I believe she should have a new trial for the following reasons: 1) Inadequate legal representation without a doubt. Her defense attorney allowed the prosecution to start the trial 6 months' from the murders, give or take a few weeks. Discovery and preparation by the defense should have taken well over a year. 2) The 30,000 errors in the trial transcript with missing audio tapes to clarify what was said. Many " No" answers were changed to " Yes' and vice versa. It was said to be the most errors in a major trial in modern court reporting/ transcription. The lady doing the work believed Darlie was guilty and wanted her to die. Thus, improper and prejudicial court procedure. 3) Conflict of interest with Darlie and defense counsel. Both Darin and Mrs. Key had prior legal business wherein they were represented by her original defense attorney. Also, because Darlie had no separate income, Darin was the guarantor of the attorney's fees. Serious and glaring reason for recusal by an already incompetent attorney. 4) Perhaps because of #3, Darin was never investigated fully by either defense or prosecution. There are 1001 questions left unanswered in my mind about what really happened the night the boys were murdered, and Darin is not exempt from a single one. For example- Why did he go to the neighbor's house to wash his hands as his boys lay dying and his wife was screaming for help?, " Why did he go to another neighbor's house because, according to him, the wife was a nurse", thus leaving the dying boys and bleeding Darlie alone a second time? Why was he outdoors and exactly what was he doing when he found the bloody sock with the boys' blood on it? Why did he enter the living room either nude or undressed from the waist up, according to him at different times in his narrative? What were his drug issues and is that why their bills were behind? Was a toxicology screen done on both Darlie and Darin at Baylor University Dallas? What were the results of each parent's test? 5) The investigators in the case took the 5th amendment many times under cross examination. This is something I've never heard of before. I believe Kron did as well at points. 6) This one is the kicker for me and it's not a point I will argue with anyone regarding any case. Tom Bevel was a blood spatter " expert" who gave utterly damning testimony at Darlie's trial. He is a fraud and a charlatan, a self- made expert, a man who kept no notes, made no records or videos showing how he reached his conclusions about blood being co-mingled or, as he put it, " layered". HE could not duplicate his " laboratory testing" nor could legitimate crime scene processors trained in blood pattern analysis duplicate his results he testified to in dozens of high stakes trials. ( hint- it is not an exact science like Bevel promoted). Leave Darlie out of it and it's likely that innocent people have already been put to death because of Tom Bevel's lies and incompetence. I despise him and the other couple of fake " blood spatter experts" who have toyed with words for money and lied about peoples' lives with the heat of 1000 suns for the harm he has done to our CJ system, the science of blood spatter and DNA transfer in general, and, just as importantly, jury understanding and belief in either. Luckily, he has been totally discredited and will never help prosecutors convict YOU or ME of a crime because he was paid to say basically what the DA wanted the results to be. As far as I know, he never once skewed his results in favor of an innocent defendant ( or a guilty one).