I just listened to True Crime Garage’s recent 2 part podcast about Darlie’s case. This seems like the most recent thread about it but not sure.
Anyway, I lived in Dallas at the time, and I remember the local news playing the video of her laughing and dancing on their graves nightly. I was sure she did it. I haven’t followed the case, but after listening to the podcast I read through some of these threads and caught up a little. I’m not sure at all now that she did it. I’m not sure that she didn’t either, but I’m actually shocked that she was sent to death row with the evidence they have and don’t have. I have reasonable doubt for sure.
Just because they don’t have forensic evidence of an intruder doesn’t mean 100% there wasn’t one. And I don’t think they looked very hard to find one. MOO There were a couple of serial killers/rapists in the area at the time with the same MO. I wonder how hard they looked at them. Also what about the lady in the neighborhood who said one night earlier she had been downstairs sleeping on the couch and a man tried to break into her house? This info is from the podcast—I need to look into that. The sock down the street is weird and doesn’t make sense to me if staging the scene. They really think she left her house all bloody and ran down the street in the middle of a double murder to drop a sock? No. No one can convince me of that. That’s just dumb. Her wounds were not superficial. They weren’t fatal, but they very well could have been w/in mm.
My main problem is motive. There isn’t one. She was so full of rage at Darrin that she killed two of their kids? Why? What did he do? And if this was the case, would he really have stuck by her all these years when it would’ve been a heck of a lot easier to move on? Money? No. They got $5000 insurance per kid. They spent $14,000 on their funerals. She didn’t seem to have a boyfriend, which IMO is one of the biggest reasons mothers kill their kids. Plus she didn’t kill the baby so..That also doesn’t make sense if she didn’t want to be a mother anymore or was overwhelmed.
PPD and specifically Postpartum Psychosis makes the most sense to me if she did it. A psychotic break could account for memory loss about the murders. But still it’s weird because usually even with PPP they seem to know they did it but have really crazy reasoning. I’m thinking of Andrea Yates who drowned all her kids because she thought they were possessed and she was saving them.
I don’t see how Darrin had anything to do with it, because Darlie would know (she was there!) and why would she take the fall? Makes no sense.
There are so many questions here, and I have no idea if she did it or not, but the evidence they had doesn’t make me sure enough to sentence someone to death. One of the jurors has said if he had seen the TWO HOUR video of a somber, crying Darlie leading up to the silly string part he wouldn’t have convicted her. WOW. That was a mistake for the defense not to show it IMO.
Anyway, just my thoughts. People here seem to be really sure of her guilt or innocence, but I’m not sure how that is. There wasn’t much actual evidence IMO.
You're not going to learn the case listening to a podcast. There's far too much misinformation out there. The only way to learn the case is to read the transcripts, appeals, and view the exhibits. The reason for that is it's a circumstantial case. Meaning there's no direct evidence; ie, a confession (from Darlie) and no eyewitness (again Darlie). However, there's overwhelming evidence that points only to Darlie which is frankly way too long to list. Because you have to be aware of all the evidence until you understand how it all ties together. There is no smoking gun, she was convicted on the totality of the evidence.
The nature of circumstantial evidence is that it can be isolated, poked holes in, and argued. Except when all put together it forms a cohesive story.
For instance, the bread knife from the kitchen wood block cut the garage screen most likely from the outside (Charles Linch testimony), and the screen debris on the bread knife was upheld on appeal. So, what intruder will do that? It's staged. Moreover, the screen popped right out because the neighborhood kids would pop it out often to run in and get popsicles (Darin testimony).
We also know the butcher knife from the kitchen is consistent with all the boy's wounds (ME testimony) and hence the murder weapon. So, we're asked to believe an intruder somehow acquired the bread knife, cut the screen, stepped through the T-cut in the dark of night (2-2:30 am), in an unfamiliar home with a severely cluttered garage and disturbed nothing. There was even a large animal cage blocking a portion of the window (deterrent). This intruder then entered the kitchen, put the bread knife in the wood block and selected the butcher knife attacked the children with deep penetrating fatal wounds, compared to superficial slashes on the only adult. Stole nothing, departed the same way he came in, knocking a wine glass off the wine rack and despite blood being dripping down the utility room door, no blood or any trace of this man could be found in the garage, backyard, fence, and the broken gate was undisturbed. All fingerprints, DNA, footprints, blood all accounted for and no sign of an intruder.
OK, then we have Darlie who had access to all the knives. She can't keep her stories straight, not just that night but days afterward. She says she was stabbed on the couch, yet the majority of her blood was found at the sink compared to an inappreciable amount of her blood on the couch. She said she followed the 'intruder' to the utility room where he dropped the knife, yet since the intruder broke the wine glass, she'd walk right through it, and then said she picked up the knife and returned the same way.
The evidence however shows no cuts in her bare feet from the glass despite walking over it twice. Her blood was found under the glass shards. No sign of a bloody knife dropped on the floor in or around the utility room. She also claimed the intruder knocked over the vacuum cleaner, but again, her blood and bloody footprint was found under the vacuum cleaner, as well as on the handle. Wheel marks through her blood.
Then there's the old holey sock that was from the rag bin in the utility room. It has Darlie's DNA in the inside toe area and the boys' blood on the outside. It implicates only her. No one else can be forensically connected to it. It was found 75 yards down the ally in back of the home. Barbara Davis ran there and back in 50 seconds, and she was 20 years older than Darlie at the time.
Not only was Darlie's blood found at the sink, but so were Devon and Damon's and in the drain. Moreover, there was a clean up attempt revealed in and around the sink (faucet, cabinet...), with Darlie's bloody footprints found on the floor.
We're already seeing a much more revealing story. Darlie staged the garage screen cut and returned the bread knife. Darlie put on the sock, grabbed the butcher knife and stabbed both boys. She then went outside and planted the sock. She washed the knife in the sink, then cut herself at the sink. She then noticed Damon had moved across the family room, stabbed him a second time inflicting his fatal wound(s), finished staging the scene, broke the wine glass, screamed and called 911.
There's cast off blood on her sleep shirt supporting she stabbed the boys, and unexplainable practice cuts that correspond with none of her injuries.
Then came Darlie's many lies as the evidence was revealed. Despite being given a prior opportunity to add to her statement, her story expanded. She testified she was wetting towels and placing them on the boys. It was her attempt to explain away the sink cleanup. Except, no towels were found that contained the boys' blood diluted or otherwise. Moreover, you can't hear water running on the 911 call, and no officer or paramedic observed her doing this or found towels on the boys. She also never attempted to give first aid to her children.
She wrote her friends telling them she knew who did this and blamed Glenn Mize in letters from prison, only to have Glenn walk into court where she cleared him. She accused Gary Austin also, and lied about him being able to see her in the hot tub (enclosed spa) from his balcony. She insisted on the 911 call she said "I woke up. I was frightening." Which is ridiculous. She clearly says, "I woke up. I was fighting". Which was one of her original stories before she changed it to not fighting, but Damon waking her as she followed the intruder.
This is only a bit of the evidence as there was much more. Alan Brantley, FBI Behavioral Science Unit described the staging in depth. Tom Bevel expanded on the blood evidence. The medical personnel explained Darlie's superficial wounds which she continues to exaggerate. The ME's explained the boys' deep deadly wounds. Forensic personnel analyzed and presented their findings. It all illustrates that the evidence points only to Darlie. No one outside the home can be placed there, and Darin's story was consistent and followed the evidence.
The silly string tape was simply there to refute her character because the defense had portrayed her as the perfect loving Mom who was devastated. The police surveillance tape (alleged 2 hour somber Darlie tape) was provided to the defense who chose not to show it. We've never seen the full tape, so I don't know what is on it. Obviously, the defense found it unhelpful to Darlie.
The juror you cite was Charlie Samford. He was approached by the defense 5 years after trial. The defense allegedly introduced and argued new evidence to him outside of court, prosecutors and the deliberation process. That's against the rules of evidence, and his affidavit was tossed by the appellate Judge and the defense was lectured. Charlie returned to the Darlie's guilty camp long before he passed away.
Motive of course isn't required for conviction, and prosecutors didn't tie themselves to any one motive. Toby Shook was clear they didn't know the motive, which isn't uncommon.
MOO.
