Routier case is the first for David Camm

[chlban]

0136257]

So you are saying he battered his wife's arms to get his frustration out for her killing their two sons and then realised that he felt a lot better so stood by her side for 16 years

.

It has nothing to do with batterrng. He could have simply grabbed her in anger. She probably bruises easily. I bumped my shoulder on a doorway the other day and have a mild but visible bruise. It was barely a bump.

And now they're divorced - he's still standing by her knowing she's guilty?

Why wouldn't he? He doesn't want to admit to the world and his sole surviving son, who by they way is seriously ill, that he lied to protect the double DD's instead of exacting justice for his other two sons. Would not exaclty reflect well on him now would it?

OTOH, what does he gain by telling the truth? She is already on death row, so it's not like justice hasn't been served. Besides, the Darlieites would just call him a liar and discount it anyway so what possible up side is there to him speaking out now?

I think that is a little far fetched don't you?

Not in the slightest.

 

[TellTheTruth]

0136257].

It has nothing to do with batterrng. He could have simply grabbed her in anger. She probably bruises easily. I bumped my shoulder on a doorway the other day and have a mild but visible bruise. It was barely a bump.

So he took the time to grab her at every point from her wrists to her underarms (on both arms) with enough force to cause deep black bruising? Have a go on one of your arms now, that's some OCD he must have.

 

[chlban]

So he took the time to grab her at every point from her wrists to her underarms (on both arms) with enough force to cause deep black bruising? Have a go on one of your arms now, that's some OCD he must have.

So your theory is the intruder is the one with OCD?

 

[TellTheTruth]

So your theory is the intruder is the one with OCD?

I haven't got a theory. I'm just going through what seems highly improbable.

More likely to me is that she (if she is guilty):

...beat the hell out of her arms herself on the night or soon after (quite easy to do against a blunt surface).

OR (if she is innocent):

...beat off an intruder.

Either way, it just doesn't seem probably that Darlie would allow Darin the privilege of being on the outside if they were somehow in cahoots with each other, so I have to rule Darin out of it.

 

[chlban]

TellTheTruth;10137321]I haven't got a theory. I'm just going through what seems highly improbable.

More likely to me is that she (if she is guilty):

...beat the hell out of her arms herself on the night or soon after (quite easy to do against a blunt surface

).

Entirely possible. I just stated the Darrin grabbing her arm as a possibility.
She may well have done it herself.

OR (if she is innocent):

...beat off an intruder

.

She is not innocent.

Either way, it just doesn't seem probably that Darlie would allow Darin the privilege of being on the outside if they were somehow in cahoots with each other, so I have to rule Darin out of it

I don't think Darin was involved in the murders. I do think he knew right away that she had done it, or at least very strongly suspected it.

 

[TellTheTruth]

)
I don't think Darin was involved in the murders. I do think he knew right away that she had done it, or at least very strongly suspected it.

I find it improbable that he would 'go along' with her claims of innocence if he thought strongly enough that she was guilty.

It's not like he'd ever get the chance to see those triple D's again.

 

[Val830]

So you are saying he battered his wife's arms to get his frustration out for her killing their two sons and then realised that he felt a lot better so stood by her side for 16 years.

And now they're divorced - he's still standing by her knowing she's guilty?

I think that is a little far fetched don't you?

I do not consider it a stretch actually.

I don't claim to know how she got those bruises - but I would think a man filled with rage could very easily grab someone so tightly that they'd appear. Don't know - just a theory.

As far as sticking by her after all these years - first, he hasn't exactly been screaming from the rooftops about her innocence for several years now. Second, admitting things NOW puts him at risk for being charged with interfering with a criminal investigation or the possibility of being accused by Darlie's supporters. Third, he has a son who is sick with leukemia - I can imagine the stress of learning his mother really did do this would be horrible for him. Fourth, once a creep = always a creep.

 

[Val830]

I actually find the fact that Darin has not spoken publicly on the case for quite some time now to be more indicative of his belief in her guilt than innocence - if I were to wear my armchair psychologist hat.

His divorcing her and re-marrying means nothing to me either way. There is no reason anyone needs to remain celibate and alone their entire life on principle alone. People lose someone they love dearly and eventually they move on and try to find happiness in someone else. I wouldn't blame anyone for that.

However - Darlie Kee is still out there campaigning for her daughter. She's still fighting for her. It's apparently a full time job for her after all these years.

Look at parents of murdered children where the killer has not been found. They don't all have the exposure that this case has, but most of them will never find closure until their child's killer is caught.

But not Darin. Not a peep out of him in years.

What's that about? A woman he loved deeply and the mother of his chilrren has been wronged. The killer of his children is still out there apparently living his life free.

And Darin - who HAS a platform to speak and has an audience who will listen declines to be interviewed by Werner Herzog and stays mum about the case?

Seems weird to me.

 

[Val830]

And when was the last time Darlie Kee or Sarilda Routier pleaded with the public to help them find the killer of their grandsons?

Have they ever?

 

[CathyR]

Darin has not remarried.




Post a link to a marriage license if you have one?

 

[CathyR]

And when was the last time Darlie Kee or Sarilda Routier pleaded with the public to help them find the killer of their grandsons?

Have they ever?

Many, many, many, times.

Both have spoken their beliefs about her innocence and without help from the state unless someone else confesses they have little assistance and no help from law enforcement to do this until they get Darlie out of prison.


How dumb do you think the public is?

This is a perfect example of the twisted methods the prosecution used to convict her. Blame the victims family for not conducting their own investigation and apprehending a criminal.

The police must catch the killers as any hope of a conviction relies upon the evidence and the manner it is collected.

Otherwise a group of vigilantes could just start beating a confession out of every suspect.

I'd personally like a few minutes in room with a phone book and Detective Patterson's son. Even if I got a confession on tape it would not stand up in court.

What do you think all the efforts to get her conviction overturned means? That once freed they would just give up? No the next step would be to demand the police FIND who did the crime.

You are putting the cart in front of the horse and expecting us to believe that the family has not done enough. What a load of #$!@ is in that cart you have put in front of the horse!

 

[CathyR]

Maybe the same thing the family of Timothy Cole sought even after his death.


Truth.

Timothy was convicted mainly on eye witness testimony and the witness was wrong. DNA proved it and Timothy died in prison for a crime he didn't commit. He died of health issues not a death row inmate.

The family didn't give up after he died they knew their brother, and son. they knew he could not have committed the crime he was convicted of. They persisted and they overcame Texas Justice as his family knew he was not guilty.

His case didn't become famous until the family forced the issue.

He is the only person ever exonerated of a crime after his death by the governor himself.

Maybe Darlie's family is trying to prevent her death so the list doesn't grow to 2.

 

[Madeleine74]

Well this is the Camm investigating Routier thread. As such, I doubt Camm will discover what Darin's role or knowledge may have been, if anything. And Camm isn't going to throw thousands of $$ at forensic testing when so much testing has been done over the years.

So far, in nearly 18 yrs, there has been no evidence implicating someone else, let alone identifying this alleged mystery intruder who Darlie claimed to know (cf. her letters from prison). And without evidence proving an intruder (not Darlie supporters insisting there must have been one, but actually proving there was one) the case will stay as is and Darlie will stay in prison and on death row.

 

[jmix]

TellTheTruth;10115275]


Good Lord, if this case wasn't so tragic that would be downright laughable.
Kind of like having OJ Simpson investigate Casey Anthony's case.

No bias there, just one murderer investigating another.:scared:

Leaving dig at Simpson out, it is clear that David Camm would be an exceptionally poor choice to investigate this particular case and it calls into question the organization's thinking.

Since no suspect besides Camm has ever been named in his OWN case, it is simply going to muddy the waters having him look into the Routier debacle. It may even seal her fate as evidence may come forward that conclusively proves her guilt.

 

[Val830]

Darin has not remarried.




Post a link to a marriage license if you have one?

Yes, he has.

I don't have a marriage license.

In the recent episode of On Death Row, it was stated that Darin had remarried and declined to be interviewed for the show.

Believe it if you want, or don't. I am confident that Werner Herzog is such a stickler for facts and truth, that he would not have said Darin remarried if he didn't.

 

[Val830]

Many, many, many, times.

Both have spoken their beliefs about her innocence and without help from the state unless someone else confesses they have little assistance and no help from law enforcement to do this until they get Darlie out of prison.


How dumb do you think the public is?

This is a perfect example of the twisted methods the prosecution used to convict her. Blame the victims family for not conducting their own investigation and apprehending a criminal.

The police must catch the killers as any hope of a conviction relies upon the evidence and the manner it is collected.

Otherwise a group of vigilantes could just start beating a confession out of every suspect.

I'd personally like a few minutes in room with a phone book and Detective Patterson's son. Even if I got a confession on tape it would not stand up in court.

What do you think all the efforts to get her conviction overturned means? That once freed they would just give up? No the next step would be to demand the police FIND who did the crime.

You are putting the cart in front of the horse and expecting us to believe that the family has not done enough. What a load of #$!@ is in that cart you have put in front of the horse!

@@ - Nice try.

I have no authority to do anything to the Routier or Kee family. My opinion has zero bearing on the investigation or the fate of Darlie Routier.

I'm talking on the Internet about things I find interesting. My words do nothing.

The killer HAS been caught and I'm pretty sure that anyone who has the capacity to investigate this case knows that.

 

[Steel86]

They call it "fresh eyes" for a reason. And with touch DNA now available maybe the ankle part of the sock will be tested as opposed to just the toe area that the prosecution tested.

What do you mean by ankle part of the sock? Judith Floyd testified that she originally tested the toe part of the sock. She then went on to say she tested the toe, heel, and band of the sock:

7 Q. And on the sock, again, did you find
8 any samples that matched the blood of Darlie Routier?
9 A. Originally, when I had the sock, I
10 typed the toe, which gave a very faint typing matching
11 the D1S80 type of Darlie Routier.
12 Q. Okay. Do you have an opinion as a DNA
13 analyst as to why that sample came back to Darlie Routier
14 from the toe area? Do you have an idea of what you were
15 actually seeing there?
16 A. When I was asked to test the sock,
17 there was an interest in who might have been the wearer
18 of the sock. I tested the toe area, the heel area and
19 the band of the sock. Which typically, is a site where
20 you might obtain cells from the person having worn a
21 sock. And that is the reason that I chose that area, and
22 it did not appear to have blood stains in that particular
23 area.
24 Since I did obtain a faint typing, and
25 quite often, if you're going to get the person who might
1 have worn the sock, it's going to be fairly faint. And
2 that is a possibility

http://darliefacts.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/42_judith-floyd-2.pdf

And then the GeneScreen lab report dated December 2, 1996 states that the heel and band of the sock yielded no result:

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Motions/05012801.pdf

 

[Madeleine74]

The police did catch the killer in this case -- the one who had the means and opportunity and, more than some random fantasy guy, a motive. The evidence doesn't point to anyone outside the home. It was someone on the inside. 2 choices, 2 adults: either Darin or Darlie.

 

[TellTheTruth]

The police did catch the killer in this case -- the one who had the means and opportunity and, more than some random fantasy guy, a motive. The evidence doesn't point to anyone outside the home. It was someone on the inside. 2 choices, 2 adults: either Darin or Darlie.

The motive being?

 

[Val830]

The motive being?

Doesn't matter.

People kill without revealing their motive all the time.