Discussion in 'Darlie Routier' started by InDoubt558, Apr 5, 2019.
She didn't .
There is no link because the IP has not officially accepted Darlie's case. Podkin is aligning with her appellate attorneys that's all.
The Texas IP has turned Darlie down year's ago so did the New York IP.
I for one, am excited to see these new developments, the presence of Potkin and the IP. I believe that if she were to ever go to trial again she would be acquitted.
This was posted almost 2 months ago and I haven't seen confirmation anywhere that this is true. Nothing on the Innocent Project website about them taking her case either.
I honestly don't know how people think she's innocent with all the evidence against her. I see a lot of people forming their opinions of innocence based on shows like ABC 20/20 which are very biased, and false info spread around social media. Once I actually looked at the actual evidence in this case, it's hard to believe she didn't do it.
The only source is her mother and we all know what a liar she is. Vanessa Podkin met with Darlie's appellate attorneys, nothing more. However given that 85J is now being run through AFIS, that tells me the DNA testing is complete. Many folks are speculating that Podkin advised them to run the print before she can get involved. Who knows? All I know is Darlie does not meet the criteria for the IP to get involved in her case. She has had more post conviction DNA testing than any other DR inmate all paid for by the state of Texas. I don't believe the IP will waste donor money on Darlie Routier. If they do, they will lose a lot of donations.
There are multiple reasons that I tend to think Darlie is guilty, the one I have always had trouble with is the killer used his knife to cut the window screen to enter the home but had to use one the Routier's knife to commit the murders. Why didn't the killer just use the knife he used to gain entrance into the home?
Actually they proved at trial the knife that cut the screen came from the Routier kitchen as well. The serrated bread knife had two separate pieces of evidence on it that matched the screen. A polyglass fibre and rubber dust. Read Charles Linch;s testimony on this it's interesting. The defence has tried to claim the fibre was transferred by the dusting brush
I probably wasn't clear in post. Sorry about that. My problem is with Darlie trying to say the killer cut the screen to get it In the house then used a knife from the home to commit the murders. If the killer already had a knife he would have used that one. To me it is just another hole (lie) in Darlie story.
I agree with you 100%!!!!
you might be the only person LOL but I just don't think she did it .