Darlie's "Hypnosis"

[Anais]

Look at the 911 transcripts too because I think, I'm not sure, that an officer was present when she snapped back at him.
Darin objected to references of him and Dana during the Pardo test, could be because Darlie accused him of it too and their fight that they now admit to, was on his mind. Even if he wasn't having an affair with Dana coming that close to a discussion about what they could have been fighting about that night crossing his mind would also make him fail. They were not revealing that info at the time.
Knowing who did it now that I'm not sure.......
If he is in denial would he fail or would he be able to fool a test, because his denial would not allow him to think Darlie is guilty. That part perplexes me.

Gr you make an excellent point here as IMO it's exactly why I believe that Darin failed the polygraph.

 

[Anais]

Which leads me to believe that he knew she did when he came downstairs. Darlie sounds very defensive toward him, OCIMO

Wendy I agree with you 100%. Darlie sounds extremely defensive in her statements to Darin. Also her statement on "maybe we could have gotten a print or something" in regards to the knife really smacks of guilty. Your children are lying on the floor a bloody mess dying and you worry about that?! No way. (IMO)

Also, regardless of the fact that there was a prayer service prior to the "silly string party" and that Dana brought the silly string,and how each person grieves the death of a child (or children) differently I simply cannot wipe Darlie's face snapping gum and cracking that big smile out of memory.

In all honesty I don't know of another mother who'd carry on that way less than a week after her child's death-especially given the horrific and tragic magnitude of it all!

 

[whitywendy]

Wendy I agree with you 100%. Darlie sounds extremely defensive in her statements to Darin. Also her statement on "maybe we could have gotten a print or something" in regards to the knife really smacks of guilty. Your children are lying on the floor a bloody mess dying and you worry about that?! No way. (IMO)

Also, regardless of the fact that there was a prayer service prior to the "silly string party" and that Dana brought the silly string,and how each person grieves the death of a child (or children) differently I simply cannot wipe Darlie's face snapping gum and cracking that big smile out of memory.

In all honesty I don't know of another mother who'd carry on that way less than a week after her child's death-especially given the horrific and tragic magnitude of it all!

Yep, I agree with ya 100%!!!

Question - the prayer service was how many weeks after the murders? I am bewildered in regards to her bruises, because you don't see them in the Silly String Video right?

 

[Anais]

Yep, I agree with ya 100%!!!

Question - the prayer service was how many weeks after the murders? I am bewildered in regards to her bruises, because you don't see them in the Silly String Video right?

Actually the prayer service & silly string birthday bash (same day) wasn't more than a weeks afterwards of the murders!

 

[CyberLaw]

The reason the bruises were not on the film, is because they were "fabricated" to support a fabricated story that has no basis in reality.

When she went the Police station, her comment to the detectives is "isn't this one of the biggest things to happen in Rowlett. She acted like she was a celebrity and should be seen as such. The cops thought to themselves, that they had no doubt what so ever that Darlie killed the kids.

There is nothing strange, weird or anything else about this case. Women kills her two boys for her own selfish reason that are a motive to her and no one else.

Unless someone confesses to the crime and can provide details, Darlie will go to her death lying that she is an "innocent women".

Darlie does not deserve a new trial. That is just smoke and mirrors that she hopes people will ignore. But the ones, that see logic knows that she is where she belongs and she will end up with a a lethal injection.

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

Wendy I agree with you 100%. Darlie sounds extremely defensive in her statements to Darin. Also her statement on "maybe we could have gotten a print or something" in regards to the knife really smacks of guilty. Your children are lying on the floor a bloody mess dying and you worry about that?! No way. (IMO)

Also, regardless of the fact that there was a prayer service prior to the "silly string party" and that Dana brought the silly string,and how each person grieves the death of a child (or children) differently I simply cannot wipe Darlie's face snapping gum and cracking that big smile out of memory.

In all honesty I don't know of another mother who'd carry on that way less than a week after her child's death-especially given the horrific and tragic magnitude of it all!

Playing devil's advocate here and no I do not believe she is completely innocent, but I have witnessed a grieving parent act in a similiar manner. She lost her daughter in a car accident 1 week before her daughter's 9th bday. She was on meds for anxiety and depression on the day of her daughter's bday, btw. Darlie was on antidepressants and pain meds as well at the time. This other mother had a party for her daughter at the gravesite. There was music and balloons and candy. Everyone dressed as they would for any children's party. It was a celebration of her life. I honestly think entirely TOO MUCH is made of this tape. I also feel Darlie does deserve a new trial. I'm doing a case study for a class and am using this case. It wasn't handled properly, imo. Read the trial transcripts for yourself, they are full of info and insight.

Do I think she played a role in the boys murder? Yes, but I do not believe she acted alone. Go ahead and attack. I'm ready to debate.

 

[Mary456]

I honestly think entirely TOO MUCH is made of this tape.

Funny thing is, supporters are the ones who have made such a big deal of this tape, because they want people to believe that it's what convicted Darlie.

Antis - and the prosecution - are confident that the tape wasn't even needed for a conviction. It was only one piece of evidence, among hundreds, and a minor one at that.

 

[cami]

Now I am going to go listen to the 911 tape some more. I have only listened to it a couple of times (read it over and over). For some reason it is hard for me to listen to it.

I found it extremely hard to listen to and I was shaken but you have to listen a few times..then I got it..guilt all over that call. And her hysteria is just Darlie shouting...and faking crying.
Listen after she says "what, what, what. Then she hisses something to Darin about Damon..in a pissed off voice.

 

[whitywendy]

I found it extremely hard to listen to and I was shaken but you have to listen a few times..then I got it..guilt all over that call. And her hysteria is just Darlie shouting...and faking crying.
Listen after she says "what, what, what. Then she hisses something to Darin about Damon..in a pissed off voice.

Hey Cami - :blowkiss:

Have you gone to the website and listened to it recently? The sound quality isn't as good as it was when I first listened to it. I guess that is why I can't understand her this time around. I remember when I first listened to it, I could understand her completely.. well mostly. Anyhow now you really can't understand her. Maybe it's just my media player.

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

Funny thing is, supporters are the ones who have made such a big deal of this tape, because they want people to believe that it's what convicted Darlie.

Antis - and the prosecution - are confident that the tape wasn't even needed for a conviction. It was only one piece of evidence, among hundreds, and a minor one at that.

I agree Mary. They are the ones claiming that is the sole reason she was found guilty. I feel the prosecution could have gotten a guilty verdict in Kerrville w/o the tape. I think there were many factors that played into the verdict.

I'm not a fanatic who believes Darlie is innocent. I want to clear that up right away. I think Darin was involved up to his arse and both of them agreed she would be the one to 'play the part.' I don't think they thought any of this through to the end, just like the rest of their life. They thought she could do the whining and crying, have a huge bleeding neck wound, and walk away from the crime a victim. But it didn't go as they planned.

IMO many variables played into this verdict. The change of venue to Kerrville screwed Darlie over big time. It's a very conservative area and Darlie was (esp in 96) over the top. She had huge silicone implants, platinum blonde hair, wore fancy and revealing clothing, and was usually in full makeup. Today this look isn't at all a big deal, but in 96 in Kerrville, it was. I also feel going to trial in 8 months on a capital murder crime is insane. Her defense attys. should have submitted the rest of the silly string tape into evidence. They should have played on the depression and Darin should have admitted it WAS a big deal. She should have been off of ALL medications by the time the trial began so as to avoid the flat/non emotional appearance antidepressants etc can give. I do not feel her trial was fair.

I could go on, but I don't want to end up fighting with anyone. I think she deserves a new trial. In another state, she would have had one by now. NO ONE deserves to be put to death until all avenues have been exhausted. Retry her now, let the truth come out with Darin's involvement, and the outcome will be entirely different.

 

[whitywendy]

I have reading allot about Women on Death Row. It's weird how more than half of them are there for the killing their spouse or kids. The reason I bring this up is because one of the "factors" in deciding for the DP (or at least I thought) was whether this person would kill again and previous crimes. Now, I believe majority of the women on DP are there for their very 1st crime. My question is... do you think they are there because of the devastation of the crime.. meaning how could a mother do this, she should die just like her babies/husband did or do you really think the jurors actually thought that someone like Darlie would actually kill again. Do you really think these women are going to serve their time and return to free world, get married, have more babies and kill them again. I don't see it. HMMMMM

 

[CyberLaw]

Her defense attys. should have submitted the rest of the silly string tape into evidence.

They did have that opportunity to do so. You see in law unless there is a mistake of fact and law, you do not get to "do over" again what you should have done to begin with. Darlie had "EXCELLENT" lawyers who are instructed by their client.

They should have played on the depression and Darin should have admitted it WAS a big deal.

Well did she have a clinical diagnosis of depression. Was she on meds and seeing a someone. I would not have "played" on this as it is more likely that a person whom is depressed would commit the crime then not. She never admitted to the crime, so now you want to say "she was depressed", she claimed an intruder came in and killed the kids, so if you enter that she was depressed, how does that fit in with "I am innocent and an intruder killed my kids.

She should have been off of ALL medications by the time the trial began so as to avoid the flat/non emotional appearance antidepressants etc can give. I do not feel her trial was fair.

Oh I thought antidepressants are not a "mood drug" and will influence the flat and non emotional appearance. They work on the levels of the "feel good" hormone that will improve a person's mood, not take away from it.

A trial is not a "dress" play, where you conduct the trial, learn from anything you may or may not have done, then in the next trial do things differently. That only happens when their are facts of law involved. Not opps, my bad, lets do it again.

Darlie again, had excellent lawyers, had time to prepare, but in the end, you can have very good lawyers, but if the evidence points to your guilt and the jury rules, then you are found guilty.

There was a mountain of evidence, irrelevant of the "silly" string tape that convicted her. Like her never giving an accurate story twice, changing her story many times, lying on the stand, "not remembering" when questions were asked about different things that were not in her favor. Being evasive or "not remembering".

Of course when a person is found guilty of a crime, the first thing out of the mouth of "supporters" was the trial was not fair. Oh it was "fair" but just not the outcome that "the supporters" wanted.

Darlie to this day has manipulated and controlled people and has been doing so since the night of the murders. Some people can see right through this.........and are not manipulated by "smoke and "mirrors" but base their decision on facts and law.

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

My response is in red.

Her defense attys. should have submitted the rest of the silly string tape into evidence.

They did have that opportunity to do so. You see in law unless there is a mistake of fact and law, you do not get to "do over" again what you should have done to begin with. Darlie had "EXCELLENT" lawyers who are instructed by their client.

I KNOW they had the opportunity to introduce the entire tape. That was exactly my point! They DIDN"T! I also understand her defense team was comprised of excellent lawyers. However, everyone has an off case. A bad trial. This very case is used in law schools to show the mistakes made on both sides. It's used to teach law students what NOT to do. And of course lawyers are instructed by their clients, but lawyers can and do influence a client's decision and I'm sure Darin was in on the meetings between Darlie and the defense team.
They should have played on the depression and Darin should have admitted it WAS a big deal.

Well did she have a clinical diagnosis of depression. Was she on meds and seeing a someone. I would not have "played" on this as it is more likely that a person whom is depressed would commit the crime then not. She never admitted to the crime, so now you want to say "she was depressed", she claimed an intruder came in and killed the kids, so if you enter that she was depressed, how does that fit in with "I am innocent and an intruder killed my kids.

Yes I would have played on the depression factor. She was SICK! Her husband did nothing to help her mental health. And I wholly disagree with your statement of someone who is depressed is less likely to commit a crime. I could provide you with a very long and scary list of crimes commited by depressed persons I have treated. They are desperate and see no way out of their problems. It's a very dark place to find yourself in. Depending on the level of depression, time left untreated, and type of depression, some commit crimes as a way of acting out and crying for help. At the time, they don't realize that's what they are doing, but later they look back and see it as their cry for help. Others commit suicide.

AND if you re-read my post, I NEVER once say SODDI. I never believed there was an intruder and I never will. But I do believe Darin is guilty and I do believe Darlie deserves a new trial.

So explain to me why a new trial is such a threat? You can't tell me you agree 100% with the handling of this trial.

She should have been off of ALL medications by the time the trial began so as to avoid the flat/non emotional appearance antidepressants etc can give. I do not feel her trial was fair.

Oh I thought antidepressants are not a "mood drug" and will influence the flat and non emotional appearance. They work on the levels of the "feel good" hormone that will improve a person's mood, not take away from it.

Honestly, have you ever read ANYTHING on antidepressants? Seratonin is a feel good chemical (not hormone) as you put it, but each person metabolizes the medication differently. Brain chemistry is not the same in everyone. Then there's the level of depression, time on the medication, outside factors, and dosage. It's not an exact science. If you and I were at the same level of depression and were given Zoloft (for example) at the appropriate dosage for our weight/height we would NOT have the same experience with the drug. In some, SSRI's give a flat and unfeeling appearance. I have seen people lose their spouse, parent, and yes a child...they had a difficult time expressing their emotions outwardly. In others SSRI's can intensify emotions. And in still others, they can provide a nice healthy balance. Darlie went to trial in less than 9 months following the murders. I have treated people who were still trying to find the RIGHT mix of medications and dosages which worked well for them A YEAR down the road.
SSRI's are not a feel good, happy all the time medication. They are not an exact science either. It can take many months of medication and therapy to find a level playing field.

A trial is not a "dress" play, where you conduct the trial, learn from anything you may or may not have done, then in the next trial do things differently. That only happens when their are facts of law involved. Not opps, my bad, lets do it again.

Darlie again, had excellent lawyers, had time to prepare, but in the end, you can have very good lawyers, but if the evidence points to your guilt and the jury rules, then you are found guilty.

There was a mountain of evidence, irrelevant of the "silly" string tape that convicted her. Like her never giving an accurate story twice, changing her story many times, lying on the stand, "not remembering" when questions were asked about different things that were not in her favor. Being evasive or "not remembering".

Of course when a person is found guilty of a crime, the first thing out of the mouth of "supporters" was the trial was not fair. Oh it was "fair" but just not the outcome that "the supporters" wanted.

Look, we all have different opinions about everything in this life. I am basing my educated opinion on the law and facts. And in my opinion, the woman deserves a new trial. I know it's not an oops, let's do it again situation.
Why must it become a situation where the one's who are against a new trial feel they must belittle those who feel she deserves a new trial? I, for one, am not an uneducated idiot who is fooled by her manipulation and smoke and mirrors, as you put it. I do not have blind faith and I do not believe her to be 100% innocent. I do believe her trial was rushed into, I believe mistakes were made on BOTH sides, and I believe Darin played a part in the murders.
Honestly, the woman's depression could have bordered on post partum psychosis at that point. She was not in her right mind. That's my educated opinion. I'm not defending the murder of children blindly. The boys are gone and nothing can change that, but I do not believe justice was properly served. And I am entitled to that opinion.
Darlie to this day has manipulated and controlled people and has been doing so since the night of the murders. Some people can see right through this.........and are not manipulated by "smoke and "mirrors" but base their decision on facts and law.

 

[whitywendy]

The issue with the depression is that DARLIE refused to acknowledge that she was depressed. She stated on the stand that once she got her period back, she was back to normal. This is in the transcripts. Even though Darin admitted she was having issues with the Social Worker, they still sat in court and denied, denied, denied. WHY, IMO because they would be a reason for her murdering her boys.

We all have our opinions. And I do believe most of us here respect the other's opinion. IMO I do not believe Darin was involved in the murders as you believe he was.

Question: What do they point out in law classes as to what went wrong on both sides. I keep hearing about this case discussion in law classes but no one tells what they are saying was so wrong.

 

[Blondieskatz]

I don't post on this case, but I've read evrything I could about it including the transcripts.

WhityWendy~ it seems to me if Darlie had admitted to being depressed and taking medication it would've helped her case. Her attorney's could've argued that she was on medication that night and it made her groggy...thus being the reason she wasn't awakened while the "intruder" was murdering her children. But, I don't think even the heaviest sleeper could have slept through that. IMO

 

[cami]

I don't post on this case, but I've read evrything I could about it including the transcripts.

WhityWendy~ it seems to me if Darlie had admitted to being depressed and taking medication it would've helped her case. Her attorney's could've argued that she was on medication that night and it made her groggy...thus being the reason she wasn't awakened while the "intruder" was murdering her children. But, I don't think even the heaviest sleeper could have slept through that. IMO

Can't argue what isn't there. Darlie's tox screen showed only that she had ingested amphetemines the night of the murders.....not antidepressants (and imo that's why she couldn't sleep at night...the amphetemines not the baby rolling in it's crib).

Darlie and Darin refused to give her attornies any mitigating factors as to why she would have committed this crime. This was not guilty all the way, she's innocent.

 

[cami]

Hey Cami - :blowkiss:

Have you gone to the website and listened to it recently? The sound quality isn't as good as it was when I first listened to it. I guess that is why I can't understand her this time around. I remember when I first listened to it, I could understand her completely.. well mostly. Anyhow now you really can't understand her. Maybe it's just my media player.

No, I don't trust that website. I have the call burned to a cd so I can listen on my cd player at home with headphones and I can listen on my computer where I can slow it down.

 

[cami]

The issue with the depression is that DARLIE refused to acknowledge that she was depressed. She stated on the stand that once she got her period back, she was back to normal. This is in the transcripts. Even though Darin admitted she was having issues with the Social Worker, they still sat in court and denied, denied, denied. WHY, IMO because they would be a reason for her murdering her boys.

We all have our opinions. And I do believe most of us here respect the other's opinion. IMO I do not believe Darin was involved in the murders as you believe he was.

Question: What do they point out in law classes as to what went wrong on both sides. I keep hearing about this case discussion in law classes but no one tells what they are saying was so wrong.

Yes I'd like to know the answer to that as well. And why she/he thinks this trial was unfair. Why would a law professor bring this case to his class...all you have to do is follow the blood evidence and you know who's guilty. Perhaps the state should have waited to arrest until they had more of an air tight case....she wasn't going anywhere.

 

[cami]

IMO many variables played into this verdict. The change of venue to Kerrville screwed Darlie over big time. It's a very conservative area and Darlie was (esp in 96) over the top. She had huge silicone implants, platinum blonde hair, wore fancy and revealing clothing, and was usually in full makeup. Today this look isn't at all a big deal, but in 96 in Kerrville, it was. I also feel going to trial in 8 months on a capital murder crime is insane. Her defense attys. should have submitted the rest of the silly string tape into evidence. They should have played on the depression and Darin should have admitted it WAS a big deal. She should have been off of ALL medications by the time the trial began so as to avoid the flat/non emotional appearance antidepressants etc can give. I do not feel her trial was fair.

She didn't look like that by the time she was tried. her defense covered her up and toned her down. However it fits with the prosecution's theory of why she committed this crime so it's circumstantial evidence isn't it? I too think it's best left out but juries want a motive. I believe the blood and fibre evidence was more than enough to prove her guilt.

 

[Blondieskatz]

I'm confused Cami by reading your response to my post and to Pocono I can't decide if you think she's innocent or guilty. Which one is it? Not being confrontational just curious.

If you do think she is innocent; who do you think did it?