Cutting the screen

[Val830]

Who says the security light was not triggered?

I have one and it doesn't stay on forever if triggered it goes back off after a short amount of time. It is a motion detector type.

No one noticed the light on. At that time of night it would have taken someone awake and looking in that direction to notice it. So saying it was not triggered is a false claim.

It wasn't on when the police arrived is all that can be proven. It triggered when they searched the area.

My neighbor has one in their backyard and the feral cats in our neighborhood trigger it all the time. When they first installed the light, it used to wake me as it shines right into my bedroom. I'm used to it and now I don't wake up anymore when it goes on or off. If I'm awake watching TV or reading I'll see it but I barely pay attention to it anymore. My neighbors had a party last night and I didn't even notice the light on at first but I heard the laughter and talking and then saw the light was on.

There is not a recording device on the light that shows when it was triggered, how many times it has been triggered, what time it was triggered, so the claims that the light never went on or off is not an indisputable fact.

No one can say they they saw it is all.


No one noticed the light being on or off.

A neighbor used to the light would not notice it just like I don't notice it anymore. It is familiar to me and my brain filters it out as unimportant as all my previous brain training has conditioned me to ignore it.

The point about the motion detector light is that there's stayed on for a good time when it was triggered - I think it was 9 minutes. And it was OFF when Waddell arrived, only 5 minutes or so after Darlie made that call, supposedly seconds after the intruder fled through the back door.

How did the intruder flee through the back yard without setting off the motion detector light when everyone else sets it off?

I don't have time to search out the testimony right now, but it was covered in the trial.

 

[Madeleine74]

I read the motion detector light stayed on for something like 15 min. (note: police tested this and the amount of time is in testimony).

If the intruder left through the window with the cut screen or even out the back door, he would have set off the motion detector light and that light would have stayed on for the amount of time it was set for (again I think it was around 15 min).

Police got there and the light in back was off. Therefore that means one of the following occurred:

- Darlie didn't call 911 right away, or not for at least 10+ min after the intruder fleeing. The police got there within 5 min of being called, maybe a bit less. The police testified no lights were on in back.

- The intruder didn't leave through the back, even though that's what Darlie claimed. But then why would the intruder take the sock in back down the alley?

- The light, which came on for everyone else, somehow didn't come on when the "intruder" fled. This "intruder" was extremely lucky.

- There was no intruder and thus that's why the motion detector light wasn't on when police arrived.

 

[Sinsaint]

I read the motion detector light stayed on for something like 15 min. (note: police tested this and the amount of time is in testimony).

If the intruder left through the window with the cut screen or even out the back door, he would have set off the motion detector light and that light would have stayed on for the amount of time it was set for (again I think it was around 15 min).

Police got there and the light in back was off. Therefore that means one of the following occurred:

- Darlie didn't call 911 right away, or not for at least 10+ min after the intruder fleeing. The police got there within 5 min of being called, maybe a bit less. The police testified no lights were on in back.

- The intruder didn't leave through the back, even though that's what Darlie claimed. But then why would the intruder take the sock in back down the alley?

- The light, which came on for everyone else, somehow didn't come on when the "intruder" fled. This "intruder" was extremely lucky.

- There was no intruder and thus that's why the motion detector light wasn't on when police arrived.

The motion detector didn't get triggered until cops got to the spa. The gate door is before that. You could easily go from the window to the gate door and not trigger the lights.

 

[Steel86]

Considering this thread is somewhat discussing the layout of the house, hoping someone could provide me some information.

After looking at the original lab tests, there were results from "Banister" - blood stains. One blood stain is Devon, two stains are Devon/Damon - Devon being the major contributor and Damon the minor contributor.

Where is the banister located that this testing was performed? TIA

 

[Madeleine74]

The motion detector didn't get triggered until cops got to the spa. The gate door is before that. You could easily go from the window to the gate door and not trigger the lights.

14 Q. Okay. And when you walked from the
15 gate of the backyard over to the window that you had seen
16 from where you were in the garage, the lights did not
17 come on, did they?
18 A. Well, I didn't go there first.
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. In fact, I walked first to the spa,
21 and past the spa and around the corner, I looked over at
22 the window as I was going through.
23 Q. Did the lights ever go on?
24 A. Yes, sir.
25 Q. While you were in the backyard?

556 1 A. Yes, sir.
2 Q. Okay.
3 A. The flood lights mounted on the spot
4 did.
5 Q. All right. Those are motion
6 detectors, are they not?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. Okay. Do you know where you were when
9 you set the motion detector light off?
10 A. I was approximately around the door of
11 the spa.
12 Q. The door of the spa?
13 A. Yes, sir.

 

[TDoc72]

While I do think it's possible for someone to crouch and exit the window w/o disturbing any dust on the sill, I don't think it would be possible for an 'intruder' that is trying to quickly get out of a house where he has killed 2 children and stabbed a woman who is now following him. An 'intruder' wouldn't take the time to try and step out carefully. He/She would be in a big ol' hurry.

I know a lot has been said about a bloody fingerprint on the utility room to garage interior door, but, other than the sock, there is no blood anywhere outside. That room was a bloody mess and I do believe an 'intruder' would have blood all over. But:
a--If someone's hands were so bloody that they left a print on that interior door, then why is there no blood on the gate?
b--Why would an 'intruder' close the gate that is hard to open and close/drags on the ground?

Just in case you can't tell, I don't believe there was an intruder at all.

 

[TellTheTruth]

While I do think it's possible for someone to crouch and exit the window w/o disturbing any dust on the sill, I don't think it would be possible for an 'intruder' that is trying to quickly get out of a house where he has killed 2 children and stabbed a woman who is now following him. An 'intruder' wouldn't take the time to try and step out carefully. He/She would be in a big ol' hurry.

I quite agree - the fact that the gauze on the window was cut when it would have been easier to remove the whole gauze frame from the window suggest to me that a fleeing intruder would have disturbed the frame or maybe nudged it off completely in his escape.

I know a lot has been said about a bloody fingerprint on the utility room to garage interior door, but, other than the sock, there is no blood anywhere outside. That room was a bloody mess and I do believe an 'intruder' would have blood all over. But:
a--If someone's hands were so bloody that they left a print on that interior door, then why is there no blood on the gate?
b--Why would an 'intruder' close the gate that is hard to open and close/drags on the ground?

Just in case you can't tell, I don't believe there was an intruder at all.

Darin fixed the gate the day of the murders.

 

[Madeleine74]

Testimony by police is the gate was difficult to open.

 

[TellTheTruth]

Testimony by police is the gate was difficult to open.

The boys were able to open and close the gate even before Darin fixed it. The fact the hinges where liken to a Heath Robinson drawing is neither here nor there.

 

[Madeleine74]

16 Q. Okay. All right. And you have told
17 us how you got into the backyard by opening the gate.
18 And I think you showed us how you even had to push a
19 little bit with your foot on the gate to open it up. But
20 you were able to open it up, weren't you?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. I mean, you didn't have any trouble --
23 that wasn't a difficult maneuver, was it?
24 A. Well, it was pretty hard to get it
25 open.


The point isn't that the boys were able to get the back gate open, it's that the back gate did not swing freely and required some maneuvering to open and close. But even with that, isn't it curious that this "intruder" took the time to then close the gate door behind him upon leaving? That door was closed when officers arrived.

Such a thoughtful intruder, making sure not to rampage the inside of the house, making sure not to disturb the mulch outside, and closing the back gate door upon exiting.

 

[TellTheTruth]

16 Q. Okay. All right. And you have told
17 us how you got into the backyard by opening the gate.
18 And I think you showed us how you even had to push a
19 little bit with your foot on the gate to open it up. But
20 you were able to open it up, weren't you?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. I mean, you didn't have any trouble --
23 that wasn't a difficult maneuver, was it?
24 A. Well, it was pretty hard to get it
25 open.


The point isn't that the boys were able to get the back gate open, it's that the back gate did not swing freely and required some maneuvering to open and close. But even with that, isn't it curious that this "intruder" took the time to then close the gate door behind him upon leaving? That door was closed when officers arrived.

Such a thoughtful intruder, making sure not to rampage the inside of the house, making sure not to disturb the mulch outside, and closing the back gate door upon exiting.

I agree, a fleeing intruder would have left it wide open, or shut it with a slam to make a noise if he/she felt they were being followed by Darlie (which they had no reason not to assume).

Yet another in a long line of anomalies in his case.

Just in regard to the mulch though, there was no mulch under the window. That was an error the prosecution made whether it be wild assumption or simply a mistake in reporting.

 

[Paysee]

Darin fixed the gate the day of the murders.

Only according to Darin.

When the police got there, the gate was still closed with a hangar and a shoelace, and they still had difficulty getting it to open and close.

21 Q. So let me ask you. You said that
22 Darin fixed the gate that Wednesday night?
23 A. Yes, sir, he did.
24 Q. Did you go try the gate out yourself?
25 A. No, I didn't.
1 Q. Are you telling this jury then that
2 gate was swinging freely?
3 A. I don't know if it was swinging or
4 not, all I know is Darin told me that he fixed it.
5 Q. That gate was hanging on hinges by
6 shoe strings and coat hangers and things like --
7 A. Shoe strings?
8 Q. Yeah. Have you seen the photographs?
9 A. No, sir.
10 Q. Had you all been making some repairs
11 to that gate?
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. Put some new poles in?
14 A. My husband I think did, I'm not too
15 sure about that.
16 Q. Okay. Do you know when those poles
17 were put in?
18 A. No, sir, I couldn't tell you that.
19 Q. Let me show you 13-D, 13-C, can you
20 see that gate there?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. Do you see the strings attached from
23 the poles to the gate?
24 A. Yes, on that one I do. I see it.
25 Q. Okay.
1 A. I think, I mean I don't know if it's a
2 shoe string, but it looks like some type of string.
3 Q. Some type of string?
4 A. Yes, sir.
5 Q. The same thing in this photograph?
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. Okay. But was the gate dragging, is
8 that -- was that the problem?
9 A. Yeah, the bottom of the gate.
10 Q. Okay. And you did --
11 A. I don't know anything about the poles
12 really, I just know about the gate.
13 Q. Did you go out that gate on the date
14 of the 5th?
15 A. Did I go out the gate?
16 Q. Yes.
17 A. No, sir, I did not.
18 Q. You were home all day, weren't you?
19 A. Yes, sir, I was.
20 Q. Had you been having trouble getting
21 through that gate?
22 A. Yes, sir, we had.
23 Q. Okay. Would you have to actually,
24 what, lift the gate up, and try to put it in the air, to
25 keep it from dragging on the concrete?
1 A. Sort of. I mean, it drug. You kind
2 of had to -- I think one of the officers described it a
3 good way as kind of pushing your foot.
4 Q. Right. He -- that was Sergeant
5 Walling. He had to shove his foot, to shove the gate
6 open?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. Okay. So it was no easy task getting
9 in and out of that gate, was it?
10 A. I wouldn't say it was easy, but I
11 wouldn't say it was hard.
12 Q. Well, if you knew what you were doing,
13 it would be a lot easier, wouldn't it?
14 A. Well, I would think that anybody,
15 really -- I mean, me and my boys got it open.
16 Q. They had been in and out of it several
17 times?
18 A. Sure.
19 Q. And you knew how to get in and out of
20 it, didn't you?
21 A. Yeah, I don't think it takes too much,
22 to know how to get in and out of it.

I can make out a coat hangar here.

 

[Paysee]

Just in regard to the mulch though, there was no mulch under the window. That was an error the prosecution made whether it be wild assumption or simply a mistake in reporting.

Do you have a reference for the no mulch under the window?

I thought these 2 pictures introduced in evidence did show the mulch?

 

[TellTheTruth]

Do you have a reference for the no mulch under the window?

I thought these 2 pictures introduced in evidence did show the mulch?

It doesn't show the mulch being under the window - or even in the ally way (as Parker suggested).

 

[TellTheTruth]

Only according to Darin.

When the police got there, the gate was still closed with a hangar and a shoelace, and they still had difficulty getting it to open and close.

I can make out a coat hangar here.

According to Darlie and Darin, the gate was fixed. They mention nothing about the brackets - I acknowledge that these were still in order for some repair (as I've already mentioned in this thread).

 

[Paysee]

According to Darlie and Darin, the gate was fixed. They mention nothing about the brackets - I acknowledge that these were still in order for some repair (as I've already mentioned in this thread).

Darlie herself admits that the gate is still hanging on by hangars and shoelaces in crime scene photographs. Agrees with the detectives that the gate was difficult to open and close. She says over and over again in her testimony that she herself did not use the gate that day, and of her own knowledge does not know that the gate was fixed. Only that Darin told her that he fixed it.

It is pretty obvious that Darin did not succeed in repairing the gate that night. Or perhaps he didn't even try. If you'll remember, this was also the night that he took an extraordinarily long time to drive Dana home. Perhaps he just did not have the time, and lied to Darlie about it to get her off his back about it?

What do you mean by brackets? Darlie's testimony does mention that Darin was supposed to put some poles in to fix the gate, but she does not know if / when he did it.

1 Q. Are you telling this jury then that
2 gate was swinging freely?
3 A. I don't know if it was swinging or
4 not, all I know is Darin told me that he fixed it.
5 Q. That gate was hanging on hinges by
6 shoe strings and coat hangers and things like --
7 A. Shoe strings?
8 Q. Yeah. Have you seen the photographs?
9 A. No, sir.
10 Q. Had you all been making some repairs
11 to that gate?
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. Put some new poles in?
14 A. My husband I think did, I'm not too
15 sure about that.
16 Q. Okay. Do you know when those poles
17 were put in?
18 A. No, sir, I couldn't tell you that.

There is no ambiguity about this. The gate was difficult to open and close the night of the murders. Inspite of this, the murderer, who was being chased by a knife wielding mother of the two children he had just hurt, still stopped to close this gate behind him.

It does not directly indicate Darlie's guilt, but taken in total with all the other evidence, goes to show that there was no intruder.

 

[TellTheTruth]

Darlie herself admits that the gate is still hanging on by hangars and shoelaces in crime scene photographs. Agrees with the detectives that the gate was difficult to open and close. She says over and over again in her testimony that she herself did not use the gate that day, and of her own knowledge does not know that the gate was fixed. Only that Darin told her that he fixed it.

It is pretty obvious that Darin did not succeed in repairing the gate that night. Or perhaps he didn't even try. If you'll remember, this was also the night that he took an extraordinarily long time to drive Dana home. Perhaps he just did not have the time, and lied to Darlie about it to get her off his back about it?

What do you mean by brackets? Darlie's testimony does mention that Darin was supposed to put some poles in to fix the gate, but she does not know if / when he did it.



There is no ambiguity about this. The gate was difficult to open and close the night of the murders. Inspite of this, the murderer, who was being chased by a knife wielding mother of the two children he had just hurt, still stopped to close this gate behind him.

It does not directly indicate Darlie's guilt, but taken in total with all the other evidence, goes to show that there was no intruder.

Agreed. It does raise the obvious questions. I think more important is the fact that the frame around the window remained on. I'm guessing an intruder leaving the house thinking he is being followed would have knocked the framed gauze off. It has been acknowledged that it would have been easier to remove the gauze than to slash it open. Suggests to me that it's rather flimsy and could be knocked off quite easily?

Coupled with the fact that the pursuit stopped in the utility room. Why? If an intruder breaks into your house, surely you chase him down to the end?

Hence why I'm still on the fence after all these years.

I just wish the prosecution would have done a better job!

 

[Paysee]

How could the prosecution have done a better job? Seriously, I am asking you this.

When there is no confession (Susan Smith) or an eye witness (Diane downs), there will always be some fence sitters, who will never, ever get convinced. Especially in such an emotional case, of a mother brutally stabbing to death her sleeping little children.

Look at the Jeffrey Macdonald case. Some people still believe in his innocence!

 

[TellTheTruth]

How could the prosecution have done a better job? Seriously, I am asking you this.

When there is no confession (Susan Smith) or an eye witness (Diane downs), there will always be some fence sitters, who will never, ever get convinced. Especially in such an emotional case, of a mother brutally stabbing to death her sleeping little children.

Look at the Jeffrey Macdonald case. Some people still believe in his innocence!

Far too long a list for me to put here.
To be brief, the key ones are:

1) The prosecutions decision to emphasise the 'Silly String' video (at least 9 times as far as I am aware) - couple that with an emotional Texas Jury and she'd probably have been found guilty on that alone

2) The retired Dallas detective Parker (then turned PI) - he was 'told' a lot of things by other investigators that simply weren't true. He then repeated these in his testimony to his friend, the defence lawyer Mulder who was to close to Parker for him to cross examine him professionally - mulch in the ally way?

3) The financial facts of the case that were portrayed by the prosecution to seek conviction that weren't true (mortgage arrears, struggling business etc)

4) Lack of blood on the knife - by that I mean of all parties bleeding that night.

5) One of the victims being left alive who would then have the opportunity to tell who the perpetrator was.

... and so on.

Looking at the court transcripts with an open mind, again and again and again, it just doesn't sit right with me.

 

[Paysee]

1) The prosecutions decision to emphasise the 'Silly String' video (at least 9 times as far as I am aware) - couple that with an emotional Texas Jury and she'd probably have been found guilty on that alone

The prosecution presented the silly string video only once in court. It was the jury's choice to view it over and over again.

If the jury was emotional, they would have freed the grieving mother - a young, beautiful, married, white, well off mother. I am sure they had a tough time accepting that such a woman could have done such a heinous deed. Those of us who have accepted Darlie's guilt have gone through such a phase ourselves.

2) The retired Dallas detective Parker (then turned PI) - he was 'told' a lot of things by other investigators that simply weren't true. He then repeated these in his testimony to his friend, the defence lawyer Mulder who was to close to Parker for him to cross examine him professionally - mulch in the ally way?

We are talking about what the prosecution could have done better, but ok.

Douglas Mulder, a veteran chief public prosecutor turned defense attorney went soft on his friend Bill Parker, a veteran police officer turned private investigator, because he did not want to hurt his feelings? On such a high profile case? Even a high school girl would not do this with her BFF when the stakes are so high.

3) The financial facts of the case that were portrayed by the prosecution to seek conviction that weren't true (mortgage arrears, struggling business etc)

Have you read Barbara Jovell's testimony?

4) Lack of blood on the knife - by that I mean of all parties bleeding that night.

Darlie was tried for Damon's murder, and his blood was found on the knife.

With improved DNA techniques, Devon's blood may yet be found on the knife.

5) One of the victims being left alive who would then have the opportunity to tell who the perpetrator was.

:doh: