Looky what beesy found!!

beesy · Feb 14, 2006

I know this has been discussed before, but I thought I'd refresh memories
In Darin's first hand-written statement, taken on the day of the funeral, he says he came downstairs nude(ew). Then after the cops arrived he ran back upstairs to put his pants on. He even says "I noticed my wallet hitting the floor". So he puts himself coming downstairs 2x. The first time sounds real to me. He wrote that while upstairs getting his pants, all he could think of was getting Karen to help. I don't understand what he's saying right here: "I needed someone to help some and held(sic) the paramedics when they arrived." Does he mean help? Why would the paramedics need help? Why isn't he getting her to help until the medics arrive? It sounds like this is the first time he's thought of getting Karen, even though he was caught outside by Waddell. In one of the stories he says he was on his way to get her and that's why he was outside. He doesn't say anything about being outside in this statement.
He wrote that after checking on Devon and seeing the holes in his chest, he ran to check Damon, who was laying on the floor in the hallway between the wall and the side of the couch, near the bathroom. Very descriptive, huh? Is that for a reason? He wrote "he had no pulse, but I could not see any injury(sic)"
This is transcribed in Springer's Flesh and Blood. Since it is transcribed word for word and not just mentioned, I feel like we can trust it. pages 95-96

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

Beesy, I think the reason he was outside...was to finish making the plant of the sock or throwing the sock and other things into the street drain, which ever theory you believe. Everyone knows that Darin was mad at the police for not telling him until much later about the sock. I think the reason he was mad is because he was going to use that sock to say ...see...there was someone in here and they took a sock when they left. Others think he was mad because it made them look guilty and they should have told them of the sock right away. Darin HAD to think of some reason he was outside...so I think he used the neighbor friend story as a cover. If it had been me...and my kids were dying...I would not have wasted time being outside when I knew the police and ambulance were already on the way. Darin did lots of strange things that night. He also did one SMART thing too. He didn't wear a shirt. The second smart thing he did was INSIST that the lawyer they hired did NOT point the finger his direction. He looks and plays a fool well. Maybe he is smarter than we give the fool credit for. He also has managed to keep a low profile all these years. Anyone else find it funny that he didn't show up for this last hearing? Even if the court didn't let me into the hearing...I still would have shown up...especially if it was about my innocent

wife on death row!

justice2 · Feb 17, 2006

deandaniellws said:
Beesy, I think the reason he was outside...was to finish making the plant of the sock or throwing the sock and other things into the street drain, which ever theory you believe. Everyone knows that Darin was mad at the police for not telling him until much later about the sock. I think the reason he was mad is because he was going to use that sock to say ...see...there was someone in here and they took a sock when they left. Others think he was mad because it made them look guilty and they should have told them of the sock right away. Darin HAD to think of some reason he was outside...so I think he used the neighbor friend story as a cover. If it had been me...and my kids were dying...I would not have wasted time being outside when I knew the police and ambulance were already on the way. Darin did lots of strange things that night. He also did one SMART thing too. He didn't wear a shirt. The second smart thing he did was INSIST that the lawyer they hired did NOT point the finger his direction. He looks and plays a fool well. Maybe he is smarter than we give the fool credit for. He also has managed to keep a low profile all these years. Anyone else find it funny that he didn't show up for this last hearing? Even if the court didn't let me into the hearing...I still would have shown up...especially if it was about my innocent wife on death row!

OK, not following. Why was it smart that he didn't wear a shirt.

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

justice2 said:
OK, not following. Why was it smart that he didn't wear a shirt.

Because any cast off blood that showed he might have participated in or was near when the killings happened could not be tested or proved. They only had the jeans...and for some reason, even those were not tested. I still think he was totally involved in this. However, I guess the police don't think he was involved...or if they do, they know they don't have the evidence to back it up.

beesy · Feb 17, 2006

deandaniellws said:
Because any cast off blood that showed he might have participated in or was near when the killings happened could not be tested or proved. They only had the jeans...and for some reason, even those were not tested. I still think he was totally involved in this. However, I guess the police don't think he was involved...or if they do, they know they don't have the evidence to back it up.

The jeans didn't have any spatter on them. They were just bloody. And he covered his butt by saying he was near all 3 victims, and the blood pattern/lack of on his jeans backed him up. So Dufus lucked up!

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

beesy said:
The jeans didn't have any spatter on them. They were just bloody. And he covered his butt by saying he was near all 3 victims, and the blood pattern/lack of on his jeans backed him up. So Dufus made it!

Yeah...he is a lucky FREAKING dufus!!!!:razz:

beesy · Feb 17, 2006

Getting a little hostile Pam? LOL My big problem with his statement is he says Damon had no pulse, but he saw no injury. What? That makes no sense!

beesy · Feb 17, 2006

deandaniellws said:
Beesy, I think the reason he was outside...was to finish making the plant of the sock or throwing the sock and other things into the street drain, which ever theory you believe. Everyone knows that Darin was mad at the police for not telling him until much later about the sock. I think the reason he was mad is because he was going to use that sock to say ...see...there was someone in here and they took a sock when they left. Others think he was mad because it made them look guilty and they should have told them of the sock right away.

Click to expand...

Thats why I think he was dumping the sock. Huge risk to set up lie, HUGE. I think he was upset when he found out about the sock for two reasons, 1. he thought he'd made it and the sock was gone or 2. He knew he missed but hadn't told the Queen of the castle yet. When did he find that out in relation to those bruises on her arm?

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

beesy said:
Getting a little hostile Pam? LOL My big problem with his statement is he says Damon had no pulse, but he saw no injury. What? That makes no sense!

Yeah..I caught that too. Just a little....does it show!?!?!?!

They could not afford for either child to live.

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

beesy said:
Thats why I think he was dumping the sock. Huge risk to set up lie, HUGE. I think he was upset when he found out about the sock for two reasons, 1. he thought he'd made it and the sock was gone or 2. He knew he missed but hadn't told the Queen of the castle yet. When did he find that out in relation to those bruises on her arm?
[url="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/8/8_1_224.gif"]http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/8/8_1_224.gif[/url]

Ok...say we buy into the dumping theory......why do they get so upset? Why worry about the sock? It didn't prove or disprove anything. Of course....unless he thought the sock MIGHT get them to looking into the gutter for other things???? Hummmmmm could that be it? OR, as you have said, not wanting to get the B*tch of the hill's panties(thong) twisted into knots. I just don't really see what the sock did or did not prove. Am I missing something here?

SanQuentinvisitor · Feb 17, 2006

beesy said:
Thats why I think he was dumping the sock. Huge risk to set up lie, HUGE. I think he was upset when he found out about the sock for two reasons, 1. he thought he'd made it and the sock was gone or 2. He knew he missed but hadn't told the Queen of the castle yet. When did he find that out in relation to those bruises on her arm?

Hi Beesy........I am lurking in this Darlie thread (and trying really hard to read all I can so as not to make you all answer things you've already answered) BUT, can I ask why he was throwing out a sock that only had a few drops (if that) of blood on it? I could see if the sock was drenched in blood but a drop or two on a sock that might have been nearby could have just been part of the scene, no? What else do you think might have been tossed in the drain? A shirt he was wearing maybe? Even if the sock had Darlies DNA on it, how does tossing it help or hurt this case? Why toss anything out?

Just trying to understand.

PS..........I feel that Darin was as much a part of this as Darlie was....JMO.........back to lurking/reading.

SanQuentinvisitor · Feb 17, 2006

deandaniellws said:
Ok...say we buy into the dumping theory......why do they get so upset? Why worry about the sock? It didn't prove or disprove anything. Of course....unless he thought the sock MIGHT get them to looking into the gutter for other things???? Hummmmmm could that be it? OR, as you have said, not wanting to get the B*tch of the hill's panties(thong) twisted into knots. I just don't really see what the sock did or did not prove. Am I missing something here? <entirely possible...lol>

Oops.......sorry you and I said the same thing about the sock....

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

SanQuentinvisitor said:
Hi Beesy........I am lurking in this Darlie thread (and trying really hard to read all I can so as not to make you all answer things you've already answered) BUT, can I ask why he was throwing out a sock that only had a few drops (if that) of blood on it? I could see if the sock was drenched in blood but a drop or two on a sock that might have been nearby could have just been part of the scene, no? What else do you think might have been tossed in the drain? A shirt he was wearing maybe? Even if the sock had Darlies DNA on it, how does tossing it help or hurt this case? Why toss anything out?

Just trying to understand.

PS..........I feel that Darin was as much a part of this as Darlie was....JMO.........back to lurking/reading.

We don't know either SQV!:doh: That's why we drive around in circles! :crazy:

SanQuentinvisitor · Feb 17, 2006

deandaniellws said:
We don't know either SQV!:doh: That's why we drive around in circles! :crazy:

yeah, I can see that. :crazy: :laugh: I am so intrigued by this case. Not that I find Darlie particularly intriguing but that she/they committed such an awful crime and the reasonings are so vague and off the wall. Why leave the baby alive? She was in no better situation with infant still alive as she was with the other two. I have more than one kid and one is as expensive as three.........

I am trying to catch up......Read a few versions of her stories but am getting a bit redeyed by the small discrepencies........... Intruder- Intruder(s)- attempt sexual assault or just an attack???

There is no rational reason why a person or persons would break into a home with 'lights from a TV on'- walk into a room and slaughter two babies/ leaving the adult who could identify them to be the last attack and NOT take a single thing or head up stairs to kill the male in the home..........didn't happen. IMO.

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

SanQuentinvisitor said:
yeah, I can see that. :crazy: :laugh: I am so intrigued by this case. Not that I find Darlie particularly intriguing but that she/they committed such an awful crime and the reasonings are so vague and off the wall. Why leave the baby alive? She was in no better situation with infant still alive as she was with the other two. I have more than one kid and one is as expensive as three.........

I am trying to catch up......Read a few versions of her stories but am getting a bit redeyed by the small discrepencies........... Intruder- Intruder(s)- attempt sexual assault or just an attack???

There is no rational reason why a person or persons would break into a home with 'lights from a TV on'- walk into a room and slaughter two babies/ leaving the adult who could identify them to be the last attack and NOT take a single thing or head up stairs to kill the male in the home..........didn't happen. IMO.

Of course it didn't. I don't think they thought they could get away with killing all three kids, yet leaving both of them alive...so he was spared. Poor kid. I wonder if he will one day wake up and all of the sudden be afraid of his parents?

justice2 · Feb 17, 2006

deandaniellws said:
Because any cast off blood that showed he might have participated in or was near when the killings happened could not be tested or proved. They only had the jeans...and for some reason, even those were not tested. I still think he was totally involved in this. However, I guess the police don't think he was involved...or if they do, they know they don't have the evidence to back it up.

Oh, duh. That makes sense. Thanks. I'm just now reading Bevel's testimony.

I have wondered at times if Darin cut her throat so that Darlie's blood would supposidly cover up the kid's blood on her shirt. I mean where else would you have cut if you wanted to drip blood on your shirt. I know this is out there, just one of those ideas that has popped into my head.

beesy · Feb 17, 2006

SanQuentinvisitor said:
yeah, I can see that. :crazy: :laugh: I am so intrigued by this case. Not that I find Darlie particularly intriguing but that she/they committed such an awful crime and the reasonings are so vague and off the wall. Why leave the baby alive? She was in no better situation with infant still alive as she was with the other two. I have more than one kid and one is as expensive as three

Click to expand...

Simple, she didn't want to kill the baby. Money was at the root, but there was so much more. I think she likes babies. I think she possibly felt she messed up with Damon and Darin, they were so hard to handle(her words), so let's try again. It's not that simple either, but I think that was in the motive somewhere.

I am trying to catch up......Read a few versions of her stories but am getting a bit redeyed by the small discrepencies........... Intruder- Intruder(s)- attempt sexual assault or just an attack

Click to expand...

Darlie has 16 different stories, at least that have been recorded, who knows what else she's told? Which one are you talking about? LOL
Sometimes the man is already leaving, sometimes he's struggling with her, and other times he's right beside her.

There is no rational reason why a person or persons would break into a home with 'lights from a TV on'- walk into a room and slaughter two babies/ leaving the adult who could identify them to be the last attack and NOT take a single thing or head up stairs to kill the male in the home..........didn't happen. IMO.

Don't forget he had to hunt for a weapon!
Nope, no reason at all. How often do you hear about children being murdered while the adults(one right there) were left alive? Children are usually snatched from the house and then raped and murdered elsewhere. The intruder had no doubt the adult female he had just "struggled with" "looked at" "run from" on the couch was alive since he saw her get up and follow him. One point that really bothers me is she said she turned around to hit the light in the kitchen. She turned her back on a strange man who was in her house in the middle of the night. She had 2 little boys to guard and a big husband not very far away to scream for, yet she endangers her life and her boys' lives by following this stranger. What?

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

justice2 said:
Oh, duh. That makes sense. Thanks. I'm just now reading Bevel's testimony.

I have wondered at times if Darin cut her throat so that Darlie's blood would supposidly cover up the kid's blood on her shirt. I mean where else would you have cut if you wanted to drip blood on your shirt. I know this is out there, just one of those ideas that has popped into my head.

The experts believe Darlie cut her own throat because it is at an angle that follows the pattern of most self inflicted injuries. Also, in the throat cut, there were signs of hesitation. I think Darin stabbed her arm though.

deanws · Feb 17, 2006

Yeah beesy....the turning around bothered me too. Think about it.....would YOU put your back to someone who just gutted your children? That was a mess up statement for sure!!! I bet the cops raised their eyebrows on that one!

beesy · Feb 17, 2006

SanQuentinvisitor said:
Hi Beesy........I am lurking in this Darlie thread (and trying really hard to read all I can so as not to make you all answer things you've already answered) BUT, can I ask why he was throwing out a sock that only had a few drops (if that) of blood on it? I could see if the sock was drenched in blood but a drop or two on a sock that might have been nearby could have just been part of the scene, no? What else do you think might have been tossed in the drain? A shirt he was wearing maybe? Even if the sock had Darlies DNA on it, how does tossing it help or hurt this case? Why toss anything out?

Just trying to understand.

PS..........I feel that Darin was as much a part of this as Darlie was....JMO.........back to lurking/reading.

That's another reason I don't think the sock was a plant. Darlie and Darin wouldn't know anything about blood spatter patterns. They would have just dunked the sock in some blood to make a plant, I think. A huge risk was taken to run it down there, just for a plant? Nah..Darlie's DNA was found inside the sock. She would have had to have alot of contact with it for her DNA to get there. That sock was used somehow and it was important enough for them to worry about it. I don't think she wore it during the murders. Wouldn't it make the knife too slipperly? I've been thinking that she used it to bite down on while cutting herself. I just don't know. There might not have been anything else thrown away at all. I don't think Darin ever had a shirt on. He was asleep in June, in TX. It's hot. A shritless Darin makes sense. If there were another knife, I'd think they'd plant that somewhere, not dump it. What was the importance of that sock? Maybe they just thought it would give them away? Even if there had been an intruder, what would he have used the sock for?

Looky what beesy found!!

myspace.com/beesy_boo

Former Member

New Member

Former Member

myspace.com/beesy_boo

Former Member

myspace.com/beesy_boo

myspace.com/beesy_boo

Former Member

Former Member

SQ Information booth...;)

SQ Information booth...;)

Former Member

SQ Information booth...;)

Former Member

New Member

myspace.com/beesy_boo

Former Member

Former Member

myspace.com/beesy_boo

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics