Did Darlie Routier murder her precious sons? Part 2

[cami]

Seriously, NOT trying to be rude here, but are you telling me that you have never heard of any other child killer case or any killer where it didn't make sense? You truly believe that there are not lunatics that run around our streets and kill people? The Zodiac, BTK, whomever killed JonBenet, Ted Bundy,Jeffrey Dalmer, shall I go on? As far as children besides JonBenet, Paulie Klaas, Jessica Lundsford, who are these people that killed them? Are they not people that once roamed our streets and killed? For what reason? No reason makes sense. JonBenet was killed and her parents weren't. So I am sorry there is such a thing as pure evil and there is such a thing as people that break into houses and murder adults and children.....some to this day we have never caught. Of course everyone here by now knows that I do believe in Darlie's innocence, but the above statements are kinda off.

None of the above mentioned killers were in Rowlette when the boys were murdered. There was only Darlie....all evidence points to her...zero evidence of an intruder.

 

[Missi]

None of the above mentioned killers were in Rowlette when the boys were murdered. There was only Darlie....all evidence points to her...zero evidence of an intruder.

that really wasnt the point. and there were other crimes that took place that had the same similiarites as Darlies....you should know that. that actually arrested someone and this person also used socks, knives from inside the house, description.

 

[cami]

that really wasnt the point. and there were other crimes that took place that had the same similiarites as Darlies....you should know that. that actually arrested someone and this person also used socks, knives from inside the house, description.

And once again, that happened in Dallas...nowhere near Rowlette and Darlie's home...and it happened long before the Routier murders. There is no evidence, none, zip, nada, squat of similar crimes in the immediate vicinty of the Routier home or Rowlette.

Darlie's dna was in the toe of the sock and fibres on it matched Darin's Reboks, it's his sock taken from their home. I am quite sure Darlie used it to cover the knife handle.

How do you think the bloody knife imprint got into the carpet in the murder room? I'm interested to hear your explanation for this. Thanks

 

[Missi]

And once again, that happened in Dallas...nowhere near Rowlette and Darlie's home...and it happened long before the Routier murders. There is no evidence, none, zip, nada, squat of similar crimes in the immediate vicinty of the Routier home or Rowlette.

Darlie's dna was in the toe of the sock and fibres on it matched Darin's Reboks, it's his sock taken from their home. I am quite sure Darlie used it to cover the knife handle.

How do you think the bloody knife imprint got into the carpet in the murder room? I'm interested to hear your explanation for this. Thanks

and Im still waiting for an explaination on these other crimes and the person that was arrested for these...too much similiarities, and it did happened. I have heard the cops say that it happened.....they should have ran evidence against this person to be sure. that is what I am trying to say. As far as the sock, that seems pretty risky to me to run 75 yards away where anyone could have seen you just to drop a sock, sounds to me IMO that the intruder dropped it either on purpose or by accident. Those other crimes though seem way to similiar and I am sorry cause no one believes this I guess, but those did happen and there was the cut screens and the knives used from whomevers house they were in and there were socks used, they did arrest someone and never ran anything against this with darlie's case.

 

[Missi]

And once again, that happened in Dallas...nowhere near Rowlette and Darlie's home...and it happened long before the Routier murders. There is no evidence, none, zip, nada, squat of similar crimes in the immediate vicinty of the Routier home or Rowlette.

Darlie's dna was in the toe of the sock and fibres on it matched Darin's Reboks, it's his sock taken from their home. I am quite sure Darlie used it to cover the knife handle.

How do you think the bloody knife imprint got into the carpet in the murder room? I'm interested to hear your explanation for this. Thanks

and you say no where near rowlette, well 20 miles to dallas isnt that far, but they did say in the area, if thats dallas ok...i mean what it takes someone 15 minutes to go 20 miles

 

[Missi]

None of the above mentioned killers were in Rowlette when the boys were murdered. There was only Darlie....all evidence points to her...zero evidence of an intruder.

I was simply trying to make a point about the comment I was responding too.

 

[whitywendy]

and you say no where near rowlette, well 20 miles to dallas isnt that far, but they did say in the area, if thats dallas ok...i mean what it takes someone 15 minutes to go 20 miles

Not in Dallas Texas. Apparently you have never driven in the Dallas area. It could take you 15 minutes to go 5 miles.

Also, the case you are referencing is the one where the man was breaking in and RAPING THE WOMEN, using their kids hostage to get them submit. All these crimes occurred in APARTMENT COMPLEXES.

 

[Missi]

In regards to the state, yes there was people from the state, and also other people who believed she was guilty. It wasnt all from the opinion of people who believe shes innocent.
Im reading transcripts in between posting, the reason I aint read them all before is that as there is so much to get through, I have limited access to computer and the fact I simply didnt have time - down to juiggling college / kids etc. Since ive now finished college work Im getting 'stuck in' to transcripts.

When I get through transcripts I'll let you all know if my opinion has changed or not. If I think she's guilty (after reading transcripts) i'll say as Im not too proud to admit that I was wrong (if that is the case).

Its not that im afraid to 'face the facts' that Darlies guilty - its just that I have a different opinion to you.

i saw that as well nicola, i know what your talking about as well as several other shows and yes there were other people on there that disputed like the state a juror and even barbara davis that now has seen all the evidence and has taken back her guilty statement and the book she wrote. barbara davis has stated several times that she had recieved a phone call from a source she has and they met and this person showed her evidence that was not seen during trial, she didnt see it the jury didnt see it and the state can say all they want it was there, but it was not made away to the jury and the state knows that there were mess ups on there part, who would want to admit they were wrong in a case like this, but it has happened. barbara davis now believes darlie is innocent after seeing this other evidence. and she is someone that has access to stuff none of us have for research, so yeah IMO she is crediable.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

that really wasnt the point. and there were other crimes that took place that had the same similiarites as Darlies....you should know that. that actually arrested someone and this person also used socks, knives from inside the house, description.

Who?
Where?
When?

 

[sherri79]

Who?
Where?
When?

it sorta reminds me of oj. bloody socks and a knife. the "real" killers escape and dont leave a clue behind.

i love your questions. facts instead of a general statement that cant be proven 1 way or the other. i have seen evidence that points at darlie. i have never seen evidence that points at some1 else. the same MO in the same area at the same time would go far in bringing doubt.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

it sorta reminds me of oj. bloody socks and a knife. the "real" killers escape and dont leave a clue behind.

i love your questions. facts instead of a general statement that cant be proven 1 way or the other. i have seen evidence that points at darlie. i have never seen evidence that points at some1 else. the same MO in the same area at the same time would go far in bringing doubt.

So far the Darlies have only general statements that can't be proven. Like, "if this could happen to Darlie, it could happen to you." NOT LIKELY!

 

[mollymalone]

Yes ~ I believe she is right where she belongs on death row.


Driving through Dallas many years ago was no picnic and I imagine it was worse by the time of the killings. Nothing the defense showed at the trial, nor in the appeals has changed my opinion, which was formed at the time of the trial. I doubt seriously they'll come up with anything now that would convince me to change it.

 

[haypaula]

I believe Darin was involved, as the wounds Darlie sustained were said to be wounds which could not have been self-inflicted. Darin sticks by Darlie and Darlie sticks by Darin because they were in it together. If Darlie were to admit Darin was involved, it would not diminish her role or her sentence, so she continues to profess her innocence.

Prior to Devon and Damon's murders, a scheme to defraud an insurance company was planned. Darin and Darlie were materialistic, and money was the root of their evil.

IMO

 

[White Rain]

I believe Darin was involved, as the wounds Darlie sustained were said to be wounds which could not have been self-inflicted. Darin sticks by Darlie and Darlie sticks by Darin because they were in it together. If Darlie were to admit Darin was involved, it would not diminish her role or her sentence, so she continues to profess her innocence.

Prior to Devon and Damon's murders, a scheme to defraud an insurance company was planned. Darin and Darlie were materialistic, and money was the root of their evil.

IMO

Which of her wounds were said to be not self-inflicted?

 

[White Rain]

Can anyone answer my question from the post above?

 

[Kitty5001]

Can anyone answer my question from the post above?

It is just an opinion that those wounds 'could not have neen' self inflicted. There is no evidence to support that they were not. If you look at the wounds and hold a knife, you can easily reinact how to create those wounds with either hand on yourself.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Which of her wounds were said to be not self-inflicted?

It depends on who you believe said they couldn't be self inflicted. Most people believe that all of her wounds were self inflicted. If you can point us in the direction of someone saying that they were not, we'll try and answer your question.

 

[Hopeful One]

What happened to all the other threads on this case??? Am I losing it??

Nevermind. It was a setting on my puter... I'm a giant idiot... ignore me.

 

[accordn2me]

It depends on who you believe said they couldn't be self inflicted. Most people believe that all of her wounds were self inflicted. If you can point us in the direction of someone saying that they were not, we'll try and answer your question.

Didn't that author...maybe her name was Barbara Davis, IIRC....her second book she decided the wounds were not self-inflicted?

Again, unless I go back and refresh my memory.....let's just say it's a mild statement that I have one of the worst memories in the world! Maybe I should change my nic to IIRC :waitasec:......the doctor(s) and nurse(s) who testified said that the bruises were not there in the hospital. However, when I look at the pics....which I would not trust over my own two eyes seeing her in person...but it looks 2me like beginning bruises, certainly swelling is there.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Didn't that author...maybe her name was Barbara Davis, IIRC....her second book she decided the wounds were not self-inflicted?

Again, unless I go back and refresh my memory.....let's just say it's a mild statement that I have one of the worst memories in the world! Maybe I should change my nic to IIRC :waitasec:......the doctor(s) and nurse(s) who testified said that the bruises were not there in the hospital. However, when I look at the pics....which I would not trust over my own two eyes seeing her in person...but it looks 2me like beginning bruises, certainly swelling is there.

I was talking about an "expert" in self-inflicted wounds. Barbara Davis, as far as I remember, never wrote a second book, but yes, she did change her mind and is now claiming that she believes Darlie is innocent. I've never heard her try and explain the wounds on Darlie, either before her change of opinion or after it.