Darlie's injuries

[Sinsaint]

Tommy Lynn Sells was caught and his execution date has just been scheduled (for this April). Sells didn't kill the Routier boys.

Sells bypassed a young male teen, the mom, and a younger (10 yr old) sister, all sleeping, in that last crime. Sells specifically went in to the trailer to sexually assault the 13 yr old girl he did kill--she was his target. He cut off her clothes with his knife (he brought his own weapon, btw, unlike the Routier case). He later slit her throat twice (before any other stab wounds). Then the 2nd young gal whose neck he also slit (ie. his 2nd victim that night) nearly died--she was sharing a bunk bed and the reason she was attacked was because she was in the same room and thus was a witness. Her injuries, unlike Darlie's, really were life threatening. Her windpipe was severed.

The surviving victim was able to describe her attacker to the point where a sketch could be drawn up and circulated. That helped catch him.

Point is: Sells did have a motive and it was sexual assault.

What motive did the "intruder" into the Routier home have? Sexual assault? Robbery? He didn't do either of those things.

I never said Sells killed the Routier boys. I said he attacked two victims in the same attack and the victims had differing wounds. Darlie's wounds were also life threatening. She didn't exactly have a paper cut on her neck. The surviving witness in that case was also awake prior to the attack and witnessed everything done to her friend prior to her being attacked. Had the girl been asleep and only woke up during the attack on herself there is no guarantee she could have identified the guy.

The intruders motive may have been a sexual assault and/or robbery that went wrong. Crimes not panning out exactly as the perpetrator intended has been known to happen.

Point is: You have no idea there wasn't an intended crime that fell apart once he got in there.

 

[Madeleine74]

Point is: You have no idea there wasn't an intended crime that fell apart once he got in there.

The bigger point is: there is no evidence of an intruder at all in the Routier household. A smudged fingerprint and 2 limb hairs inside a sock aren't proving it. Look at the map of all the blood in the scene. Where are the footprints (any footprints) by an intruder? How did the intruder get into the house? Testimony is the dust on the windowsill was undisturbed. How did the intruder get out of the house? Not through that slit screen he didn't. Show me the evidence.

 

[PamelaC123]

I never said Sells killed the Routier boys. I said he attacked two victims in the same attack and the victims had differing wounds. Darlie's wounds were also life threatening. She didn't exactly have a paper cut on her neck. The surviving witness in that case was also awake prior to the attack and witnessed everything done to her friend prior to her being attacked. Had the girl been asleep and only woke up during the attack on herself there is no guarantee she could have identified the guy.

The intruders motive may have been a sexual assault and/or robbery that went wrong. Crimes not panning out exactly as the perpetrator intended has been known to happen.

Point is: You have no idea there wasn't an intended crime that fell apart once he got in there.

And you have no proof that there was an intended crime that fell apart once he "got in there." The alleged intruder walked right past a Rolex watch as well as several other pieces of jewelry laying right there on the counter as he went into the kitchen to get a knife. There is nothing that indicates robbery or a sexual assault.

http://www.guiltybydefault.com/transcripts/volumes/vol-40.php#1

 

[Sinsaint]

The bigger point is: there is no evidence of an intruder at all in the Routier household. A smudged fingerprint and 2 limb hairs inside a sock aren't proving it. Look at the map of all the blood in the scene. Where are the footprints (any footprints) by an intruder? How did the intruder get into the house? Testimony is the dust on the windowsill was undisturbed. How did the intruder get out of the house? Not through that slit screen he didn't. Show me the evidence.

Lol... Yea, testimony that there was no undisturbed dust on the windowsill. Hamilton testified he started dusting for prints at the windowsill at around 10:00 a.m. Linch showed up at 12:30 p.m. And somehow he observed this "fine layer of dust on the windowsill" as well. Care to tell me exactly how that works?

BTW, the screen was also bent at the bottom. Did Darlie do that too?

 

[Sinsaint]

And you have no proof that there was an intended crime that fell apart once he "got in there." The alleged intruder walked right past a Rolex watch as well as several other pieces of jewelry laying right there on the counter as he went into the kitchen to get a knife. There is nothing that indicates robbery or a sexual assault.

http://www.guiltybydefault.com/transcripts/volumes/vol-40.php#1

The rape kit might have shed some light on that. Oh, silly me. That has since disappeared.

 

[PamelaC123]

The rape kit might have shed some light on that. Oh, silly me. That has since disappeared.

Nothing "disappeared." There was no rape kit.

Baylor didn't do full rape kits. They gave her a pelvic exam.

3 Q. Okay. Now, later on did you try to
4 coordinate some type of rape exam?
5 A. Yes, sir, I did
6 Q. Why was there a rape exam being
7 conducted, or going to be conducted?
8 A. I don't know why it was brought up. I
9 don't know if it -- I don't know who decided to do that.
10 One of the residents asked me how do we set up a rape
11 exam for someone in the intensive care unit. And I
12 called the emergency department and found out who the
13 OB/GYN that was on call for the day was, and set that up
14 through Dr. Santos and Dr. Gogel.
15 Q. Okay. Now, did you want to explain
16 that procedure to Mrs. Routier?
17 A. Yes, sir, I did.
18 Q. Okay. And, what did you say to her?
19 A. I tried to -- I asked her if she
20 understood what we were going to do. Did she understand
21 what a rape exam was? I explained to her that we didn't
22 do a full rape kit at Baylor Hospital, because those are
23 done at Parkland, but did she understand that it would be
24 like, just a normal GYN exam. Was she okay with that. I
25 had asked her, did she think she had been raped.
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
1031

1 Q. What was her response when you asked
2 her that?
3 A. She told me something like, "Well,
4 when I woke up I felt a pressure down there."

http://www.guiltybydefault.com/transcripts/volumes/vol-31.php#5

 

[Sinsaint]

Nothing "disappeared." There was no rape kit.

Baylor didn't do full rape kits. They gave her a pelvic exam.

3 Q. Okay. Now, later on did you try to
4 coordinate some type of rape exam?
5 A. Yes, sir, I did
6 Q. Why was there a rape exam being
7 conducted, or going to be conducted?
8 A. I don't know why it was brought up. I
9 don't know if it -- I don't know who decided to do that.
10 One of the residents asked me how do we set up a rape
11 exam for someone in the intensive care unit. And I
12 called the emergency department and found out who the
13 OB/GYN that was on call for the day was, and set that up
14 through Dr. Santos and Dr. Gogel.
15 Q. Okay. Now, did you want to explain
16 that procedure to Mrs. Routier?
17 A. Yes, sir, I did.
18 Q. Okay. And, what did you say to her?
19 A. I tried to -- I asked her if she
20 understood what we were going to do. Did she understand
21 what a rape exam was? I explained to her that we didn't
22 do a full rape kit at Baylor Hospital, because those are
23 done at Parkland, but did she understand that it would be
24 like, just a normal GYN exam. Was she okay with that. I
25 had asked her, did she think she had been raped.
Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
1031

1 Q. What was her response when you asked
2 her that?
3 A. She told me something like, "Well,
4 when I woke up I felt a pressure down there."

http://www.guiltybydefault.com/transcripts/volumes/vol-31.php#5

I'm well aware Baylor didn't do a full rape exam. Typically suspected rape victims were sent to Parkland. But there is this...



Hmmm... Samples were taken? Samples were sent? Sounds like some type of evidence was collected. Mind explaining to me where exactly those samples got to? What did they sent to the lab? Pictures of Darlie's vagina?

 

[Sinsaint]

No explanation for the knives that were lied about, the bent screen that was cut from the outside or the missing rape kit, oh, excuse me... Partial rape exam that included a wet smear that was sent to the lab?

Okay, got it.

 

[PamelaC123]

I'm well aware Baylor didn't do a full rape exam. Typically suspected rape victims were sent to Parkland. But there is this...



Hmmm... Samples were taken? Samples were sent? Sounds like some type of evidence was collected. Mind explaining to me where exactly those samples got to? What did they sent to the lab? Pictures of Darlie's vagina?

"I'm well aware Baylor didn't do a full rape exam. Typically suspected rape victims were sent to Parkland. But there is this..."

Well, that's not what you said. You were asking about the "rape kit" that "disappeared" and there wasn't one.

"Hmmm... Samples were taken? Samples were sent? Sounds like some type of evidence was collected."

Yeah, like I said, they gave her a pelvic exam. Wet smear, cultures for chlamydia, etc., and the doctor said he would also order other testing for HIV, etc. It also says zero perineum lesions, zero labial or perineal lacerations, that the vagina was clear (minus a small amount of white discharge) - zero lacerations or lesions. Also says no evidence for sexual assault.... isn't that what you were concerned about? Whether or not Darlie might have been raped?

"Mind explaining to me where exactly those samples got to? What did they sent to the lab? Pictures of Darlie's vagina?""

Ask Darlie's mother. I'm sure she has Darlie's medical reports, although I'm not sure what Darlie having chlamydia, HIV, etc. would have to do with whether or not she was raped.

 

[Sinsaint]

"I'm well aware Baylor didn't do a full rape exam. Typically suspected rape victims were sent to Parkland. But there is this..."

Well, that's not what you said. You were asking about the "rape kit" that "disappeared" and there wasn't one.

"Hmmm... Samples were taken? Samples were sent? Sounds like some type of evidence was collected."

Yeah, like I said, they gave her a pelvic exam. Wet smear, cultures for chlamydia, etc., and the doctor said he would also order other testing for HIV, etc. It also says zero perineum lesions, zero labial or perineal lacerations, that the vagina was clear (minus a small amount of white discharge) - zero lacerations or lesions. Also says no evidence for sexual assault.... isn't that what you were concerned about? Whether or not Darlie might have been raped?

"Mind explaining to me where exactly those samples got to? What did they sent to the lab? Pictures of Darlie's vagina?""

Ask Darlie's mother. I'm sure she has Darlie's medical reports, although I'm not sure what Darlie having chlamydia, HIV, etc. would have to do with whether or not she was raped.

Getting back on topic. Samples were taken. Where are they?

 

[PamelaC123]

Getting back on topic. Samples were taken. Where are they?

The topic was the rape kit that you claimed "disappeared" and whether or not Darlie might have been raped. The doctor's report makes it very clear that she wasn't raped, the cited testimony makes it clear that a full rape kit wasn't done and that she had a pelvic exam. If you want the results for the gynecological tests that were ordered, ask Darlie's mother. She's easily reached on Facebook and doesn't mind answering questions.

 

[PamelaC123]

No explanation for the knives that were lied about, the bent screen that was cut from the outside or the missing rape kit, oh, excuse me... Partial rape exam that included a wet smear that was sent to the lab?

Okay, got it.

LOL What knives were lied about? What about the screen cut from the outside? Again... what does the wet smear from her pelvic exam have to do with anything when the doctor said there was no sign of a sexual assault?

 

[Sinsaint]

LOL What knives were lied about? What about the screen cut from the outside? Again... what does the wet smear from her pelvic exam have to do with anything when the doctor said there was no sign of a sexual assault?

The kitchen knives. The bent screen. And not every rape victim has vaginal tearing.

 

[PamelaC123]

The kitchen knives. The bent screen. And not every rape victim has vaginal tearing.

What about the kitchen knives? What about the bent screen? Aren't we here for discussion?

No, not every rape victim has vaginal tearing, but a physician -an OB/GYN- gave her a pelvic exam and saw no evidence of rape.

 

[Sinsaint]

What about the kitchen knives? What about the bent screen? Aren't we here for discussion?

No, not every rape victim has vaginal tearing, but a physician -an OB/GYN- gave her a pelvic exam and saw no evidence of rape.

Go back to page 4. The knives were dusted at the scene. Linch lied and said they were not dusted when he received them. The screen does show evidence someone went through it. It was bent at the bottom. And how do you explain Linch seeing a dusty windowsill after Hamilton dusted it for prints? And, as I said, samples were taken during this, whatever you'd like to call it. Why do you think it's okay that they went missing?

 

[Madeleine74]

The screen does show evidence someone went through it. It was bent at the bottom. And how do you explain Linch seeing a dusty windowsill after Hamilton dusted it for prints? And, as I said, samples were taken during this, whatever you'd like to call it. Why do you think it's okay that they went missing?

So what's the evidence that someone went through the screen or the window? Fibers? Skin cells? DNA? Fingerprint? Footprints? The screen being bent in no way proves someone actually went through the window or screen. All that's proved is... the screen was bent.

 

[Val830]

Go back to page 4. The knives were dusted at the scene. Linch lied and said they were not dusted when he received them. The screen does show evidence someone went through it. It was bent at the bottom. And how do you explain Linch seeing a dusty windowsill after Hamilton dusted it for prints? And, as I said, samples were taken during this, whatever you'd like to call it. Why do you think it's okay that they went missing?

Bear with me a second because something occurred to me last night.

So - you think the state conspired against Darlie Routier in that they intentionally lied about when those knives were dusted for prints b/c they didn't want to admit the possibility of contamination was there?

So they all conspired to lie together - obviously that's the case when you have 2 different state expert witnesses intentionally lying about this, right? That's not something anyone with a conscience would take lightly. They are putting their professional reputations and ethics on the line here - I am not saying that everyone who testifies for criminal trials is ethical, just pointing out that it would have to be a conscious choice for them all to lie, right?

So a decade or so passes and OH NO - silly Charles Linch forgets he's supposed to be lying? He totally forgot he was supposed to be lying and railroading this poor little housewife?


You don't think the more likely scenario is that after several years passed, he simply misspoke or misremembered the order in which he performed these tests?

When would someone's memory be more reliable - 7 months after an act or several years?

I should have looked up the date of the affidavit but I am busy (and lazy)

 

[Sinsaint]

Bear with me a second because something occurred to me last night.

So - you think the state conspired against Darlie Routier in that they intentionally lied about when those knives were dusted for prints b/c they didn't want to admit the possibility of contamination was there?

So they all conspired to lie together - obviously that's the case when you have 2 different state expert witnesses intentionally lying about this, right? That's not something anyone with a conscience would take lightly. They are putting their professional reputations and ethics on the line here - I am not saying that everyone who testifies for criminal trials is ethical, just pointing out that it would have to be a conscious choice for them all to lie, right?

So a decade or so passes and OH NO - silly Charles Linch forgets he's supposed to be lying? He totally forgot he was supposed to be lying and railroading this poor little housewife?


You don't think the more likely scenario is that after several years passed, he simply misspoke or misremembered the order in which he performed these tests?

When would someone's memory be more reliable - 7 months after an act or several years?

I should have looked up the date of the affidavit but I am busy (and lazy)

What I think happened was that there was a rush to judgement. As Darlie was being wheeled out of the operating room Cron had decided she was lying about what happened. And make no mistake, his assertion wasn't "someone" in the house did it. He testified, Darlie's account of the scene didn't match the evidence. She was the liar and as such she was the suspect. They sent Dr. Townsend-Parchment to view her wounds that very afternoon. Darlie was the suspect.

They arrested her based on what exactly? A screen cut from the inside? Maybe, possibly... Oops, it wasn't. A blond hair in the screen ripped from the scalp, presumably as Darlie tried to crawl through the screen? Oops, turns out that was a cop's hair. A negative rape kit? Well, can't even find that now. Wounds that were a good half inch or more or, in Parchman's terminology a "medical mile" from causing any serious harm to Darlie? Oops... Two millimeters is far closer than a good half inch or more from any danger. The one solitary thing they had? A single fiberglass rod and a few rubber particles on a bread knife in the house.

The only evidence that still even justified their arrest was the fiberglass rod. The case for even arresting her would fall apart if anyone admitted those knives were dusted at the scene. And the Rowlett Police Department and Dallas County DA had their reputations on the line at that point.

If they admitted they made a mistake they were going to look like idiots who arrested a victim of a vicious assault who lost her two children and then was further traumatized by being arrested for the murders. Not to mention, oh... By the way... There's a murderer running loose that we haven't caught yet. Sorry, we were a little side tracked in our zeal to bring down a mother who had the unmitigated nerve to celebrate her son's birthday while she was hopped up on Xanax. Sorry, our bad.

Yea, that wasn't going to happen. She had to be guilty and that was that. Whether Linch lied on the stand to cover his own *advertiser censored* because he was too stupid to realize before he told Davis about the particle that a dusted knife just might be contaminated with particles from the scene... Well, who knows. Davis certainly had no incentive to admit he was wrong.

He was the one who wanted her arrested because as he said, he saw the silly string video and it "disgusted" him. From her arrest on he had no incentive to admit he was wrong but plenty of public shame if he did. The Rowlett PD would look like a bunch of idiots collecting evidence in Piggly-Wiggly bags. Cron would look like a complete moron because he couldn't see things like blood on a pillow or cast-off blood on the table beside the couch.

There were plenty of motives to go around for not wanting to admit they royally messed up. Which means there were plenty of motives for people to just "not recall" what they did or didn't do at the scene.

 

[Sinsaint]

Here's a picture of the knives...



What is wrong with it? Look hard. There are eight visible knives all with an evidence sticker applied to them. Seven are dusted. One is not (the murder weapon). Linch was the one who did supposedly did all the dusting and marked all the knives with evidence stickers. Seven of them appear to be dusted and then the sticker was applied later. The eighth (murder weapon) is undusted but the sticker is already applied.

What exactly was his method? Did he decide to only dust the other seven first and then sticker all eight knives before he decided to dust the murder weapon? Did he then decide, for whatever reason, to deviate from his standard practice and put an evidence sticker on the murder weapon prior to dusting it? Or is more probable and logical that Linch tagged the evidence the way it came to him?

No matter how you view it, that picture makes no sense... Unless that is how Linch received the knives... Already dusted at the scene as he said.

 

[Paysee]

A negative rape kit? Well, can't even find that now.

Why are you persisting with saying that there was a rape kit and it is now missing? That has been thoroughly discredited.

This what a rape kit consists of: (source-Wikipedia)

Although a rape kit's contents may vary by location, it may include:
Instructions
Bags and sheets for evidence collection
Swabs for collecting fluids from the lips, cheeks, thighs, vagina, anus, and buttocks
Blood collection devices
Comb used to collect hair and fiber from the victim’s body
Clear glass slides
Envelopes for preserving the victim’s clothes, head hair, pubic hair, and blood samples
Nail pick for scraping debris from beneath the nails
White sheets to catch physical evidence stripped from the body
Documentation forms
Labels

Most of these - clothes, nail debris, blood samples, cavity swabs etc. would have been collected from Darlie, not as a part of the rape kit, but because she was allegedly a victim of a violent crime. Do you want it to be placed in a neat labeled box called "rape kit"?

Dr.Miller who did the pelvic exams wrote: No evidence of sexual assualt. Lab results pending. Please call if lab results are positive for further follow-up.

As for the so called Darlie's missing panties, we only have Darlie's word that she even wore panties that night. As any woman can tell you, it is not easy to remove panties from a sleeping woman without waking her.