Darlie's injuries

[whitywendy]

as far as darin he was the only one there that saw her even before the cops even got there and would know dont you think. and even if Darlie was his "trophey wife" that doesnt make her a killer. The state took Drake away because he was supporting his wife and believed in her innocence, which is not wrong. Plus he wasnt stable either after, I mean he did lose 2 of his children too and his wife to jail, is he not allowed to look out for the best interest of his child and let him be with his grandparents while he got back on his feet? what is so wrong with that, he went through a trauma too.I think that is pretty selfless.

IMHO - I believe Darin is guilt ridden over the murders because there were obvious signs that something was wrong with Darlie and he couldn't/didn't do anything about it. Like seeking mental help. I'm sure he beats himself up about that one. I sure would.

 

[whitywendy]

So even if only 2 volumes of the transcripts were "missing" as long as you don't need them to suit your "opinions" or "facts" then thats ok then? Guess we didn't need those volumes. By the way the audio tapes that are so accurate according to you the 1st transcriber held on to them for a period of time and had to be made to give them back, so how do you know that nothing else was adjusted. I just watched a lengthy video with Darin and he really WAS there unlike you or me and the facts you are trying to state can be disputed by him. So I guess he wouldn't know what he was talking about either, right? How about the author Barbara Davis that was VERY adement about Darlie's guilt and then when she saw other evidence that disputed even what she was saying went back on national television to admit that she was wrong and that she felt darlie was innocent? I am sarcastic here at times because you are to me too and started that way from the beginning, IMHO. No I am not like that with others on other sites unless people are that way to me. I am actually a very nice person, but when I am supposed to JUST go on your word and that is it and everything I have tried to debate or tried to have you acknowledge as facts you totally tear it down and then critisize me for saying something to you about what I think is wrong from your facts or opinions or whatever word you would like to use this time. I have tried not to be sarcastic and that was never my intention, but did you ever think that maybe the info that you say are facts "could" be wrong too? I think that what darin has said holds a lot more weight then a lot of other evidence because like I said HE WAS THERE before the cops,during and after. Now I just waiting to see what you will tell me about why I shouldnt listen to that either. So sorry if you feel like I am coming across rudely, but I came here to inform others and to learn new things if there was anything else to learn, but the rudeness started with your responses first. I will respect your "opinions" or "facts" as long as you respect mine.

I don't have time to get all into this post right now. But I did want to say that you sounded that way from the very beginning. If you go back and read my posts, you will see that I too am not that type of person. But when someone talks to you in tone like that, well you tend to return the tone.

 

[White Rain]

as far as darin he was the only one there that saw her even before the cops even got there and would know dont you think. and even if Darlie was his "trophey wife" that doesnt make her a killer. The state took Drake away because he was supporting his wife and believed in her innocence, which is not wrong. Plus he wasnt stable either after, I mean he did lose 2 of his children too and his wife to jail, is he not allowed to look out for the best interest of his child and let him be with his grandparents while he got back on his feet? what is so wrong with that, he went through a trauma too.I think that is pretty selfless.

Sure he may have been trying to look out for Drakes best interests at the time, but it's now 11 years after the murder, and as far as I know he Sarilda still has custody of Drake.
The fact that he did lose two of his kids should make him WANT to have Drake.

 

[Mary456]

she was knocked out so maybe the killer thought she was already dead..

Darlie herself said she was not knocked out, never lost consciousness. Doctors and nurses checked her pupils, reflexes, questioned her extensively, and she was adamant that she had not been knocked out. This is just another campfire story started by her supporters.

There is something that doesn't make much sense either, the nurse that was at the hospital that had seen and taken care of Darlie while she was there, when she was called to testify why would she lie about the bruising?

She didn't lie about the bruising, nor did the other five nurses and two doctors - all of whom testified that there were no bruises on Darlie's right arm. The pictures you're referring to were taken on June 10, two days after Darlie was released from the hospital. She inflicted them herself, probably on June 8th.

You have to be very careful with Darlie's website, Missi. They distort the facts.

 

[Mary456]

Darlie herself said she was not knocked out, never lost consciousness. Doctors and nurses checked her pupils, reflexes, questioned her extensively, and she was adamant that she had not been knocked out. This is just another campfire story started by her supporters..

Missi, I'm just wondering what you think about this testimony. Was Darlie lying when she said she wasn't knocked out? I'm asking because you said she was knocked out, and Darlie said she wasn't.

I'd like your opinion on the bruising, too. Do you think that 6 nurses and two doctors were lying when they said there was no bruising on her right arm in the hospital?

A yes or no would do it for me.

 

[CW]

NOW IT'S MY TURN GET BACK ON TOPIC AND ONE MORE RUDE POST AND THERE WILL BE SOME LONG VACATIONS GIVEN FROM WS. I'M TIRED OF THIS CHILDISH CRAP. TAKE THIS AS A FINAL WARNING BECAUSE ONCE YOU ARE LOCKED OUT I WILL NOT BE SENDING ANY EMAILS OUT.

 

[Mary456]

NOW IT'S MY TURN GET BACK ON TOPIC AND ONE MORE RUDE POST AND THERE WILL BE SOME LONG VACATIONS GIVEN FROM WS. I'M TIRED OF THIS CHILDISH CRAP. TAKE THIS AS A FINAL WARNING BECAUSE ONCE YOU ARE LOCKED OUT I WILL NOT BE SENDING ANY EMAILS OUT.

Well, you certainly convinced me, WindChime. I won't be posting here again.

Too much childish crap

 

[Rino]

This from the rotton.crime blog sums it up best for me:

If Ms. Routier didn't commit this crime, what a fortunate assailant there must be running around this desolate Texas neighborhood. He goes in and brutally murders two children. He slashes their mother's throat as they're struggling face to face. He drops the knife and she wipes off his prints. He runs away, but leaves Darlie alive - the one woman who could identify him, and send him to the gas chamber. Then, d'oh, she gets amnesia and can't remember what he looks like. This must be the luckiest ---darn child killer in the universe.

 

[Missi]

here is my problem with your therory. every1 has to be a liar but darlie and those that suport her. the first cop on the scene lied about how she acted and what he saw. the crime scene techs contamintated the scene and hid it. the nurse lied about what she saw with the brusies. the nurse lied about how she acted. the emt lied about if darlie was in shock. the court reporter lied in the transcripts. why??? why would every1 get together to frame a young mother and let a murder go free? people talk about how little a PD is paid but a DA is not given millions. do you really think that the DA wanted to let the "real" killer get away with murder so he could get a young mom? it just dont pass the smell test.

As far as the nurse I have no idea WHY they would lie, but I know that they did for sure on Darlie's "emotional state" while she was in the hospital. There were notes made by the nurses that I have seen that has contradicted what was said on the stand. As far as the court reporter, it was proven that there were over 33,000 mistakes, 54 pages missing, and audio tapes missing for when the reconstruction was supposed to take place, and she was repermanded for her actions and stripped of her certification. That was all proven. WHY she would do that I don't have an answer to that. Good question though....WHY? It was also stated to a Fox news reporter (heard this from his own mouth) that off the record the court reporter admitted to her believeing Darlie was guilty and therefore knowing that that would make her biased. So there would be a reason to me for the transcripts to be tampered with. Even the ones reconstructed still include missing pieces, for example the missing audiotapes. I am just trying to answer some of these questions so please no one get offended.

 

[Missi]

Darlie herself said she was not knocked out, never lost consciousness. Doctors and nurses checked her pupils, reflexes, questioned her extensively, and she was adamant that she had not been knocked out. This is just another campfire story started by her supporters.



She didn't lie about the bruising, nor did the other five nurses and two doctors - all of whom testified that there were no bruises on Darlie's right arm. The pictures you're referring to were taken on June 10, two days after Darlie was released from the hospital. She inflicted them herself, probably on June 8th.

You have to be very careful with Darlie's website, Missi. They distort the facts.

Within those pictures of the bruising there are many little "cuts" on her arms and fingertips, that seems a awful lot to "stage" when they would be consistant with "defensive" type cuts. I understand about the dates, but it still doesn't explain that someone would have to be very meticulous about where to put those small cuts and to know that a doctor would say yes or no to those being consistant with "defensive" type injuries.

 

[Missi]

Missi, I'm just wondering what you think about this testimony. Was Darlie lying when she said she wasn't knocked out? I'm asking because you said she was knocked out, and Darlie said she wasn't.

I'd like your opinion on the bruising, too. Do you think that 6 nurses and two doctors were lying when they said there was no bruising on her right arm in the hospital?

A yes or no would do it for me.

As far as being knocked out I do apologize for maybe not putting IMO, I was tryng to answer a post about her waking up and so forth and I meant to say maybe she was knocked out and the killer thought she was dead, it would still be consistant with a struggle and not remembering. Another topic is that there was also regretion therapy done on Darlie and through the regretion therapy it was found that her story was true with the intruder story. Did anyone know about that here? Just wondering.

 

[Missi]

This from the rotton.crime blog sums it up best for me:

If Ms. Routier didn't commit this crime, what a fortunate assailant there must be running around this desolate Texas neighborhood. He goes in and brutally murders two children. He slashes their mother's throat as they're struggling face to face. He drops the knife and she wipes off his prints. He runs away, but leaves Darlie alive - the one woman who could identify him, and send him to the gas chamber. Then, d'oh, she gets amnesia and can't remember what he looks like. This must be the luckiest ---darn child killer in the universe.

I understand what you are trying to say here, but realistically not every child killer or any killer has always been caught, there are many killers in our history and I'm sure even now there is someone that has done these types of horrific crimes that have never been caught.

 

[CyberLaw]

Missi I see your point.

But what I feel you are talking about is child killers who snatch a child on the street or on the way to school.

When a crime happens in a home, your children are both viciously murdered a mere few feet from you then all of the other evidence only points to you, well the two are not the same. Again what did the killer gain by killing two innocent boys. Leaving valuable in plain sight upon entry and exit. Going right for the boys to kill, two small little boys. What a person would do is use the children as leverage against the adult, not murder the two innocent children who would serve a valuable purpose if left alive.

But they leave a women who could identify them alive, and why did the "stranger" run away with Darlie in following him. Why did he suddenly run away. Not a chance in heck that anyone other then Darlie killed her son, the facts and evidence support that, the lack of evidence about an intruder does not support nor has it ever support her story.

 

[whitywendy]

I understand what you are trying to say here, but realistically not every child killer or any killer has always been caught, there are many killers in our history and I'm sure even now there is someone that has done these types of horrific crimes that have never been caught.

I also understand what you are saying Missy, but "usually" child killers, ie Tommy Lynn Sells, are sexual deviants. They "usually" don't break in to homes just with the sole intention of killing kids. There are many evil people in this world, but I have yet to hear of a person roaming the country with the sole person of entering a home just to kill (no sexual motivation) a total stranger's child while leaving the parents alive (knowing you left them alive as you were exiting the home).

 

[cami]

As far as being knocked out I do apologize for maybe not putting IMO, I was tryng to answer a post about her waking up and so forth and I meant to say maybe she was knocked out and the killer thought she was dead, it would still be consistant with a struggle and not remembering. Another topic is that there was also regretion therapy done on Darlie and through the regretion therapy it was found that her story was true with the intruder story. Did anyone know about that here? Just wondering.

Yes I do and Darlie. That story was no more true than her voluntary statement. She came up with two killers in her regression therapy (she had to have one smaller than the first one she described). Nor did she ever have a second regression session.

The killer knew she wasn't dead, she followed him to the utility room..according to her story.

Darlie is guilty as sin. She was not knocked out, she had no head injuries, she was not in shock, she was given a shock test at the scene. She was oriented as to time and place and her vitals were stable at Baylor.

 

[cami]

Within those pictures of the bruising there are many little "cuts" on her arms and fingertips, that seems a awful lot to "stage" when they would be consistant with "defensive" type cuts. I understand about the dates, but it still doesn't explain that someone would have to be very meticulous about where to put those small cuts and to know that a doctor would say yes or no to those being consistant with "defensive" type injuries.

they are not cuts on her arm...it's dried blood. She has one hesitation wound and then the slice to her arm. A surface slice. Her fingertips had what appeared to be paper cuts. Defense wounds should be all over her fingers, palms, the underside of her arms, etc...not a vertical slice to the forearm...what she do hold her arm out for the perp to slice her?

 

[Missi]

Missi I see your point.

But what I feel you are talking about is child killers who snatch a child on the street or on the way to school.

When a crime happens in a home, your children are both viciously murdered a mere few feet from you then all of the other evidence only points to you, well the two are not the same. Again what did the killer gain by killing two innocent boys. Leaving valuable in plain sight upon entry and exit. Going right for the boys to kill, two small little boys. What a person would do is use the children as leverage against the adult, not murder the two innocent children who would serve a valuable purpose if left alive.

But they leave a women who could identify them alive, and why did the "stranger" run away with Darlie in following him. Why did he suddenly run away. Not a chance in heck that anyone other then Darlie killed her son, the facts and evidence support that, the lack of evidence about an intruder does not support nor has it ever support her story.

the point is that you cant honestly say that you dont believe an intruder has NEVER done something like that before...what about Jonbenet, that was in her house and she was found in her house and her parents were left alive, did they do that too?

 

[Missi]

they are not cuts on her arm...it's dried blood. She has one hesitation wound and then the slice to her arm. A surface slice. Her fingertips had what appeared to be paper cuts. Defense wounds should be all over her fingers, palms, the underside of her arms, etc...not a vertical slice to the forearm...what she do hold her arm out for the perp to slice her?

wow how long does dried blood stay on someone? thats not what i saw in the pictures.

 

[Missi]

Yes I do and Darlie. That story was no more true than her voluntary statement. She came up with two killers in her regression therapy (she had to have one smaller than the first one she described). Nor did she ever have a second regression session.

The killer knew she wasn't dead, she followed him to the utility room..according to her story.

Darlie is guilty as sin. She was not knocked out, she had no head injuries, she was not in shock, she was given a shock test at the scene. She was oriented as to time and place and her vitals were stable at Baylor.

by the way there was regression therapy done. and it did show that there were intruders in the house.

 

[Dena]

the point is that you cant honestly say that you dont believe an intruder has NEVER done something like that before...what about Jonbenet, that was in her house and she was found in her house and her parents were left alive, did they do that too?

Well, since you bring up Jon Benet, yes, I think they did do that too. Can't speak for everyone else though, but I believe it was a family crime - always have & always will.