what if's -shed some light

Discussion in 'Darlie Routier' started by Kitty5001, Jun 16, 2006.

  1. Kitty5001

    Kitty5001 New Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have been reading and researching and trying to stay as objective as possible but I have some what if's-if anyone can shed some light on these:

    1. Everyone keeps talking about a time-line when the 911 call was placed but whose to say that everything wasn't staged prior to the 911 call.

    2. What if it was Darin that inflicted the wounds on Darlie (explains the inner arm bruising and neck slashing that had to have been done with the left hand) he may have done this to A. Either protect her after he came downstairs after hearing the attacks and saw that she did this or B. He was the intruder and since it was dark and she was half asleep she did not notice him and he could not go through with killing her after the kids (less plausable)

    3. Is it not possible that you could sleep through the murders if it was late (fell asleep in front of the TV (TV noise in background) with 2 kids that were killed in their sleep (they would not make any noise if they were sleeping and the blows were quick) it's not like using a bat or something else that would make loud noises. I know that I am a light sleeper when it comes to my kids moving around or coughing in the next room but there are times that I can sleep right through a loud thunderstorm and not even know that it had rained the night before.

    4. I listened to the 911 tape and the operator said FIRST don't touch anything and Darlie responded after this that she already touched the knife. She did NOT volunteer out of the blue that she had touched the knife. She sounded hysterical on the tape and every other word was 'oh my God' repeated in between explaning what was going on -she did not know CPR and I would have been on that phone trying to get someone to help my kids that knew how to save them also.

    5. The intruder did not leave blood going out of the house because the kids were laying down and any blood would have soaked and spread down the chest sides to the floor -like if you layed down and poured water over your chest and at that time there was no trail of blood it was concentrated where they were laying- Darlie had blood on her night shirt because she had leaned over the boys to help them and the little one was standing after and she was also bleeding and moving around to the kitchen and back dripping and trailing and walking making prints- Prior to her being up the intruder was in front of her leaving there was a clean path until she came from behind etc.

    The big major question I have is 'why did she get wet the towels'???? wouldn't you get dry towels to soak up the blood and stop the bleeding and not waste time getting them wet? The only reason I can think she wet them was to either 'clean' the scene to cover up evidence or because she was way shallow and didn't want a mess. How many of you wet towels when someone is bleeding?

    These are all just thoughts I had if anyone can shed any light on them at all. I really am torn between innocence and guilt on this. Thanks.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Goody

    Goody New Member

    Messages:
    3,652
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The timeline is determined by how long Damon would have lived after the first attack, which was approximately 10 to 12 minutes if I remember correctly. The 911 call takes up 5 and a half minutes of that time.

    Impossible for him to get back upstairs once she chased him out of the garage, Besides. he can't be guilty unless she is too. He, however, has her placing him upstairs during the crime.

    Darlie was a light sleeper too which is why she says she slept downstairs in the first place/ The baby rolling around in his crib kept her awake. She was taking diet pills that probably interfered with her sleeping ability and probably made her more edgy than normal. It was a strong prescription that should hve never been given to her or anyone who had only a few pounds to lose if you ask me. Plus she had been taking them much longer than recommended. Besides they no longer claim she slept thru the murders. By the time trial rolled around that changed to traumatic amnesia and after conviction she was hypnotized and recalled fighting with two intruders, one big guy and one dark skinned little guy.

    Yes, Darlie is misunderstood on the knife thing, but she then volunteers worries about them not being able to get fingerprints. Remember now her 5 year old is dying right before her eyes and instead of worrying about him or comforting himl she is thinking about fingerprints. It is typical of domestic killings for the guilty person to make sure it is known early on that they messed up the fingerprints by handling the murder weapon. Plus she tells everyone darned near at the hospital that she messed up the fingerprints, as if she were lining up witnesses. She wanted to make sure people knew it early on to help explain why they might find hers on it. The knife handle was not made of material that picks up fingerprinfs though so all she really did was make herself look guilty every time she tried to set up that explanationl

    Then where did the blood on the sock come from?

    You can't get cast off blood that way. Even if you could because of height and other mathematical variances you would not expect the blood to land in the same place, have the same directional patterns, and be the same size as what was alredy proven in court would if Darlie had raised the knife repeatedly to stab the children.


    I confess that I wet a portion of the towel in an emergency, ony because I don't want to take the time to figure out which one I need. That way I have both but when there is a lot of blood, the wet does not work and one can see almost immediately that it creates more problems so a move to dry would be expected fairly soon. I think she lied about wetting the towels to explain why her blood and the boys was washed down the sink/ She had to explain why the water was running.

    These are all just thoughts I had if anyone can shed any light on them at all. I really am torn between innocence and guilt on this. Thanks.[/QUOTE]
    No problem. Welcome to the forum.
     
  4. Jimthecarpetguy

    Jimthecarpetguy New Member

    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  5. beesy

    beesy myspace.com/beesy_boo

    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, her supporters give half the evidence and usually end up leaving out the important part to make it sound mysterious. For instance, the unidentified fingerprints were not clear enough to make a match to anyone, in the house, in the data base. They were smudged. Her supporters will have you believing they CAN be identified if they could just find the right person. Wrong!
    This case is a hard sell to people who only read what her supporters say, not to people who look past their BS. Why do you think it's a hard sell? If one looks at all of the evidence objectively the answer points to Darlie and Darlie only. It takes some work, but after some digging, it's an easy sell.
    And it sounds as if Kitty wants help with her questions, not to just examine the evidence on her own.
     
  6. Dani_T

    Dani_T New Member

    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One quick thing-

    Darlie maintains that the bloody fingerprint on the coffee table and on the U-room/garage door are not hers but the intruders. This means that the intruder (if he existed) must have had at least blood on his hands- enough to leave a bloody fingerprint on the coffee table but more than that to leave the bloody marks on the U-room door. There was actually enough blood left on the door to start running down the door.

    She also maintains she struggled with the intruder. I don't see how he would have come away blood free from a struggle with her if she was bleeding (which she would have had to have been).

    Finally, there is a imprint on the carpet of the bloody knife. The blood on that imprint which is where the tip of the knife would have rested on the carpet is particularly heavy. That means that whoever held the knife before putting it down on the carpet had blood running down their arm and collecting at the tip of the knife before it was put down. That means

    a) the intruder was either bleeding significantly
    b) Darlie held the knife in her hand and then put it down on the carpet and then moved it back to where it was found ,<-- which does not jibe with her story at all.

    And in all of this, all the blood stops right at the door to the garage (apart from the blood on the sock).

    It just doesn't fit.
     
  7. beesy

    beesy myspace.com/beesy_boo

    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  8. beesy

    beesy myspace.com/beesy_boo

    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  9. Kitty5001

    Kitty5001 New Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well thank you all for your answers. I needed some other scenarios to what I was thinking and yes, I did examine most all of the evidence I could find. Transcripts-both Darin and Darlies, crime scene, 911 tape, autopsies of both boys, etc. but the same evidence can be put together in different ways to make different scenarios that sometimes can make a different outcome. I am a claims adjuster and all I do all day is investigate people's injury claims, how they happened, if they happened ,if they could have happened so I tend to be a little cautions when jumping to conclusions after doing that for so long.

    1. The Luminal hit me hard, I had fogotten that it was cleaned up at the sink-that couldn't have happened when she was running the water to wet the towels?

    2. The blood running down the door because someone was turning the handle but after, the arms could have been held not to drip a trail so that they would not be followed or their trail found. Once you realize you are bleeding you can wipe on your shirt or something.

    "Then Damon woke her up, she follows the intruder, stops, turns back, hits the light, back around, picks up the knife, puts it on the counter, walks back into the entryway, then screams for Darin. Then she calls 911 and blah blah blah, Damon has run out of time and should be dead before the medic gets to him."

    3. I timed this process (frantically as someone would have been) and gave a good couple second leway time and I counted this whole process to 25 seconds. I really don't think this attack occured during the 911 call.

    4. If she fought with an intruder yes there would have been transfer of blood but she was not cut that bad (or to my knowledge as bad as the kids) as to have that transfer to someone else be running off of them versus just getting on the clothing but NOT necessarily on the bottom of their shoes. I had an old boyfriend once who decided to punch my plate glass door window and cut pretty deep into an artery- the blood was very heavy, squirting and soaked on the clothing -he left then came back (knowing he needed my help) I got a towel (a dry one in a frantic) and ran him to the car but when I came back from the hosp to my surprise the only blood I had to clean up was at the door. BY the way, he is fine now-just stitches and some surgery-:doh:

    5. Does anyone know how much blood was on the sock? soaked or just a trace on there?

    6. Why in the world, if she knew that she did it, would she want the fingerprints on the table and the door handle examined further- and the hair on the sock (why didn't they do this before??) wouldn't that seal her fate at that point and you would think that she would just pull her own plug right?

    And I don't get motive... why not just off her husband for some insurance money? She gains nothing from killing the kids. And she didn't touch Drake.

    I think I need some more answers please........
     
  10. Goody

    Goody New Member

    Messages:
    3,652
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Maybe if she actually wet towels, but there is no independent supporting evidence backing up that claim. She didn't even mention wet towels until after she saw that police had taken the sink and plumbing out of the kitchen. There were no watered down blood areas around the sink indicating that she had slopped any water as she hurried back and forth (4 trips they claim) to deliver these wet towels, and at one point she supposedly claimed to have thrown a whole stack of dry towels to Darin from the kitchen, which makes a lot more sense/ You'd think Darin would have been hollering for dry towels since wet ones would only make it more difficult to try to absorbk the blood and apply pressure. There is also no sound of water running on the 911 tape.

    That arm wound was not very deep, only about an inch but it bled a lot/ Most of the blood dripped in the family room, kitchen, and utility room was from that wound/ It is what fed the blood to the knife that made the imprint in the carpet. She never wrapped it and that tells me that time was very limited.

    As soon as Darin comes downstairs, according to their story, she gets on the phone with 911. But Darin does not see Damon when he enters the fam room. He should have practically tripped over him. Now that tells me that Damon was not there yet. We know he was attacked the second time in the second location near the kitchen doorway because of the b lood spatter/cast off on the wall. So if he was not there when she got on the 911, when else could he have been attacked the second time? Had to be before police arrived, which was only about 3 minutes into the call.

    Her neck wound was seeping, for the most part being absorbed by the shirt, but the arm wound was bleeding and dripping a lot. Plus she was hypnotized a couple of years ago and claims that there were two intruders she struggled with on the sofa, believe she was standing as she tried to fight them off, so blood should have been flying off that arm wound everywhere and certainly on them/ Glad to hear your friend is okay.

    5. Does anyone know how much blood was on the sock? soaked or just a trace on there?........[/QUOTE]
    I think there were 5 drops; 2 tested. Plus the toe where her dna was found

    To buy time. DR inmates do it all the time. If they can get testing. the clock stops until test can be done and that is months usually/ She probably knows by now that she is not going to win appeals so they are just going thru the motions, doing whatevre they can to keep her alive as long as they can.

    I think there is a unique motive in this case. Her marriage was more important to her than the kids and there were probably many factors that played into it. There are hints laced throughout the case of what might have been going on with her but nothing conclusive so unless or until she or Darin talk we may never know exactly why she did it.
     
  11. beesy

    beesy myspace.com/beesy_boo

    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  12. Kitty5001

    Kitty5001 New Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Beesy, where is the crime scene evidence found where it shows the wipe up pattern of the blood and the hand and butt print etc.? Certainly not on her site and I don't find it in any of the transcripts. Thanks.

    My opinions are now getting a little more clouded from when I first thought that she may be innocent. Hmmmm.
     
  13. jubie

    jubie Former Member

    Messages:
    2,252
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I used to just lurk here and couldn't believe Darlie was guilty but after reading for a while I realized the sad truth and that is that Darlie murdered two of her children. She has changed her story in approx 16 ways to defend herself from the evidence all pointing to her.

    Why on earth were the boys stabbed in their chests and backs while this murdering lunatic spared Darlie?

    Why did her little boy die in the arms of a stranger while Darlie stood back?


    Stick around and I believe you will eventually see the sad truth.

    Jubie
     
  14. beesy

    beesy myspace.com/beesy_boo

    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The hand and butt print on the sofa were not wiped up. The handprint on the carpet was not either.
    There is no picture of the hand and butt print that were on the sofa. They could be seen with the naked eye, but since LE had darkened the room to spray the Luminol and the blood was under a blanket(hmm), they did not see them until they sprayed the Luminol, which will ruin visible blood. It is in Springer's book "Flesh and Blood" and I think it's in the transcripts, maybe under Lynch or Cron. As far who the killer was, that doesn't prove anything one way or the other, but it does up the freak-out factor.
    The bloody hand print on the carpet was visible and was preserved and tested. There was also a trail of blood behind it as Damon dragged himself along..
     
  15. cami

    cami Keep your fork......

    Messages:
    2,696
    Likes Received:
    94
    Trophy Points:
    48
    8 A. That's correct.
    9 Q. On the blue blanket we had?
    10 A. Darlie.
    11 Q. Coming from this couch in this
    12 position, we had a mixture; is that right?
    13 A. That's correct.
    14 Q. Of Damon and Darlie Routier; is that
    15 right?
    16 A. That's correct.
    17 Q. Over here on the arm of this couch
    18 near the windows, we had a Damon; is that right?
    19 A. Damon, correct.
    20 Q. And, finally, on the handprint that
    21 came out of the carpet, that was Damon; is that right?
    22 A. The print itself was Damon, that's
    23 correct.
    24 Q. And the green dot, indicated right
    25 here next to that handprint, what does that represent?
    Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter
    3186

    1 A. Adjacent to the area of the handprint
    2 was a soaked through stain of Darlie.
    3 Q. So we have Damon's blood in this
    4 portion of the den by the couch and we also find his
    5 blood on this portion where his body was; is that right?
    6 A. That's correct.
    7 Q. Now, Ms. Van Winkle, looking at the


    Link to the trial testimony of Van Winkle

    Read Linch's testimony on the wipe patterns and the blood washed down the sink...

    http://www.justicefordarlie.net/transcripts/volumes/vol-37.php#1
     
  16. Goody

    Goody New Member

    Messages:
    3,652
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow, Cami. Yu are getting pretty good at coming up with these quotes quickly. thanks for the refresher.
     
  17. beesy

    beesy myspace.com/beesy_boo

    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks cami girl...
     
  18. Kitty5001

    Kitty5001 New Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ok further investigation leaves me with the following questions:

    1. There is no mention anywhere about the baseball cap that was found by the washer/ window where the alleged killer escaped-what happened to that and was it ever examined for dna?? (This was listed in the book Hush Little Babies)

    2. What about the 2 fingerprints on the widow where the alleged killer escaped? Were these ever taken and anyone ruled out (also in the book)?

    3. No Blood on the knife from Devon-how is that possible?

    4. There was no blood on the couch where she alleges she was stabbed/slashed BUT her pillow she was laying on was covered in blood-why is this not mentioned anywhere?

    5. There was mention of blood on a sign in the garage?

    6. There was more than 3 people that state they saw the dark car around the area including Basia and her mother that was against Darlie. Even on the day of the murders.

    7. They say one of the main reasons they state there was NOT an intruder is because there was no blood outside the utility room-back to the bloody sock- if she planted it after she killed the kids then she would have had to trail blood out of the house and there was none.

    8. The hair found on the sock was found to be from either a deer or elk-where did than come from. Maybe someone who was a hunter?

    9. If she were to slice the screen herself, why wouldn't she use the same knife for the stabbings? If she thought that far ahead for planning this entire thing she would have planted more evidence outside the house, there would have been blood on that window and outside trailing to the sock etc. logically speaking.

    10. There were amphetamines found in her body when she was tested at the hospital-what if she was given GHB or some other drug like it the night of the murders-that would explain why she can't remember much and everything was a blur when she was allegedly being attacked and chased the alleged intruder.

    I am still on the fence here the more and more I think about it back and forth.
     
  19. beesy

    beesy myspace.com/beesy_boo

    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice