Darlie Routier A Miscarriage Of Justice?

[watson]

Hi all, I just came across this case recently. That of a woman who has sat on death row for 10 years, convicted in 1996 by a Texas court of knifing to death 2 of her little sons, self inflicting grevious wounds on herself, and trying to stage the scene as a rape/robbery gone bad, all while her husband and other son were present in the home. This area of the message boards seems the best place to start a discussion of it. At the time she was the first woman sentenced to death in Texas since the Civil War. The case happened the same year as the more famous 'Ramsey' case, and like that one, happened in the middle of the night, in a upper middle class home, with only both parents and the children known to be present. What evidence did they convict her on?............IMO after reviewing the case ...NONE. They did have a suspicious crime scene with indications it 'MAY' have been staged. They also had a police dept. that had never handled such a case (more shades of Boulder CO), and a political prosecutor who grandstanded the case as proof of '1996 tough on crime' Texas. In a time when it takes years to bring a murder case to trial this womans was 4 months after the crime, talk about a 'rush to judgment'!
They also had a husband present who supposedly slept through everything, and was having financial troubles at the time, as well as evidence of an intruder, and a ME who refused to testify for the prosecution and instead testified for the defense. Crime Library has this story in it's 'killers' section and there are sites on the web to read up on. I don't want to make this post too long, so if there's interest in discussing it I'll post case details later.

[AMS80]

Hi Watson! I recently read a book on this case, "Hush Little Babies." I need to go back and read specific parts to be able to have a meaningful factual discussion, but when I read about this I saw it as more of a "Scott Peterson" conviction than, say, a Jeffrey MacDonald conviction, in that there wasn't stunning physical evidence as in the JM case, but many pieces of the puzzle fit together to point to DR's guilt. IIRC, DR's actions both directly after and in the few days after the boy's murders put a less than shining light on her demeanor. When speaking to the 911 operator, she seemed adamant to get the point across that she had already touched the murder weapon. She was less than helpful with life-saving procedures of the boys, bringing wet towels (how in the world that will help I have no idea) back and forth to Darrin, not really using them, and more worried about her own superficial wound. The fact that the boys wounds were so much more brutal than hers is puzzling. She changed her stories many times. The legendary "graveyard" birthday party, some diary entries that pointed to depression, and her own changing stories showed her emotional instability. IIRC, there was also talk of blood found on the back of the shirt she was wearing during the murders which insinuated blood splatter from her raising the knife to stab the boys. All of this plus the apparent lack of an intruder are some of the reasons I think she is guilty. I will go back and try to get some more meaty facts for you, though!

[JTF]

I run a website on the Jeffrey MacDonald case and this case is similar in many respects. Granted, there is far more physical evidence in the MacDonald case than in the Routier case, but they are similar in terms of what was not present at the crime scene. If memory serves, there is not a shred of foreign DNA in the Routier household nor were there any unsourced fibers and/or head hairs. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only concrete piece of debatable evidence in this case is a bloody fingerprint found on a table in the living room. Darlie Routier is not the first nor will she be the last cold-blooded killer to concoct a ridiculous scenario involving home invader(s) killing small children, while leaving the adult(s) very much alive.

JTF.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.net/

[watson]

Sorry it took me so long to get back on this. You both make good points JTF and AMS80, but 1st I did promise to post the case facts/details for all readers and as IMO the case deserves an in depth review....These facts are almost all from the Crimelibrary section, and from a 20-20 documentary done in 2001 rebroadcast 2006 and a little from official sources.....Wednesday night Rowlett TX Dallas county 6-96 upper middle class suburban home of the Routiers. The family (mom, dad, 2 boys 5 and 6) had been watching big screen tv in the family room as usual. Dad went upstairs to bed c.12:30-1:00am, a 3rd child (an infant) and a small poodle type dog were also upstairs. Young mom (age 26) Darlie wearing a Victoria Secret night shirt remained dozing on the sofa by the tv, with the 2 boys who as often had been allowed to bring their pillows and blankets down to fall asleep by the tv.
Darlie then reported she was woken shortly before 2:30am by 1 of the boys calling out to her, or a tuging on her shirt. She opened her eyes to a man wearing 'black jeans and black shirt' in the room with her, who had a knife and attacked her from atop her. She reported she blocked and warded of many blows with her arms the knife sometimes getting through before he gave up, getting off her, fleeing through the attached kitchen. Jumping up, she flipped on the kitchen light seeing and retreiving the bloody knife from the floor on the other side of the kitchen leading to the garage before turning back to the family room where the light revealed both boys stabbed to, or near death. Screaming, she called 911 at 2:31am, husband Darin ran in soon after and can be heard on the tape.
Police arrived in 5 minutes to find a family room and kitchen awash in blood from both boys and Darlie (who had a gapping slash to her throat and other more minor stab wounds). Police kept paramedics out for 2-4 minutes while checking the garage and elsewhere for the reported intruder. Lots of police and paramedics then moved through the scene. 1 boy was dead, 1 died in the ambulance, Darlie was rushed to the hospital. Police closed off the scene for investigation 2 hours after arriving.
Police found... 'a trail of blood' leading from the kitchen to or into the garage. In the garage they found a cut window screen big enough for a man to go in and out, but no blood in the 'dewy mulch' outside the window or on the lawn or backyard gate. 1/3 of a block (225 feet) from the gate they did find a sock with the boys blood on it in the alley that ran behind the backyards on the block.
On the kitchen counter Darlie's purse with her 'expensive looking' jewelry laid out next to it, with no blood on or near at all.
In the family room the coffee table was tipped over, a lamp shade was askew, and a flower arrangement had been knocked over, but the stems weren't broken.
In the bloody kitchen a wine glass was shattered all over the floor, a vaccum cleaner that had been parked there lay on it's side with some blood on it. The front and lip of the kitchen sink had lots of blood on it, but luminol revealed a massive amount of blood in the sink and drain had been rinsed away, and that 1 of the boys bloody handprints had been wiped from the sofa.
Both parents gave full statements that am, and several times in the next days. None of these statements were recorded or written down by police until Darlie's written signed statement was taken on Saturday 6-8-96 when she was getting out of the hospital. Initially police reported no finger prints other than the Routiers. Police were not experienced in this type of crime and did not have a complex crime investigator on staff, so they hired a private 'crime scene consultent' (James Cron) to look at the scene the day following the crime and advise them.
Those are the basic facts....I'll post the facts re: ME and med reports, and the short (Darlie was charged 12 days after the crime 6-18-96) police investigation, and get to your good questions JTF and AMS80 in a different post as I don't want to make this too long.

[watson]

To finish up with the facts....all these are from, besides the sources already given, the ME and injury report, injury and crime scene internet photos. I was in error in my first post in this thread about the ME. The autopsies were done by something called the Southwest Institute for Forensic Science (SWIFS) and they testified for the prosecution, an ME for a TX county for the defense. SWIFS found the 1 boy died from 4 stab wounds to the back all were placed so as to kill, there was also 2 superficial cuts to the back. There were no defense wounds. The other boy died from 2 stab wounds to the chest placed in the heart area so as to kill, there was also a superficial cut to the forearm that might be defensive and a minor stab wound to the back of the thigh indicating he was moving. The presumed weapon for all victims was the bloody knife from the home found at the scene.
Darlie had a long cut to the neck, starting where a mans necktie knot would usually be, and moving upward to the right at c.a 40 degree angle all the way to the right edge of the neck, about 7-8 inches long. I've found no source but guess such a cut would need c. 20-40 stiches. The same slash wound continued from the middle of the neck to the left and down onto her chest as about a 2" superficial cut near her arm pit. There was also another stab or cut wound near her left armpit requiring 3 stitches. A deep stab wound to the top of her right forearm requiring 5 stiches. Superficial cuts going at a 45 degree angel to the insides of her left thumb, mddle, and ring fnger. Massive continuous bruising to the under sides of her forearms (I've never seen such bruising short of a car accident), significant bruising to her upper arms, and wrists, swelling and redness to her finger tips and around the fingernails .
After his 1 day at the scene and considering the wounds to the boys and Darlie,and where the weapon came from, consultent Cron told police he thought the crime was staged, meaning an adult in the house, either the mother or father, did it. Police were suspicious of Darlie....because her verbal statements varied about 10% each time, and police strongly felt she did not cry enough, and was not hysterical enough about her sons murders. Talking to nurses at the hospital, they echoed the same thing. Police decided to watch Darlie.
According to Darlie, prior to the murders the family had planned a birthday party for 1 of the boys, invitations had been sent etc., the boys were counting down the days, then the murders happened. Darlie told others the boys would've wanted it to go on. So, 8 days after the murders, and after the funerals, on 6-14-96, as scheduled, after a somber graveside memorial service led by a minister, Darlie held a short birthday celebration with singing Happy Birthday, balloons, and the infamous jumping and dancing around with silly string 'so the boys could see it from heaven'. Police and the media videotaped the somber service and the 'birthday', but the media only showed the public the dancing on the graves with silly string suggesting she was celebrating the murders. She was arrested and charged 4 days later.
In the national spotlight, the DA announced he'd seek the death penalty, the first time for a TX woman since the Civil War.
After the arrest the PD developed the following info......
The father Darin Routier had been having serious business and money problems. He admited to them he had even thought of staging a fake robbery of the house as an insurance scam to get money but chickened out.
That Darlie had been depressed recently by weight gain from her last pregnancy, and her husbands money woes. That in her diary before the murders, she even wrote she would kill herself but she loved her boys and husband too much.
2 foreign finger prints in blood were found at the scene that did not belong to any house occupant, or emergency worker.
1 foreign facial hair, and 1 foreign pubic hair not from the family were found in the family room. and remain unidentified.
At first Darlie had only a court appointed lawyer, it took her family about 1 month to raise money to hire lawyers. They had only 3 1/2 months to get, and study all the case materials, do any testing, interview everyone, line up any experts or witnesses, plan and practice a defense, attend and take care of the many pre-trial motions and appearances, before her trial started
in November 1996

[AMS80]

Originally Posted by JTF

I run a website on the Jeffrey MacDonald case and this case is similar in many respects. Granted, there is far more physical evidence in the MacDonald case than in the Routier case, but they are similar in terms of what was not present at the crime scene. If memory serves, there is not a shred of foreign DNA in the Routier household nor were there any unsourced fibers and/or head hairs. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only concrete piece of debatable evidence in this case is a bloody fingerprint found on a table in the living room. Darlie Routier is not the first nor will she be the last cold-blooded killer to concoct a ridiculous scenario involving home invader(s) killing small children, while leaving the adult(s) very much alive.

JTF.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.net/

Howdy Watson and JTF!

IIRC LE found dust where intruders entered the house completely untouched, as well as mulch undisturbed in the intruder's "getaway" path. I think that during her trial the defense attorneys actually brought in a mock set-up of the window and had the biggest attorney crawl through it to show it could be done without disturbing the dust. Didn't seem to change the jurors mind much, though. Also, the Routier's had a motion-sensored security light that turned off automatically after a certain amount of time (18 minutes? I honestly can't remember) which was not on when LE arrived, even though it was in the direct path of where Darlie said the intruder fled.

Off topic: JTF I religiously keep up with the MacDonald thread and have studied the case a lot. You, as well as the other regulars over there do a great job of discussing the case. I need to join chat sometime!

[JTF]

Watson: Thanks for providing the case info. It's good to know that my memory is relatively intact. The impetus for the defense team not bringing the unsourced facial and pubic hairs to the forefront is probably due to the fact that the hairs were found in the play room, not the living room. In addition, if the hairs showed any evidence of being forcibly removed, you can bet your bottom dollar that the defense team would be lauding their significance to the media. Despite what some of the documents have indicated, the 2 bloody prints are still a topic of debate within the appellate process.

AMS80: Your input on the MacDonald case thread would be a nice addition. I would also like to invite you to the Live Chat which occurs every Tuesday from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. EST through my website.

JTF.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.net/

[Riviera]

Story in the Crime Library---->

Darlie Routier: Doting Mother/Deadly Mother
By Joseph Geringer

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notoriou...routier/1.html

[watson]

Hi all again. Yeah, I figured posting the facts was a good idea, since I'm relatively new to this case and for the benefit of all those brand new to it. As always if I got any facts wrong let me know so I can correct.
Getting to some of everyones points........
*Was there any foreign DNA found? I guess the short answer is...nobody knows. There were the 2 unidentified hairs, neither tested for DNA as far as I know. Further, DNA analysis was not as advanced in 1996 as now, at the trial the analyst testified about 20% of all DNA material tested garnered 'no result' for profile on the 'intial test' using 1 testing method. None was retested by the state (trial transcript vol.38, the transcripts are avaiable on a site called 'Justice for Darlie'), and as far as I read, the defense did no DNA testing of its own.
*Mentioning the knife and fingerprints in the 911 call....the audio of this is also avaiable on line (although I could not get it to play, I read a partial transcript), as I read it the call was some 5 minutes long, and 1 of those where the operator keeps the victim on or near the phone, giving instructions, asking questions, till police arrive. It was the operator who 1st brings up the knife saying don't pick it up, just leave it where it is, and Darlie answering 'oh my God I just did, you could have got prints off it maybe...' Possibly suspicious, but not what the media led us to believe.
*Putting wet towels on the boys....Wet towels of the dish towel variety were definitely used because they're in the scene photos and were mentioned in the trial. Although I don't yet have a better source, according to the article on the lawyer website Justice Denied.org, she was told to put the wet towels on the boys by the 1st police at the scene, in the minutes they were there before EMT's were let in. This might also explain the rinsed away blood in the sink, and why she 'seemed not to want to give medical care'. Reportedly when police arrived they were holding the EMT's outside, telling her to do some 1st aid to the boys, while she was screaming at them, the intruder had gone in the garage so the EMT's could come in.
*Blood splatter on the mothers shirt....this is an area I look forward to getting into more, as it's 1 of the few potential solid pieces of evidence police had. Unfortunately for them, on her whole blood drenched shirt, only 4 tiny drops or specks were the boys blood (the rest was hers) these were in the area of the top and I believe, front of the right sholder. A blood consultent testified it was splatter and 'could' be consistent with her wielding a knife in her right hand in a downward motion (TT vol.38).
*Were the 2 ailien hairs forcibly removed, and the exact orgin of the bloody prints? Don't know, I'll try and research some more.
*Mother Darlie's actual written statement, the entire trial, some scene and injury photos, the 911 call, are all avaiable on line, I've found Darlie's own site (the Darlie site), Justice for Darlie, and the Justice Denied.org section so far best to access these source materials.
There's also a book I haven't seen yet....Media Tried, Justice Denied, Christopher Wayne Brown, Ad Vice Marketing Inc. 1999 that is supposed to have over 200 pages of case materials and photos.

[tv]

watson, thanks for posting this information. I've always been fascinated by this case and have gone back and forth on whether or not she's guilty. One thing that's always bothered me about the case is I wonder what motiviation anyone would have for breaking in, killing two small children, only wounding the mother and then fleeing? I know there are crazies in the world but it just seems too far-fetched to me.

I've only read one book on the case, I can't remember the name of it, but it was very pro-Darlie. I didn't realize there was information on Crime Library about the case. Thanks again!

[AMS80]

Hey Watson! I'm still trying to find time to get back to the book so we can discuss the physical evidence! Life needs to slow down for a minute so I can post on here LOL! Mercy sakes it's been busy around here! Be in touch soon!

JTF working on comin over to MacDonald thread too!

[watson]

Ditto that AMS80, summer is not the best time for armchair internet detectives, there is just too much else to do. I haven't made much progress in my research since last week, I guess it'll take a while. Still I hope to drop in for a little while every day or two to discuss.
TVDinner....the motive or lack of it, really bothers me too. It's just another 1 of the features of this case that make it stand out. The motive of an intruder, if there was one, is troubling as it was to the police and FBI. On the other hand, the motive of the mother for doing it is troubling also. The prosecution never came up with one, instead just suggesting she was 'depressed', or that the family's money problems were involved. I've never understood how if someone was depressed, murdering 2 of your 3 children, staging a robbery, and cutting yourself is supposed to get you un-depressed. Also the family had no insurance to collect on the boys outside of a policy that paid funeral expenses (listed at $5000 each according to the 20-20 documentary) so apparently there is no way the murders could have helped their money problems. I so far don't see a motive for Darlie either.
Although it's too early in my study of the case to say, here's my idea of the motive of an intruder...... he came to the house to steal, entered through the cut screen, was a very brazen home invader cooly gathering up valuables as the family slept, then 1 of the boys woke up (the one with the stab wound to the chest, but also a gash on the back of his thigh) the intruder caught him, knocked him down, killed with 3 stbs to the chest, hearing the other boy stir, and having gone so far, he silenced that boy with 3-4 stabs to the back, he was standing there deciding what to do next, kill the sleeping Darlie, rape? When she woke, and the fight began and the rest happened as she said. Far fetched that a burgler wouldn't have just run, when the 1st boy woke up, that he would lay out the stuff he was stealing, instead of just taking it? Yep, but it's not unheard of for a home invader to stay long at the scene and committ other crimes there, consider the recent case of the doctors family, where a home invasion started as theft, progressed to kidnapping, extortion, rape, murder, and finished as arson. Just a thought.

[tv]

You make a lot of excellent observations, watson. The lack of motive is a real stumbling block for me. I guess it's possible she's just plain crazy and has no real motive or at least not one we'd understand.

I think the parents acted more than a little strange after the fact. I'm not even including the silly string party in the strangeness because I believe that could have been misinterpreted.

Thanks for giving me some food for thought.

[Results]

I have some questions for you if you don't mind answering them if you can. Darin admits to plotting a home invasion for an insurance fraud and the neighbors witnessed a vehicle watching this house previous to the murders. Was there any life insurance on Darlie? If there was how much? I also read that it was common for Darlie to let the kids bring pillow and blankets to watch TV and fall asleep so it appears that someone knew they would be down there and it looks like robbery was not the motive so who would want these 3 dead? It is hard for me to believe that the detectives did not look in Darin's directions after claims of plotting an insurance scam of robbery. TIA for any help. JMHO

[AMS80]

Originally Posted by Results

I have some questions for you if you don't mind answering them if you can. Darin admits to plotting a home invasion for an insurance fraud and the neighbors witnessed a vehicle watching this house previous to the murders. Was there any life insurance on Darlie? If there was how much? I also read that it was common for Darlie to let the kids bring pillow and blankets to watch TV and fall asleep so it appears that someone knew they would be down there and it looks like robbery was not the motive so who would want these 3 dead? It is hard for me to believe that the detectives did not look in Darin's directions after claims of plotting an insurance scam of robbery. TIA for any help. JMHO

Hi, Results! I found this through a quick search.

http://www.texnews.com/1998/texas/routier0612.html

As mentioned above, I read one book on this case, but don't recall reading anything about the $250,000 life insurance policy (in which Darin was the beneficiary) as stated in the article above.

IMO I think Darlie's motive had less to do with money than with frustration of her ever-changing life. Don't get me wrong, she was missing the money that the couple had enjoyed before, but more than that she was missing the attention she had gotten in her younger years. Diary entries show that she was depressed, arguably to the point of suicide. Tensions in her heightened until she snapped. She didn't think she would get caught, and the situation would give her the attention that she wanted (oh poor Mother Darlie!).

Watson: How have you been? I'm finally finding some time to post!

[Results]

Originally Posted by AMS80

Hi, Results! I found this through a quick search.

http://www.texnews.com/1998/texas/routier0612.html

As mentioned above, I read one book on this case, but don't recall reading anything about the $250,000 life insurance policy (in which Darin was the beneficiary) as stated in the article above.

IMO I think Darlie's motive had less to do with money than with frustration of her ever-changing life. Don't get me wrong, she was missing the money that the couple had enjoyed before, but more than that she was missing the attention she had gotten in her younger years. Diary entries show that she was depressed, arguably to the point of suicide. Tensions in her heightened until she snapped. She didn't think she would get caught, and the situation would give her the attention that she wanted (oh poor Mother Darlie!).

Watson: How have you been? I'm finally finding some time to post!

Hi AMS! Thank you for the article. The attention part doesn't make sense. She would have acted a lot different to get the attention she wanted IMO if that is what she wanted was attention. Where the sock was found that had blood on it she didn't have time to go that far to put the sock there. I looked at the pictures of Darlie and those bruises are horrible it clearly indicates something happened to her. Foreign fingerprints, the sock, the bruising, and her husband admitting that he was plotting an insurance scam and neighbors witnesses a vehicle observing this house doesn't add up to Darlie. This is one tragic case 2 beautiful innocent boys were murdered. The comment that the Dad made to the police about his boys being murdered throws me even more in his direction. JMHO

[Results]

More information of Patterson and Frosch taking the fifth amendment -

The next day Patterson and Frosch took the fifth, it was done before the jury came into the court room. After that, both Patterson and Frosch were excused and not required to testify again. The fact that the officers were excused for taking fifth was kept secret from the jury. The lawyers were restrict from telling the jury that they took the fifth because it my prejudice the case. I would think the jury would believe that there is nothing left to cross the cops on and their statements on direct go unchallenged though plausibly false. Along with pleading the fifth, the grave scene video was much more complete was also suppressed since it related to the fifth. This tape shows the silly string incident in a different context than what the news showed and the defense was denied this evidence. This definitely hurt Darlie's defense because if prevented her from being able to challenge the officers earlier testimony and clarify the silly string.

I think the jury should have been allowed to know that 2 officers pleaded the 5th. JMHO

[AMS80]

Originally Posted by Results

Hi AMS! Thank you for the article. The attention part doesn't make sense. She would have acted a lot different to get the attention she wanted IMO if that is what she wanted was attention. Where the sock was found that had blood on it she didn't have time to go that far to put the sock there. I looked at the pictures of Darlie and those bruises are horrible it clearly indicates something happened to her. Foreign fingerprints, the sock, the bruising, and her husband admitting that he was plotting an insurance scam and neighbors witnesses a vehicle observing this house doesn't add up to Darlie. This is one tragic case 2 beautiful innocent boys were murdered. The comment that the Dad made to the police about his boys being murdered throws me even more in his direction. JMHO

Good points, Results!

I am just speculating on her motive, as I really don't know for sure! I just don't understand the sole financial motive due to the low monetary gain for the boys. Killing Darin would have given her much more.

I'm not convinced of iron-clad evidence of an intruder. First and foremost, why would an intruder break in, kill two of the most helpless and unable people in the house, and not make darn sure that Darlie was dead so she couldn't identify them? Even though Darlie's wounds seem severe (there is speculation as to how severe), they are nothing compared to the savagery inflicted on the boys. IIRC there are also disagreements between hospital staff as to whether Darlie had those bruises in the hospital (this is a muddy issue, as it is hard to tell when bruising will show up, etc...I would have to go back and read up some more on this).

Moving on to physical evidence in the house. The knife used to cut the screen came from the butcher block in the kitchen, it was found in its original location. Did the intruder get in the house without being noticed or cutting any screen, get the knife, cut the screen, and put it back? Did he put it back before murdering the boys? If so, why not just use that knife? Traces of cleaned-up blood were found in the kitchen sink and down the front of the kitchen cabinet. Either the intruder had lots of time to clean up the scene, or Darlie inflicted her own wounds there and cleaned it up herself.

Darlie changed her stories a few times. I need to go back to verify the different versions, but they ranged from one of the boys waking her, to waking up and seeing someone standing over her, to her waking up to feeling pressure "down there" and on and on. She claims to have chased the intruder through the kitchen to the utility room. Her bloody footprints are on the kitchen floor, but under broken glass, in which Darlie had no injuries to her feet. Staged scene? Also, there are no bloody footprints leading to the utility room.

There are a couple other things that I've mentioned in my above posts as well. This is all IMO.

[Results]

Originally Posted by AMS80

Good points, Results!

I am just speculating on her motive, as I really don't know for sure! I just don't understand the sole financial motive due to the low monetary gain for the boys. Killing Darin would have given her much more.

I'm not convinced of iron-clad evidence of an intruder. First and foremost, why would an intruder break in, kill two of the most helpless and unable people in the house, and not make darn sure that Darlie was dead so she couldn't identify them? Even though Darlie's wounds seem severe (there is speculation as to how severe), they are nothing compared to the savagery inflicted on the boys. IIRC there are also disagreements between hospital staff as to whether Darlie had those bruises in the hospital (this is a muddy issue, as it is hard to tell when bruising will show up, etc...I would have to go back and read up some more on this).

Moving on to physical evidence in the house. The knife used to cut the screen came from the butcher block in the kitchen, it was found in its original location. Did the intruder get in the house without being noticed or cutting any screen, get the knife, cut the screen, and put it back? Did he put it back before murdering the boys? If so, why not just use that knife? Traces of cleaned-up blood were found in the kitchen sink and down the front of the kitchen cabinet. Either the intruder had lots of time to clean up the scene, or Darlie inflicted her own wounds there and cleaned it up herself.

Darlie changed her stories a few times. I need to go back to verify the different versions, but they ranged from one of the boys waking her, to waking up and seeing someone standing over her, to her waking up to feeling pressure "down there" and on and on. She claims to have chased the intruder through the kitchen to the utility room. Her bloody footprints are on the kitchen floor, but under broken glass, in which Darlie had no injuries to her feet. Staged scene? Also, there are no bloody footprints leading to the utility room.

There are a couple other things that I've mentioned in my above posts as well. This is all IMO.

You have very good points also. The bruising is in the evidence file where she is still hooked up to an IV so the bruising was there while she was in the hospital. There is no way the prosecution can claim she had no bad bruises on her in the hospital because the picture clearly shows she is hooked up to oxygen and she still has the IV hooked up.

This is interesting to me because it shows there is reasonable doubt if Darlie did in fact murder her children. JMHO

The link for this picture and statements that I have been reading.

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/HerProof/CourtTV.html

Additional information on Barry Fife -
3 years prior to the murder, Darlie was in Pennsylvania visiting relatives. When she returned to Dallas, Darin told her that his car was stolen. Being suspicious, Darlie confronted Darin. Darin fessed up to her and admitted that he when to Barry Fife to have the vehicle stolen. She got angry and Darin and Fife, did not approve of Fifes influence on Darin, and confronted Fife about what he did. She threatened to report him to the police. Fife (who used another party to steal the car) told her, "You do not know who you are dealing with. He would hurt your family and hurt your kids." Darlie eventually let it go because of the threat and the concern of getting her husband into big trouble. When the murders happened three years later, Darlie and Darin both named Barry Fife and Ben Claybour (Denton TX) as possible suspects. Claybour had once stolen Darin's credit cards and charged up $10,000. The Routiers reported this to the FBI, but they never charged Claybour despite the fact that he signed his own name on the charge slips. It was not till years after Darlie's conviction that Darin revealed that a short time before the murders, he had approached Fife to burglarize his house. Fife has a history of this kind of activity to defraud the insurance company. Fife's friend, Ben Claybour, left the state when police wanted to question him. The police did not do any further follow up on Fife or Claybour and arrested Darlie for the murder. They probably arrested her in hopes that she knew more and would rat out her husband rather than face capital murder charges. However, this plan failed because Darlie knew nothing and was not withholding any information from the DA. Unfortunately, after the DA's plan failed, they were now committed to following through her prosecution. They certainly could not release her after making such a public arrest, even though behind the scenes, it was intended to setup her husband. If Fife did arrange a burglary and he used the same person that stole the car, then that person would have a reason to kill Darlie since she would immediately suspect Fife's involvement.

[AMS80]

Originally Posted by Results

You have very good points also. The bruising is in the evidence file where she is still hooked up to an IV so the bruising was there while she was in the hospital. There is no way the prosecution can claim she had no bad bruises on her in the hospital because the picture clearly shows she is hooked up to oxygen and she still has the IV hooked up.

This is interesting to me because it shows there is reasonable doubt if Darlie did in fact murder her children. JMHO

The link for this picture and statements that I have been reading.

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/HerProof/CourtTV.html

Additional information on Barry Fife -
3 years prior to the murder, Darlie was in Pennsylvania visiting relatives. When she returned to Dallas, Darin told her that his car was stolen. Being suspicious, Darlie confronted Darin. Darin fessed up to her and admitted that he when to Barry Fife to have the vehicle stolen. She got angry and Darin and Fife, did not approve of Fifes influence on Darin, and confronted Fife about what he did. She threatened to report him to the police. Fife (who used another party to steal the car) told her, "You do not know who you are dealing with. He would hurt your family and hurt your kids." Darlie eventually let it go because of the threat and the concern of getting her husband into big trouble. When the murders happened three years later, Darlie and Darin both named Barry Fife and Ben Claybour (Denton TX) as possible suspects. Claybour had once stolen Darin's credit cards and charged up $10,000. The Routiers reported this to the FBI, but they never charged Claybour despite the fact that he signed his own name on the charge slips. It was not till years after Darlie's conviction that Darin revealed that a short time before the murders, he had approached Fife to burglarize his house. Fife has a history of this kind of activity to defraud the insurance company. Fife's friend, Ben Claybour, left the state when police wanted to question him. The police did not do any further follow up on Fife or Claybour and arrested Darlie for the murder. They probably arrested her in hopes that she knew more and would rat out her husband rather than face capital murder charges. However, this plan failed because Darlie knew nothing and was not withholding any information from the DA. Unfortunately, after the DA's plan failed, they were now committed to following through her prosecution. They certainly could not release her after making such a public arrest, even though behind the scenes, it was intended to setup her husband. If Fife did arrange a burglary and he used the same person that stole the car, then that person would have a reason to kill Darlie since she would immediately suspect Fife's involvement.

I should have been more clear when I said "in the hospital." What I was referring to was the initial night/day when they were brought into the hospital. I can't remember where I read this, but some thought that the bruising was consistent with crossing the arms in front of the chest and ramming them repeatedly against something. This kind of bruising would look a lot like defensive wounds.

For me, it's just the lack of evidence of an intruder! Honestly I would much rather think of a stranger doing this to these boys than their own mother!

[Results]

Originally Posted by AMS80

I should have been more clear when I said "in the hospital." What I was referring to was the initial night/day when they were brought into the hospital. I can't remember where I read this, but some thought that the bruising was consistent with crossing the arms in front of the chest and ramming them repeatedly against something. This kind of bruising would look a lot like defensive wounds.

For me, it's just the lack of evidence of an intruder! Honestly I would much rather think of a stranger doing this to these boys than their own mother!

ITA about a stranger than their own Mother. I'm not sure about anything in this case but there is a lot that seems to be way out there that makes you go hmmmm. The police woman's hair in that screen who was never on the scene I would love to know what that was about and how it got there. JMHO

[Results]

Originally Posted by AMS80

I should have been more clear when I said "in the hospital." What I was referring to was the initial night/day when they were brought into the hospital. I can't remember where I read this, but some thought that the bruising was consistent with crossing the arms in front of the chest and ramming them repeatedly against something. This kind of bruising would look a lot like defensive wounds.

For me, it's just the lack of evidence of an intruder! Honestly I would much rather think of a stranger doing this to these boys than their own mother!

She was in surgery for 2 hrs so when do you think she had time to make them. Then she was probably doped up from the surgery and sleeping a lot. I don't see a time frame for her to make those bruises on her arms and that bad bruising on both hands before her leaving the hospital. JMHO

[AMS80]

Originally Posted by Results

ITA about a stranger than their own Mother. I'm not sure about anything in this case but there is a lot that seems to be way out there that makes you go hmmmm. The police woman's hair in that screen who was never on the scene I would love to know what that was about and how it got there. JMHO

Wouldn't it be great to be able to know exactly what happened in all of these cases we're interested in? I swear that would be one of my 3 wishes if I had a genie LOL

Check your PM box!

[Results]

Originally Posted by AMS80

Wouldn't it be great to be able to know exactly what happened in all of these cases we're interested in? I swear that would be one of my 3 wishes if I had a genie LOL

Check your PM box!

That would be great without a doubt! Thanks for the PM!

[watson]

Originally Posted by Results

I have some questions for you if you don't mind answering them if you can. Darin admits to plotting a home invasion for an insurance fraud and the neighbors witnessed a vehicle watching this house previous to the murders. Was there any life insurance on Darlie? If there was how much? I also read that it was common for Darlie to let the kids bring pillow and blankets to watch TV and fall asleep so it appears that someone knew they would be down there and it looks like robbery was not the motive so who would want these 3 dead? It is hard for me to believe that the detectives did not look in Darin's directions after claims of plotting an insurance scam of robbery. TIA for any help. JMHO

*****************************************
Hi Results, and AMS80, to AMS... Been doing ok, we just got done with several days of heavy rain/ flooding round here, we're drying out now, hope you've been good, I've made some good progress on researching the case last couple weeks too. Looks like you guys have discussed Results questions, but here's some points (this stuff is just from the official statements, LE, ME, forensic reports, and official evidence (from the trial transcripts).
1.)There was life insurance on both Darlie and Darin but none to speak of on the kids. As far as I know Darlie's life was insured for $100,000, but it could've been $250,000 (it would be in Trial Transcript (TT) vol.33 evidence of ofc David Mayne).
2.) It was normal and a treat for the boys to bring their pillows and blankets down to fall asleep in front of the big screen, according to both parents.
3.)Darin admitted in years past to having his car stolen as part of an insurance scam, and due to the Routier's serious money problems, to planning in the months before the murders, a fake home robbery for an insurance scam, but never carrying it out (Darin's sworn affidavit).
4.) But, that's not all...confirming Darlie's written statement at the time of the murders, he also admitted the couple had been having relationship problems (one reason Darlie was on the couch), that they had argued earlier that night while discussing their relationship, and Darlie told him before he went up to bed, she was going to leave him, and file for legal seperation (Darin's affidavit).
5.) All the insurance policies in question, along with everyones personal documents (birth certs, marriage license, s.s. cards) along with family bills mixed in, were all out in a stack in the family room on top of a geeen box where the murders occurred (TT vol.33 ofc Mayne).
6.) Similar to the Ramsey case, only the parents were 'known' to be in the house with the children, but only Darin was by himself (unless the few months old infant is counted) and therefore unaccounted for during the murders, which he supposedly slept alone through.
7.) Darlie said her attacker in dim light, wore black jeans, black t-shirt, and dark baseball cap (Darlie's written statent, TT ofs. Waddel , and Walling). When police arrived Darin, was wearing dark 'blue jeans', was shirtless, and a black baseball cap usually worn by 1 of the boys was in the utility room by the blood trail. I could not clarify from the transcripts if Darin's jeans were black 'blue jeans', dark 'blue' jeans, or black jeans.
8.) The exact time recording of the 911 call Darlie made, makes it very unlikely she would have had time to plant the sock 1/3 block away, but Darin would have no time problem in doing so, since he's not proven to be at the scene till after the call starts. (911 tape timed transcript).
9.) Darin admitted that when he hired Darlie's lawyers for her in 10/96, 1 month before trial, he did so on condition they not suggest he might have been the killer. (Darin's affidavit).
So, am I saying Darin did it? No, but if I were the investigator knowing everything but #9 above during the investigation, I sure would've taken a long look at him, rather than her. So, why didn't the detectives? Maybe because they arrested her only 12 days after the crime (6-18-96) when a proper investigation would've just been picking up steam, and long before 1 could've been completed.
I used Justicefordarlie.org, not for it's viewpoint, but to access the trial transcripts and evidence, and Fordarlieroutier.org to access the 911 transcript.

[TuscanDreams]

Originally Posted by Results

More information of Patterson and Frosch taking the fifth amendment -

The next day Patterson and Frosch took the fifth, it was done before the jury came into the court room. After that, both Patterson and Frosch were excused and not required to testify again. The fact that the officers were excused for taking fifth was kept secret from the jury. The lawyers were restrict from telling the jury that they took the fifth because it my prejudice the case. I would think the jury would believe that there is nothing left to cross the cops on and their statements on direct go unchallenged though plausibly false. Along with pleading the fifth, the grave scene video was much more complete was also suppressed since it related to the fifth. This tape shows the silly string incident in a different context than what the news showed and the defense was denied this evidence. This definitely hurt Darlie's defense because if prevented her from being able to challenge the officers earlier testimony and clarify the silly string.

I think the jury should have been allowed to know that 2 officers pleaded the 5th. JMHO

hiya Results. In this instance, the officers had no chiocke but to take the Fifth, because Mulder -Darlies atty- was accusing them of illegally planting microphones at the grave. It is not illegal for them to do this, but Mulder knew what he was doing and when he accused them of illegal acts, they had to shut up.

Honestly, I don't think their testimony would have helped Darlie. I think she's guilty as he!!and Darin may have helped with the coverup.

Also, the bruises on her arms are from Devon kicking her while he fought for his life.

Just a note- I used to think she was innocent. I wrote on her behalf to the Gov., etc. Then, I realized she's as guilty as sin.

[One2Snoop]

Originally Posted by TuscanDreams

hiya Results. In this instance, the officers had no chiocke but to take the Fifth, because Mulder -Darlies atty- was accusing them of illegally planting microphones at the grave. It is not illegal for them to do this, but Mulder knew what he was doing and when he accused them of illegal acts, they had to shut up.

Honestly, I don't think their testimony would have helped Darlie. I think she's guilty as he!!and Darin may have helped with the coverup.

Also, the bruises on her arms are from Devon kicking her while he fought for his life.

Just a note- I used to think she was innocent. I wrote on her behalf to the Gov., etc. Then, I realized she's as guilty as sin.

What made you change your mind?

[TuscanDreams]

Originally Posted by One2Snoop

What made you change your mind?

The book, "Media Tried, Justice Denied" changed my mind. It was written by Chris Brown in an effort to defend Darlie and declare her innocence. The autopsy photos of the boys are included in the book and after seeing their injuries- which reveal a personal attack- compared with Darlie, there was no doubt in my mind that she did this.

[watson]

[quote=
Also, the bruises on her arms are from Devon kicking her while he fought for his life.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not aware of any defensive wounds on either of the boy victims, doesn't this have to mean they did not fight with their attacker? I'm not aware of any evidence they kicked anyone, or any evidence that kicking would cause the continuous and massive bruising found only on the bottom of the mothers forearms. Is there any, or is it just speculation?
Isn't true that if the boys were laying down with their feet up in the air kicking the undersides of her arms as she stabbed them, she could not have stabbed Damon only in the back, or Devon in the chest? Wouldn't they have stab wounds to their legs and feet? Wouldn't she also have kick bruises elsewhere like on her face, neck, chest?
Devons lethal wounds were 2 close together deep stab wounds to the chest in the heart area, Damons 3 close together deep stab wounds in the center back, and 1 in the lower back. Doesn't this have to indicate someone stabbed them when they were not moving and intended to kill them quickly and quietly while they slept, and basically did so with little movement on their part?

[TuscanDreams]

Originally Posted by watson

I'm not aware of any defensive wounds on either of the boy victims, doesn't this have to mean they did not fight with their attacker? I'm not aware of any evidence they kicked anyone, or any evidence that kicking would cause the continuous and massive bruising found only on the bottom of the mothers forearms. Is there any, or is it just speculation?
Isn't true that if the boys were laying down with their feet up in the air kicking the undersides of her arms as she stabbed them, she could not have stabbed Damon only in the back, or Devon in the chest? Wouldn't they have stab wounds to their legs and feet? Wouldn't she also have kick bruises elsewhere like on her face, neck, chest?
Devons lethal wounds were 2 close together deep stab wounds to the chest in the heart area, Damons 3 close together deep stab wounds in the center back, and 1 in the lower back. Doesn't this have to indicate someone stabbed them when they were not moving and intended to kill them quickly and quietly while they slept, and basically did so with little movement on their part?

Hi Watson. It is nearly impossible to pick out bruises on the heels of the boys, as the feet mottle first when death approaches. I don't have the book by Chris any longer, so this is from memory- I studied this case until I was blue, until I figured out she was guilty.

Devon had wounds to the back of his thigh and his forearm- they were defensive wounds. Devon kicked his mom when she stabbed him, he was fighting for his life. Devon was stabbed in the heart and Damon was stabbed in the liver. Darlie had a scratch on her neck, basically a papercut.

I've always thought that Darlie intended to stab the boys while they slept, but she woke Devon up and he fought back. I'll have to find some of the pics on the net to refresh my memory regarding your other questions.

Sadly, Darlie killed her sons and she will never take responsiblity. If she took any type of ownership of what she did, she'd just be another muderer. If she continues to claim she's innocent, she gets attention.

Interestingly enough, Darlie was molested as a child by a step parent, which is seen in many cases of filicide- including Susan Smith.

[kathk58]

Originally Posted by TuscanDreams

Hi Watson. It is nearly impossible to pick out bruises on the heels of the boys, as the feet mottle first when death approaches. I don't have the book by Chris any longer, so this is from memory- I studied this case until I was blue, until I figured out she was guilty.

Devon had wounds to the back of his thigh and his forearm- they were defensive wounds. Devon kicked his mom when she stabbed him, he was fighting for his life. Devon was stabbed in the heart and Damon was stabbed in the liver. Darlie had a scratch on her neck, basically a papercut.

I've always thought that Darlie intended to stab the boys while they slept, but she woke Devon up and he fought back. I'll have to find some of the pics on the net to refresh my memory regarding your other questions.

Sadly, Darlie killed her sons and she will never take responsiblity. If she took any type of ownership of what she did, she'd just be another muderer. If she continues to claim she's innocent, she gets attention.

Interestingly enough, Darlie was molested as a child by a step parent, which is seen in many cases of filicide- including Susan Smith.

Wow, I guess I read different accounts of this tragedy. Think the entire investigative team had been recently transferred from Boulder. Not to mention the D.A.'s having been separated at birth. Darlie's neck injury was within 2 mm of her carotid artery resulting in damage to the carotid sheath. The larger of the 2 wounds to her right arm was deep enough to splinter the bone and resulted in leakage of marrow. Not to mention she is right handed. The photos of the bruising of her arms are horrible. What defies understanding is that nurses who cared for her at the time testified months later that she had no bruising or defensive wounds !!! HUH? More Rocky Mountain High. The children were probably sound asleep, and being so young could not fathom what was happening before being mortally wounded. Darlie on the other hand said she woke up with the man on top of her. She probably started to move around defensively and was trying to get up, which could account for her having fewer and less deep wounds. I think the guy was psychotic and killed the kids first just so they couldn't disturb him while he raped and killed their mother. Guess he didn't expect 1 of them to still be able to get to his mom. A grown women, however slight her build, is much more difficult to hold down than 5 or 6 year old children. I'm sure the profilers will say that rapists don't kill children. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. Profiling is a tremendous help to law enforcement, but it's more of an art than a science. Sociopaths, psychopaths do not follow the book. Their total lack of conscience, compassion and remorse are some of the things that make them so dangerous. I have to stop now, but I'll be back. Thanks to all of you who care enough to take the time for these discussions. I don't post often but this case is 1 that really scares me. Thanks, Kath

[watson]

Originally Posted by TuscanDreams

Hi Watson. It is nearly impossible to pick out bruises on the heels of the boys, as the feet mottle first when death approaches. I don't have the book by Chris any longer, so this is from memory- I studied this case until I was blue, until I figured out she was guilty.

Devon had wounds to the back of his thigh and his forearm- they were defensive wounds. Devon kicked his mom when she stabbed him, he was fighting for his life. Devon was stabbed in the heart and Damon was stabbed in the liver. Darlie had a scratch on her neck, basically a papercut.

************************************************** *****
Hi Tuscan, I think it's important to consider the wounds of the boy victims too. When I 1st came across this case from media sources, they kept saying the boys were 'slaughtered'. The tv program showed lots of blood at the scene. So, I was really surprised when I read the autopsy reports and found that Devon only had 2 serious stab wounds, and Damon 4, all of them grouped closely together. Your right there were some other wounds, but these were minor were they not? I wanted to check the autopsy reports again (online at fordarlieroutier.org) for accuracy before responding to your post....Beside his only 2 serious wounds, Devon had a minor stab wound to the back of his left thigh 3/4" long 3/4" deep. If he was laying on his back, someone trying to stab down into his chest and he raised his legs in a defense posture, this would explain this wound, and I agree it could defensive, but there's only the one. He also had some very mild brusing on the palms of his hands, spots 1 1/4" x 1/2", and 1 1/2" x 3/4" on the meaty part directly below the thumbs (the thenar eminence). That again I'd call probably defensive, if he was laying down with his palms up. The 1 1/4" long cut on his left forearm was on the top of the arm, and barely there at only 1/8" deep and IMO probably an accident of the stabber as his arm lay on his chest, and therefore wouldn't be defensive.
Damon's only other injuries were a very superficial cut on the back of his left sholder 1/8" deep, and a 3/4" deep but only 1" long cut, near the closely packed stab wounds that probably was started as another stab. He had no defense wounds and no other wounds at all.
So, I'd change my comment to... the boys had just about no defensive wounds at all (only 1 of them Devon, had a slight stab to the back of his thigh, and barely there superficial bruising on only a small part of his palms).
Your theory about kicking is good but doesn't seem to be supported by the evidence. Everyone can agree blood pools in and discolors the lowest part of the body, but the lowest part would only be the feet if the body was standing or sitting. These boys were prone. For Devon, the ME makes clear in her report, blood and discoloration were on the back of his body, not his feet and legs 'rigor mortis is general and post mortum lividity is purple and....on the posterior aspect (the back) of the body.' She notes no kicking bruising, or injuries to his feet. For Damon, whose body came from the hospital ER, the the ME specifically notes no discoloration at all...'the body is in a good state of preservation, with reduced blanching', she actually notes she inspected his feet and legs... no bruises from kicking, no injuries. I just don't see how two barefoot boys could kick a stronger, heavier adult so much as to leave heavy purple/black bruising on the adult, but no trace on their own bare flesh. The ME's found no evidence they kicked anyone.
Darlie's wounds are for another post, but come on 'a paper cut'. I know you don't really mean it, and are just advocating for your position, but the wound to her neck is a geat big slash, 8" long, that left an enormous scar, visable all over the courtroom at her trial 5 months later (TT vol.28 Dr. Townsend-Parchman), it was closed with surgical tape instead of stiches to reduce scarring but if stiched, probably would've taken about 40 stiches to close the wound, some parer cut!

[TuscanDreams]

Hi Watson,

Years ago, I was a paramedic and the analogy I used was a paper cut in comparison to the cuts on the boys.

Personally, I don't think Darlie should be on death row. I think she should be in a mental health facility to determine what can be learned from her to prevent this type of crime.

More on this later, it's a great discussion! One more thing, the boys were laying on their backs when they were deceased, because Darin placed Devon on his back and I think the medical personell placed Devon on his stomach to rescuitate him.

Actually, Darlie Kee, Darlie Routier's mom, is very kind and sweet. If you google her, you will find an email address for her. She'd love to hear from you and she will write you back. She's had a horrible time, she lost her grandsons and her daughter. While we disagree that Darlie Routier is innocent, I still like Darlie Kee.

[jaxread]

Originally Posted by watson

Ditto that AMS80, summer is not the best time for armchair internet detectives, there is just too much else to do. I haven't made much progress in my research since last week, I guess it'll take a while. Still I hope to drop in for a little while every day or two to discuss.
TVDinner....the motive or lack of it, really bothers me too. It's just another 1 of the features of this case that make it stand out. The motive of an intruder, if there was one, is troubling as it was to the police and FBI. On the other hand, the motive of the mother for doing it is troubling also. The prosecution never came up with one, instead just suggesting she was 'depressed', or that the family's money problems were involved. I've never understood how if someone was depressed, murdering 2 of your 3 children, staging a robbery, and cutting yourself is supposed to get you un-depressed. Also the family had no insurance to collect on the boys outside of a policy that paid funeral expenses (listed at $5000 each according to the 20-20 documentary) so apparently there is no way the murders could have helped their money problems. I so far don't see a motive for Darlie either.
Although it's too early in my study of the case to say, here's my idea of the motive of an intruder...... he came to the house to steal, entered through the cut screen, was a very brazen home invader cooly gathering up valuables as the family slept, then 1 of the boys woke up (the one with the stab wound to the chest, but also a gash on the back of his thigh) the intruder caught him, knocked him down, killed with 3 stbs to the chest, hearing the other boy stir, and having gone so far, he silenced that boy with 3-4 stabs to the back, he was standing there deciding what to do next, kill the sleeping Darlie, rape? When she woke, and the fight began and the rest happened as she said. Far fetched that a burgler wouldn't have just run, when the 1st boy woke up, that he would lay out the stuff he was stealing, instead of just taking it? Yep, but it's not unheard of for a home invader to stay long at the scene and committ other crimes there, consider the recent case of the doctors family, where a home invasion started as theft, progressed to kidnapping, extortion, rape, murder, and finished as arson. Just a thought.

I dont it is just a matter of the $5000 for each child to be considered. Dont you think removing the 2 boys would have had a huge impact on the household finances.? Not just day to day but into the future as well.
As far as you not understanding how doing this crime would help Darlies depression,you are looking at it from your point of view. You are not a desperate,depressed,sociopath.If all criminals looked at there potential crimes logically and sanely we probably wouldnt have any crimes.

[wind149]

I have watched this case profiled on many shows and I have always came up with the same conclusion the prosecutor did. Darlie is as guilty as sin and there are many factors as to why that is. She, while injured, just like with Jeffrey McDonald, had superficial wounds compared to the deep knife wounds in her children. Her throat slash was not even near fatal, and the bruises could easily been self inflicted and the other cuts on her arms were not deep penetrating wounds either. If an intruder came to that house to steal, or some crazed killer, he would have left no living witnesses and even Darren would have murdered. This case is so eerily similar to the McDonald case it is not even funny. While the insurance amounts were not large, the money could have bailed them out a tad and I think Darlie was only into Darlie and when the business was not doing as good as they hoped and she could not have all the nice things she thought she was entitled to and she was one that liked to show off what they had. All of sudden the fancy house and the jewels and cars could all be gone and she could not handle going poor again. And if your wife is screaming frantically downstairs, don't you think you would be hauling butt to the first floor? How could anybody sleep through that carnage? Easy, if it is your wife doing the killing. Old Darren ain't an innocent babe in the woods here either. His polygraph was inconclusive, not telling the truth. I think the reason he has stuck by her all these years is he does know what happened that night and while I don't think he wielded the knife, he knows damm well who did and has tried for the last 11 years to run the spin that she is as innocent as a lamb. She is going to die for what she did because the crazed killer only exists in she and Darren's heads. The Rowlette police found dripped blood that was hers over the sink. What a perfect place to slash your own throat. The blood found in the living room was a mixture of hers and the boys but mostly the boys which proves to me that she was not stabbed in the living room like the boys. She did her own gig in the kitchen. I mean come on, here your kids have deep, stab wounds that prove to be fatal, and 98% of her blood is in the kitchen, but yet she says she woke up to the "Killer" slashing her throat??? The scene to me looked staged and the silly string gravesite yahoo did not bode well with me either. She did not seem like the grieving mother, but her mother will spin ya the this is what Devin would have wanted. No, what I think Devin would have wanted was to live and his mother decided that he and his brother were a financial burden. She is a liar, a manipulator and no one should have any sympathy or empathy for her and should shed no tears the day she meets her maker.

[Marcia3]

Wow, Wind, I'm so glad to see you posting on this thread. Based on what you have written here, it's obvious that you are able to see this case for what it is, and while you and I don't agree on what should happen to Billy Flynn, we absolutely agree on what should happen to Darla.

I also suspect that Darren knows much more than he has admitted to over the years. Delusions come in many shapes and colors. They are totally delusional if they think that Darla will receive a new trial and be found NG as a result. JMO, of course.

[wind149]

Marcie,
The good thing on this board is we all agree to disagree and I know where you are coming from with Bill Flynn and I respect your opinion, it is a mixture of people that have been mulling that case over. Some agree with me ,some agree with you and that is fine, makes it more of a challenge! As for this vapid, evil, child killer, she is NEVER going to get a new trial if anything, her execution date should soon be looming as she has been there for 10 years and the average stay on death row in TX could be as little as five years to about 12, so I would say she better start praying. Every time I have seen her profiled on those crime shows ,whining about how tough her life in behind bars and how she is so innocent, she is another one who will not give up the spin anymore than Pam Smart will and it is sickening. Just like Pam's mother, Darlie Key is so bamboozled and refuses to see the killer of her grandchildren is the same woman who speaks from behind a glass partition. These poor women are delusional to a fault and in the end it is not going to matter for Darlie Key. Linda Wojas moans often about Pam and what a raw deal her daughter got and it is to the point now where people especially from NH are just plain sick of seeing her on their TV's. These two women killed people they claimed to have loved, one for the insurance money the other for the want of a rented condo, a dog ,and a leather couch and her husband wanted to grow up and not be a head banger rock musician. But if both of them actually admitted their guilt they would have to tell their parents the real truth and all their spins over the years would be in vain, not that anyone believes it beyond their fool parents. I would find it very hard to live with myself, but I am not a sociopath. This woman is as evil does and the day they execute her will show the world that we don't tolerate child killers in this country. I know that she has some of those bleeder anti-DP terrorists on her side and I do believe there is a Free Darlie web-site out there, but I have not felt the need to look it up. I did look up Pam's and I signed that guest book alright and told that doctor that put it out there that she is delusional and blinded by Pam, the rest of us know the real Pam, especially the ones from NH such as myself. We will never let that witch forget what she did and we all should just forget she exists like this child killing scumbag.

[Marcia3]

I'm curious as to your opinion on what Darla's motive may have been for killing her sons. I'm not sure that she had one beyond a vague notion that life might be better without all of the responsibilities that come with children. Everyone who is raising, or has raised, children knows that there are days when you're lucky to have time for the "luxury" of showering and changing your clothes! The physical, emotional, financial stresses can eat away at the strongest of souls.

However, I don't think Darla is a strong person, I think she wimped out when the day-to-day work and sacrifices necessary for children piled up. I'm not saying she "snapped" because I hate it when people use that expression.

Anyway, she has always made this about herself, IMO, and not about her two children that were robbed of the chance to grow up. I don't believe that the evidence indicates the intruder story, not at all. But I still have these sneaking suspicions that her husband knows much more than he's telling.

I am not typically an enthusiastic supporter of the death penalty. In this case, though, it just seems to fit.

[watson]

Wind, it's clear you've seen the same tv programs on this case most of us have. The prosecutor in this case told a 'story' to get a conviction. The tv producers retold his story on tv, and now people who watch the programs re-tell the story. But, where's the facts and evidence to 'prove' this story???
The 'story' is that Darlie was selfish. Ok, lets say she was, maybe 1/2 the people in the country are selfish, does this 'prove' their murderers?
The 'story' is the couple were having money problems. How many people today in 2007 are having money problems, does this 'prove' their murderers?
About the only 'fact' or 'evidence' this prosecutor had originally to back up anything he said, was (as you point out) the wounds on Darlie were different than those on the boys. Her throat was slashed, she had a few non lethal stab wounds, and was beaten to a pulp (at least her arms were), while the boys each had a few lethal stab wounds with just about no evidence of other injury. The prosecutor said this 'proved' she murdered the boys and injured herself......Why? How?
I mean really how and why does the fact that she was beaten and slashed and stabbed only some, while she says she was struggling, and the boys weren't beaten and stabbed deeply, apparently while sleeping, indicate she did it?
If she did it, couldn't she have easily have said an intruder broke in stabbed the boys, robbed the place and not injured herself at all?
What the prosecutor didn't have to 'prove' his story in this case was, any fingerprints, any hairs, any fibers, essentially no other forensic evidence, any witnesses, or any hard facts at all, (case facts) isn't that true?
Then what about the defense evidence skipped in the hurried trial.....2 fingerprint in the boys blood one, on the doorway leading to the garage, she says the killer ran through, the other at the scene that aren't hers. Doesn't this alone raise a doubt to her guilt?
P.S. blood in the sink.......Aren't the case facts that the layout of this house was that the family room where the murders took place, and kitchen are one room divided by a island counter and wine rack. The sink being only about 15 feet and in view of where the murders took place. That she used the counter phone, in her 5 3/4 minute long 911 call while standing and bleeding by the sink, that she also got towels for the bleeding boys at the sink as the 1st police on scene told her to, and wet towels there as well? (websleuths archives, this case, floor diagram, case facts all the case websites including Jsticefordarlie, fordarlierotier.org etc.). Given these facts I'd say the prosecutor has no proof to back up his idea she cut her throat at the sink. Her blood would've been there anyway.

[wind149]

Who would have wanted to kill the Routier family? While I know some murderers kill just for the sake of killing, I don't see where this family had any enemies, they appeared to be an average American family, not connected to any criminal elements. The insurance money was scant, I will agree there, but I think Darlie was only into Darlie and when the business was not doing well, and she had the responsibility of these boys and I think she did not want to be a mother anymore and the kids were a financial burden. If a crazed killer had entered that home he would have made sure no one survived including the baby and Darren. What does not add up for me is here she is screaming as she claims frantically for Darren and yet, he does not come downstairs until the boys are already fatally wounded and Darlie is injured. As I said, if I heard my landlord screaming, I would be hauling butt over to her house to find out why! Her wounds could easily been self inflicted, including the bruises. Having worked in law enforcement and I had spoken to some of my detectives about this case, we had a case where a woman just wanted her husband out of the picture, she wanted total custody of the kids, and she wanted the money and the house and figured the only way she could get all of this is to self inflict bruises on herself and claim the husband did it and he was arrested for domestic violence and then we get wind of the fact she had bragged to friends how she set him up and how she got everything and she found herself being charged with false info to a police officer, her husband who happened to be a decent fellow who would never lay on a hand on anyone including that selfish witch, got custody of the kids as Family Court based on what she had done terminated her parental rights and he got the house. It totally backfired on her and this is the same thing that happened to Darlie. She tried to run the intruder spin and not one iota of evidence has pointed to that fact, the fingerprints could have been there from the Avon lady for all we know. If Darlie did not want her kids dead ,then who did? I watched one show where two retired detectives went on a snoop to find out some things about the family and it was on that show which was on Court TV I believe, that made me take a second look at Darren.The detectives found a guy who claimed Darren wanted him to steal his Jag for the insurance money and break into the house and make it look like a robbery months before the murders and he turned Darren down. Now this guy was no choir boy, but he was telling the truth as he had no reason to lie and had not done the deeds so that tells me that Darlie and Darren were intending on breaking the law before that fateful night and gives credence to the murders were committed by Darlie and Darren knew all about what was going down and he should burn in hell with her. When they questioned Darren about the guy's claim, he had a ready answer that the guy had it in for him but never explained why. I was totally convinced after seeing this show which was on maybe a year ago? Until some fool comes forward and tells the world he was the killer, I believe the killer is in custody and sitting on death row.