Many People Believe Darlie Needs a New Trial, Discuss it Here.

[Jeana (DP)]

Can someone please tell my why this "evil" women is still breathing?????? I thought Texas has no qualms about the death penalty, there is zero prospects for a new trial, there is no new evidence.

Darlie's appeals started approx. two years late due to the errors in the transcripts. Appeals are not necessarily the place to bring up "new evidence." The attorneys must prove she didn't get a fair trial, there was prosecutorial misconduct, trial errors, etc. I haven't seen any "new evidence" to TRY and bring to the court's attention, although I've been hearing her supporters say that there is some. Its time for them to put their money where their mouths are and come out with it. Saving it for after she's executed won't help her one bit. :angel: :angel: :angel:

 

[little1]

First Jules, I did not say she was not guilty. I only said she deserves a new trial. Why? First, there is much evidence of errors on the part of the prosecutors and the police that were NOT addressed. First question, I have is after 1 year how can a detective remember all the evidence on the scene and all the stories about what was actually said by each witness (he had no written notes per his testimony). Sure, Darlie had several stories, but that alone does NOT make someone guilty of murder-it makes them a liar, and also a better SUSPECT, but does not make someone a murderer. She may be, but shouldn't the EVIDENCE be accurate and directly prove beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT that no one else was involved before sending someone to DEATH. Could it be Darrin did it? Could there have been an intruder-evidence here points that someone else may have been in the house-but who knows? I do not, because the evidence and DNA analysis of it has been denied by the judge. Let's suppose the DNA of this evidence was that of a felon who was in the area on that particular night and owns a dark sedan-Would this mean that she may be innocent or would you say she is still guilty? If you say she is still guilty than you obviously have no doubt about her guilt. But, if after seeing the results of this evidence they name a felon who had matching DNA and drove a dark colored vehicle (as neighbors saw this vehicle too) would you have doubts? If so, then you would have to say she deserves another trial. But, to refuse testing of this evidence by the state shows NO intent to find the truth, only to punish a person convicted without searching for the truth. THIS IS WRONG!!
I also have one big question that really bothers me, and that is a sock with Darlie's saliva and blood was found 70 yards from the scene. Now, Darlie was on the phone with 911 for the 2 minutes it took the police officer to get there, and the doctors said with the injuries Damon had, he would have survived about 3 minutes (lack of Oxygen as lungs were punctured and not working). Now, that leaves Darlie a maximum of 1 minute to do all the things to set up the scene. Hmmm? If she is guilty there is another involved-time factor alone shows that.

IMO one of the things that hindered her defense was no fault of the prosecution, the state, or anyone else involved except for Darlie. Taht is the fact that she & her husband had the same lawyer.

 

[little1]

Also, 3-5 minutes before Damon dies=let's do the numbers on the phone with 911 for 2 minutes, that leaves at the most 3 minutes to cut herself, kill the two boys, run the sock outside,clean the counter and sink, and make the mess you describe. Now, I am NOT saying she was alone, I am saying that someone ELSE would have had to be involved to accomplish all these things. I never mentioned the screen cutting as I already though like you.
.

Have you ever heard of multi tasking? One could cut her own throat, try to clean up the scene & try to make it look as if an intruder came into the
house.

IMO if one was running on adrenaline (which she owuld have been if she had just butchered her two sons) they could easily do what you have described. Furthermore, she did not do a whole lot of staging, which is why most cops can tell when a crime scene is mor elikely staged than not. There were things that should have been missing that were not (ex: jewelry) and things that should not have been missing that were. (ex: blood evidence that was cleaned up)

BTW, just remember the time frame you are speaking of also applies to any intruder that would have committed this crime because Darlie said she saw the guy running out the door and she chased him. When did he have time to clean up the scene? Why would he have tried to evne clean up the scene? WHy butcher 2 small boys---and leave the mother who can identify you running after you? WHy not turn around and butcher her, too?

 

[little1]

Actually it was 9 minutes and if he was stabbed at two different times which his wounds and his location in the room appear to indicate, the final stabbings were the fatal ones, plenty of time for Darlie to have run the sock down the alley. NO, Darlie's blood and saliva was not found on the sock. The boys blood was found on the sock and Darlie's dna. Nothing to indicate it was saliva, it could have been her skin cells.

Oh! That makes sense! So she stabbed the boys, thought they were dead and started staging the crime scene? Then after coming back fromt he alley, she saw that Damon was not dead and needed to be stabbed again. Then she called the paramedics?

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Personally, I'd like to see a live demonstration from the supporters.

The house gets broken into (they can't decide WHY), but Darlie is supposedly the intended victim.
They or He (they can't decide how many) then attacks two sleeping boys for absolutely no reason whatsoever and then apparently have a fight with Darlie.
They then STOP to wash blood off of the counter and sink (thoughtful huh???) before they leave.
However, they leave the house BEFORE they're able to do what they came there for (to kill Darlie)
They don't leave the house because Darlie was screaming her head off and they thought that someone would hear her;
not because stuff was being knocked over left and right and loud thunderous noises were being made while Darlie was defending her life and the lives of her children;
not because she was trying to dial 911. . . . WHY did they leave a live adult witness????? And they leave the house (the hard way) instead of just going out the front door.

Then (and this is the part that I personally love the most), the intruder(s) exited the back yard through a broken gate that had to be lifted up off of the ground because it dragged horribly - AND they lifited up AGAIN to CLOSE it before they left. Now that's one (or was it two???) seriously thoughtful intruder(s).

 

[jubie]

I've wondered if maybe her injuries came from Darin in his shock and horror finding her attacking the boys he lunged at her and she really did need to fight him off.... I mean, he wouldn't come upon what she'd done or was still doing and just say "aw geez Darlie why you go and do that?" I think he'd freak out and very likely lash out at her a few times.


Only they know for sure.


Jubie

 

[jubie]

Personally, I'd like to see a live demonstration from the supporters.

The house gets broken into (they can't decide WHY), but Darlie is supposedly the intended victim.
They or He (they can't decide how many) then attacks two sleeping boys for absolutely no reason whatsoever and then apparently have a fight with Darlie.
They then STOP to wash blood off of the counter and sink (thoughtful huh???) before they leave.
However, they leave the house BEFORE they're able to do what they came there for (to kill Darlie)
They don't leave the house because Darlie was screaming her head off and they thought that someone would hear her;
not because stuff was being knocked over left and right and loud thunderous noises were being made while Darlie was defending her life and the lives of her children;
not because she was trying to dial 911. . . . WHY did they leave a live adult witness????? And they leave the house (the hard way) instead of just going out the front door.

Then (and this is the part that I personally love the most), the intruder(s) exited the back yard through a broken gate that had to be lifted up off of the ground because it dragged horribly - AND they lifited up AGAIN to CLOSE it before they left. Now that's one (or was it two???) seriously thoughtful intruder(s).

EXACTAMUNDO!!!! :clap:

 

[dasgal]

Jeana, I think one of the major falicies the supporters have is that they tend to break down the crime and subsequent actions down into segments. I think if they ever did a full out walkthrough it would really throw them for a loop.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Dasgal, I completely agree.

 

[cami]

Oh! That makes sense! So she stabbed the boys, thought they were dead and started staging the crime scene? Then after coming back fromt he alley, she saw that Damon was not dead and needed to be stabbed again. Then she called the paramedics?

LOL, yes but not in that exact manner. It's not that cut and dried.

If you read the testimony you will find that Damon was stabbed at two different times and in two different areas of the room. He was in front of the couch yet when he was found he was over by the wall heading towards the entrance. He got there somehow.

His second set of stab wounds was administered after Darlie's neck cut. (check out the depth of his wounds). That's how his blood got on top of her's. She couldn't have the paramedics showing up when they were cold and into rigour mortis now could she. I believe the 911 call was placed for Darlie not the boys.

 

[cami]

Have you ever heard of multi tasking? One could cut her own throat, try to clean up the scene & try to make it look as if an intruder came into the
house.

IMO if one was running on adrenaline (which she owuld have been if she had just butchered her two sons) they could easily do what you have described. Furthermore, she did not do a whole lot of staging, which is why most cops can tell when a crime scene is mor elikely staged than not. There were things that should have been missing that were not (ex: jewelry) and things that should not have been missing that were. (ex: blood evidence that was cleaned up)

BTW, just remember the time frame you are speaking of also applies to any intruder that would have committed this crime because Darlie said she saw the guy running out the door and she chased him. When did he have time to clean up the scene? Why would he have tried to evne clean up the scene? WHy butcher 2 small boys---and leave the mother who can identify you running after you? WHy not turn around and butcher her, too?

Oh and the bread knife. Why break in, take the bread knife, and then go back outside and cut the screen and come in through the window and then put the knife back in the block?

 

[CyberLaw]

Well in the legal field, lying is construed as "consciousness of guilt".

if you lie once, you wil lie again and again, it is in your nature.

Didn't Scott P lie his head off also, blame the homeless, robbers, etc.

It does not matter if you break the "crime" down into "segments", that is what you do to solve a case, or other problems.

That is why when you take all of the parts of a problem or case, you break it down.

You look at all of the evidence of a crime, not just the whole crime.

 

[mollymalone]

Darlie's neighborhood wasn't one that someone would just happen by. Either someone in that house did it or it was someone who had a map because it would be VERY easy to get lost in a maze of neighborhood streets where all of the houses looked the same and there are many culdesacs where one would get stuck.

That's a very good point! Someone would have had to know the layout of the house and that the boys and Darlie were sleeping downstairs, or stumbled onto them by accident while trying to rob the house (which wasn't robbed).

 

[mollymalone]

LOL, yes but not in that exact manner. It's not that cut and dried.

If you read the testimony you will find that Damon was stabbed at two different times and in two different areas of the room. He was in front of the couch yet when he was found he was over by the wall heading towards the entrance. He got there somehow.

His second set of stab wounds was administered after Darlie's neck cut. (check out the depth of his wounds). That's how his blood got on top of her's. She couldn't have the paramedics showing up when they were cold and into rigour mortis now could she. I believe the 911 call was placed for Darlie not the boys.

Yes, I think you are right! Darlie wanted to make sure she got help for herself.

 

[mollymalone]

Personally, I'd like to see a live demonstration from the supporters.

The house gets broken into (they can't decide WHY), but Darlie is supposedly the intended victim.
They or He (they can't decide how many) then attacks two sleeping boys for absolutely no reason whatsoever and then apparently have a fight with Darlie.
They then STOP to wash blood off of the counter and sink (thoughtful huh???) before they leave.
However, they leave the house BEFORE they're able to do what they came there for (to kill Darlie)
They don't leave the house because Darlie was screaming her head off and they thought that someone would hear her;
not because stuff was being knocked over left and right and loud thunderous noises were being made while Darlie was defending her life and the lives of her children;
not because she was trying to dial 911. . . . WHY did they leave a live adult witness????? And they leave the house (the hard way) instead of just going out the front door.

Then (and this is the part that I personally love the most), the intruder(s) exited the back yard through a broken gate that had to be lifted up off of the ground because it dragged horribly - AND they lifited up AGAIN to CLOSE it before they left. Now that's one (or was it two???) seriously thoughtful intruder(s).

I have a friend who thinks Darlie didn't do it. I pointed out what you did, and the response about the blood on the counter and sink.. "it got washed off because she was wetting the towels to put on the child's back." She compartmentalizes and picks each peice that she wants to support Darlie with and doesn't want to look at the whole pix.

 

[Mary456]

I have a friend who thinks Darlie didn't do it. I pointed out what you did, and the response about the blood on the counter and sink.. "it got washed off because she was wetting the towels to put on the child's back." She compartmentalizes and picks each peice that she wants to support Darlie with and doesn't want to look at the whole pix.

Molly, ask your friend why Darlie & Darin never mentioned wet towels until after LE removed the kitchen sink. Better yet, ask her why there wasn't a shred of testimony about any blood being diluted by water...no wet spots on the floor, the carpet, Darlie's t-shirt, Damon's shirt, etc.

Any blood diluted by water would have been detected by the forensic people in an instant & Mulder would have had them testify. It didn't happen. (Not preaching to you, this subject just riles me up

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I have a friend who thinks Darlie didn't do it. I pointed out what you did, and the response about the blood on the counter and sink.. "it got washed off because she was wetting the towels to put on the child's back." She compartmentalizes and picks each peice that she wants to support Darlie with and doesn't want to look at the whole pix.

They all do. They have to because if you take it as a whole, its impossible to come to the conclusion that there was anyone else in that house.

 

[cami]

Molly, ask your friend why Darlie & Darin never mentioned wet towels until after LE removed the kitchen sink. Better yet, ask her why there wasn't a shred of testimony about any blood being diluted by water...no wet spots on the floor, the carpet, Darlie's t-shirt, Damon's shirt, etc.

Any blood diluted by water would have been detected by the forensic people in an instant & Mulder would have had them testify. It didn't happen. (Not preaching to you, this subject just riles me up

Further to Mary's post, look at the crime scene photos in Gallery 1 on www.justicefordarlie.net or get your friend to look I mean. Doesn't look as if any of that blood is diluted by water to me. Blood running down the front of the cupboards and the kitchen floor.

Of course if they don't want to see it they won't.

 

[Daisy]

I don't think it was done for financial gain either - I think it was done to rid Darlie of the responsibility. I've often wondered if Drake had been down there too, would she have murdered him as well? I get the impression she saw her kids as things that stood in the way of HER happiness. Meaning money was going to support them that could have gone to further her high lifestyle.

I think you hit the nail on the head, Jules.

I'd still like to know where Darin fits in on all this. I don't believe he's totally innocent. I don't think he's the killer but he's involved somehow. I just can't put my finger on it. However, this is going to be another case where all we can do is speculate and still never know the answers. D&D will take the answers with them to their graves. At this point, if either one did come out and really tell the truth, would we believe them? I've wondered if the two of them had ever discussed how much simpler their life would be without the boys and maybe even went so far as to discuss possible scenarios in which the boys would die but neither D&D would be held responsible. I'm wondering if Darlie may have taken it upon herself to go through with this and this is why the silence from and the support that they have for each other. Just a wacky theory...but this is one wacky case.

I think things are gonna get a little more sticky for Darin since, as I said, Darlie's clock is tick-tick-ticking away now. I think she's gonna do some talking and, if she is telling the truth, she'd be wise to request a polygraph to back up her statements. I know polys don't always work on everyone but they work on her since she failed one during the investigation (if I remember correctly - if not, just give me a :slap: ).

 

[cami]

I think you hit the nail on the head, Jules.

I'd still like to know where Darin fits in on all this. I don't believe he's totally innocent. I don't think he's the killer but he's involved somehow. I just can't put my finger on it. However, this is going to be another case where all we can do is speculate and still never know the answers. D&D will take the answers with them to their graves. At this point, if either one did come out and really tell the truth, would we believe them? I've wondered if the two of them had ever discussed how much simpler their life would be without the boys and maybe even went so far as to discuss possible scenarios in which the boys would die but neither D&D would be held responsible. I'm wondering if Darlie may have taken it upon herself to go through with this and this is why the silence from and the support that they have for each other. Just a wacky theory...but this is one wacky case.

I think things are gonna get a little more sticky for Darin since, as I said, Darlie's clock is tick-tick-ticking away now. I think she's gonna do some talking and, if she is telling the truth, she'd be wise to request a polygraph to back up her statements. I know polys don't always work on everyone but they work on her since she failed one during the investigation (if I remember correctly - if not, just give me a :slap: ).

Me too! I wish she would talk. None of us think Darin is an innocent party in all this. Nothing will save Darlie. If she does talk it will be just to get Darin.