he would have had to be standing....wet towels or not. But I certainly don't know that for sure. It's JMO.

I can't dismiss the sock. I don't know how it got there. I haven't seen a good explanation for it yet. If Darlie's blood isn't on it, maybe Darin put it there.

I didn't realize Darin's jeans had been tested. Where can I find that?
Click to expand...

Yeah maybe he did. Would that lead you to believe that Darin is the killer if he did?

Darlie though had loads of time to put it there too before she was injured so we'll never know unless they tell us.

You have to read Linch's testimony. I think..I know it's Linch though ...to find the answer to your question.
 
accordn2me said:
Thanks Mary.

I don't think "it's safe to say that Darin's jeans didn't help either side's case" so that's why they weren't admitted into evidence. Apparently, Mulder didn't think he needed to use anything tested or found before he came on board. This would be in keeping with the agreement to hire him - to keep the jury from hearing evidence that would implicate Darin.
Click to expand...

Laber didn't find any spatter on the jeans and that's what they would have relied on as evidence on the jeans as it would indicate Darin was present during the stabbings. He would have had a lot of transferred blood on the jeans from working on Devon and checking Damon and being with Darlie. Laber found nothing to indicate from the jeans that Darin was present during the stabbings. So given as he's Darlie's expert, I think it is safe to say the jeans didn't help either side.

I don't think Mulder did that at all. I believe he relied on Laber's opinion of the jeans.

Do you have some proof he kept the jury from hearing evidence? :waitasec:
 
nicola said:
That makes sense. The whole Mulder/Darin issue is suspicious to say the least.

IMO the jeans, along with other evidence, should be sent off to be tested, after all there are newer and better ways of testing evidence than there were in the 90's.
Click to expand...

The jeans have been tested. Just out of curiousity, what would you expect to find on Darin's jean? There is very little of the boys' blood on Darlie's shirt but it's the back of her shirt and it's the way it's cast-off that leads to the knife being in her hand. If Darin stabbed the boys wouldn't it make sense that the cast-off blood would be on his back and not his jeans?

It's like the black car, what would you expect to find in a black car when the murder weapon was left at the scene, there is not a speck of blood outside that house and not a thing stolen despite the money, gold and wallet lying there. Oh besides the sock that is, and why would the intruder run down that alley if there was a get away car outside?
 
accordn2me said:
Thanks Mary.
Click to expand...

You're welcome, accordn2me.

accordn2me said:
Apparently, Mulder didn't think he needed to use anything tested or found before he came on board.
Click to expand...

That’s because all the items tested pointed to Darlie as the killer. If Laber and Epstein (or any other expert) could have refuted the blood & fiber evidence, Mulder would have had them on the stand in a New York minute. As we’ve said before, Dougie-boy had precious little to work with.

accordn2me said:
This would be in keeping with the agreement to hire him - to keep the jury from hearing evidence that would implicate Darin.
Click to expand...


I assume you’re getting that information from the Darlie camp. First of all, there WAS no evidence to tie Darin to the actual murders, and there still isn't to this day. Secondly, Darlie was adamant, from day one, that she saw the intruder and it was not Darin. Absolutely, positively was not her husband.

What was Mulder supposed to do? Call his client a liar:waitasec:
 
cami said:
Yeah maybe he did. Would that lead you to believe that Darin is the killer if he did?

Darlie though had loads of time to put it there too before she was injured so we'll never know unless they tell us.

You have to read Linch's testimony. I think..I know it's Linch though ...to find the answer to your question.
Click to expand...
I have a hard time believing Darlie was the only one that "generated" the evidence. If she is guilty.....I think Darin is as well. Like in a bank robbery, the driver of the get away car is just as guilty as the robber/killers.....I think if Darlie killed and Darin participated in any way including the cover up, he should be on DR the same as she is.

Personally, there are too many things about the evidence presented, and the evidence that was not presented, that are so questionable, I don't feel comfortable with Darlie's death sentence (not that it matters how I feel one whit).

The points made by the debaters in this case are all good ones....from both "sides." I put that word in quotes because I don't consider myself to be on the Routier's side per se. It's just that with so many unanswered questions and things that were never addressed by her defense, I'm alarmed by her conviction. Equally alarming is that if she is guilty, and he is too, he's not on DR! :eek:
 
cami said:
Laber didn't find any spatter on the jeans and that's what they would have relied on as evidence on the jeans as it would indicate Darin was present during the stabbings. He would have had a lot of transferred blood on the jeans from working on Devon and checking Damon and being with Darlie. Laber found nothing to indicate from the jeans that Darin was present during the stabbings. So given as he's Darlie's expert, I think it is safe to say the jeans didn't help either side.

I don't think Mulder did that at all. I believe he relied on Laber's opinion of the jeans.

Do you have some proof he kept the jury from hearing evidence? :waitasec:
Click to expand...
The jury heard evidence all right! They didn't hear any defense of the evidence.

ETA: They didn't hear any evidence that implicated Darin.
 
cami said:
The jeans have been tested. Just out of curiousity, what would you expect to find on Darin's jean? There is very little of the boys' blood on Darlie's shirt but it's the back of her shirt and it's the way it's cast-off that leads to the knife being in her hand. If Darin stabbed the boys wouldn't it make sense that the cast-off blood would be on his back and not his jeans?

It's like the black car, what would you expect to find in a black car when the murder weapon was left at the scene, there is not a speck of blood outside that house and not a thing stolen despite the money, gold and wallet lying there. Oh besides the sock that is, and why would the intruder run down that alley if there was a get away car outside?
Click to expand...
I don't know what to expect! Good point about "the back." Was the back of Darin's clothes tested?

....."there is not a speck of blood outside that house....." I would say there is not a speck of blood outside that house that was discovered. IMO discovering blood outside the house, especially after the rain storm, would have been nearly impossible.

Maybe the intruder would have ran down the alley if the get away car was back there?

As for the murder weapon.....they found one.....maybe it wasn't the only one....
 
Mary456 said:
You're welcome, accordn2me.



That’s because all the items tested pointed to Darlie as the killer. If Laber and Epstein (or any other expert) could have refuted the blood & fiber evidence, Mulder would have had them on the stand in a New York minute. As we’ve said before, Dougie-boy had precious little to work with.




I assume you’re getting that information from the Darlie camp. First of all, there WAS no evidence to tie Darin to the actual murders, and there still isn't to this day. Secondly, Darlie was adamant, from day one, that she saw the intruder and it was not Darin. Absolutely, positively was not her husband.

What was Mulder supposed to do? Call his client a liar:waitasec:
Click to expand...
Mulder wouldn't have had experts that refuted evidence that also implicated Darin. We don't know what Laber and Epstein were going to say since Mulder dismissed them early on (one of the first things he did). Will we ever know if he sought other experts? I haven't even heard a claim that he did.

Because Darlie WAS adamant, from day one, that the intruder was not Darin, maybe that's why the police and later the prosecution didn't pursue that notion. I don't know....
 
accordn2me said:
The jury heard evidence all right! They didn't hear any defense of the evidence.

ETA: They didn't hear any evidence that implicated Darin.
Click to expand...


you have said yourself: Darlie's lawyer was hired on the premise that he not pursue or bring up any evidence against Darin....(at least I think, I am out of date on all the lastest news of the case) but anyway...if so then WHY would you expect anyone to introduce any evidence pertaining to him, IF there was any?
This was Darlie's choice in the beginning, she didn't HAVE to agree to these terms, or ask her lawyer to agree to them. hey if I were innocent I'd say "do whatever you can" even IF at the time I thought my hubby were 100% innocent....if evidence COULD be brought up against anyone, FIND IT, I wouldn't care WHO or what family member/friend, etc. it could be.
Darlie ok'd this never thinking she'd be found guilty, but now that she has, throw anyone under the bus in order to gain a possible delay in the death sentence.
Darin did NOT have ANYTHING to do with the murders, IMO, although I do think he MAY have helped cover them up. Darlie and her crew are just grasping at ANY straw they can think of.
 
accordn2me said:
I would say there is not a speck of blood outside that house that was discovered. IMO discovering blood outside the house, especially after the rain storm, would have been nearly impossible.
Click to expand...


If there was a rainstorm, it didn't occur until the night of 6/7. By that time, police and detectives had two full days (June 6th and June 7th), from sunup to sundown, to search for blood outside. If it was there, they would have found it.

The thunderstorm was a red herring thrown out by Richard Mosty. From the trial transcript:

Mosty: "There was a large thunderstorm on the night of the 7th, wasn't there?"

Linch: "I don't know."

Mosty: "Do you recollect that there was a rainstorm on the 7th?

Linch: "No."

My point is that it doesn't matter if there was a rainstorm on the evening of June 7th. The yard, the gate, and the alley had been searched for blood long before the pitter patter of possible raindrops.
 
White Rain said:
you have said yourself: Darlie's lawyer was hired on the premise that he not pursue or bring up any evidence against Darin....(at least I think, I am out of date on all the lastest news of the case) but anyway...if so then WHY would you expect anyone to introduce any evidence pertaining to him, IF there was any?
This was Darlie's choice in the beginning, she didn't HAVE to agree to these terms, or ask her lawyer to agree to them. hey if I were innocent I'd say "do whatever you can" even IF at the time I thought my hubby were 100% innocent....if evidence COULD be brought up against anyone, FIND IT, I wouldn't care WHO or what family member/friend, etc. it could be.
Darlie ok'd this never thinking she'd be found guilty, but now that she has, throw anyone under the bus in order to gain a possible delay in the death sentence.
Darin did NOT have ANYTHING to do with the murders, IMO, although I do think he MAY have helped cover them up. Darlie and her crew are just grasping at ANY straw they can think of.
Click to expand...

I don't think Darin had anything to do with the murders either. It was all Darllie and I don't he did any coverup. I believe he knows Darlie killed the boys.
 
accordn2me said:
I don't know what to expect! Good point about "the back." Was the back of Darin's clothes tested?

....."there is not a speck of blood outside that house....." I would say there is not a speck of blood outside that house that was discovered. IMO discovering blood outside the house, especially after the rain storm, would have been nearly impossible.

Maybe the intruder would have ran down the alley if the get away car was back there?

As for the murder weapon.....they found one.....maybe it wasn't the only one....
Click to expand...

What rain storm? It didn't rain that night/early morning.

As for Darrin - I don't agree that he should be on DR with Darlie. Why should he be punished for her act of violence toward their kids? I honestly believe that Darin was stunned to say the least when he came downstairs that early morning. Yea, he said some of the most stupids things toward the cops that are questionable but imo not in the sense of him being involved with the actually murders.

I do believe however that he did cover up for her. But that does not qualify for the death penalty. You nor I know how we would react to that type of situation. Some people will do anything to protect the ones they love. Lie/Deny. We all know from everything that has been said and read that Darrin loved Darlie.

In regards to the knife. They also can't prove that there was another knife involved.
 
Mary456 said:
If there was a rainstorm, it didn't occur until the night of 6/7. By that time, police and detectives had two full days (June 6th and June 7th), from sunup to sundown, to search for blood outside. If it was there, they would have found it.

The thunderstorm was a red herring thrown out by Richard Mosty. From the trial transcript:

Mosty: "There was a large thunderstorm on the night of the 7th, wasn't there?"

Linch: "I don't know."

Mosty: "Do you recollect that there was a rainstorm on the 7th?

Linch: "No."

My point is that it doesn't matter if there was a rainstorm on the evening of June 7th. The yard, the gate, and the alley had been searched for blood long before the pitter patter of possible raindrops.
Click to expand...
I think there was enough INSIDE the house to keep everyone busy for a lot longer than "two full days." Given the fact that a veteran detective.....possibly the most respected detective on the scene....declared virtually immediately that "this was an inside job" I don't think much evidence was searched for on the outside.

I don't remember....how was the sock discovered?
 
White Rain said:
you have said yourself: Darlie's lawyer was hired on the premise that he not pursue or bring up any evidence against Darin....(at least I think, I am out of date on all the lastest news of the case) but anyway...if so then WHY would you expect anyone to introduce any evidence pertaining to him, IF there was any?
This was Darlie's choice in the beginning, she didn't HAVE to agree to these terms, or ask her lawyer to agree to them. hey if I were innocent I'd say "do whatever you can" even IF at the time I thought my hubby were 100% innocent....if evidence COULD be brought up against anyone, FIND IT, I wouldn't care WHO or what family member/friend, etc. it could be.
Darlie ok'd this never thinking she'd be found guilty, but now that she has, throw anyone under the bus in order to gain a possible delay in the death sentence.
Darin did NOT have ANYTHING to do with the murders, IMO, although I do think he MAY have helped cover them up. Darlie and her crew are just grasping at ANY straw they can think of.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't expect Mulder to introduce any evidence pertaining to Darin. That would violate his "contract." If I were innocent, I too would say "do whatever you can" but not at the expense of my husband if I truly believed him to be innocent, or any other family members. That's just me. Likewise, I think if Darin....or any family member participated in a cover up....they too deserve the DP. Again, purely me. I don't expect others to feel the same.

I would expect any attorney, including one with whom I had a "contract" about not implicating my husband, to vigorously defend the contested evidence in my case. Mulder did not do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 133 more.
Total: 3,565 (members: 134, guests: 3,431)

Online statistics

Members online
134
Guests online
3,431
Total visitors
3,565
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,677
Messages
17,957,409
Members
228,586
Latest member
chingona361
Back
Top