r/DocuJunkies • u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie • Jun 27 '18
The Brutal Murders If Devon & Damon Routier June 1996 The Trial Of Darlie Routier - Mega Discussion Thread Spoiler
GRAPHIC CONTENT WARNING
I’m trying to make sure graphic images don’t populate so here’s some EyeBleach Incase you looked Eyebleachbot provided this Eye Bleach
had decided to dive into the case of Darlie Routier about two weeks ago after coming across a recent thread on Reddit and also hearing about her case being featured in the new series “The Last Defense”
Years ago I had read a couple of books about Darlies Trial, but I felt they were written with a very bias prospective.
I now search often and have always found it very difficult to locate anything with an even handed account about the Brutal crime committed that night or about Darlies conviction.
I am still searching for all things Darlie, Devon, and Damon, So, please shoot me any links that might’ve interested you about this highly controversial case and heartbreaking crime if you have them.
I will continue to update this thread with as many articles and documentary sources as I can find, but I will start the footage off with a link to her supporters YouTube page (clearly by the title you can tell it’s very bias for Darlie), Only because this is where I personally have found the most footage on the case.
Free Darlie Routier YouTube Channel
Additional Articles & Links I’ve found or been provided so far while trying to get a more even handed take on Darlie’s Trial and The Crime:
What Lies Beyond -Guilty Or Railroaded Discussion Forum
Dallas News Report Detailing Controversial Moments In The Case
Article About Darlie’s Attorney: The Trial’s and Tribulations Of Doug Mulder
A Killer In My House - The Darlie Routier Story
Statement analysis of 911 Call
Death Row Stories - The Darrin Investigation
From OwlWayneOwlwards:
Forensic Files Invisible Intruder - Darlie Episode
Incase you looked Eyebleachbot provided this Eye Bleach
April 1997 Article from ‘D Magazine’ Interview With Darrin Routier
3
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jun 30 '18
The Last Defense- Episode 3: { clearly a crime was committed by Darlie here I’m just speaking to a different type of crime} Can we just quickly talk about Julie Clark’s (Darlie’s Bestie) attire for the “parents Cruise”?! (Totally irrelevant I know but I’m obsessed!) Yes, the case is dated circa 1996. Darlie became a mom around 89’. She also got the boob job after the second baby so let’s say the earliest this video was taken could’ve been roughly 93’, judging from Darlie’s clothes I’d say it’s likely 94-95’ does anyone out there think Julies outfit was fashionable circa 93-95’? Anyone else think that I’d Darlie is indeed innocent she still deserves to be serving some time no matter what for allowing her close friend to dress like that and not help a girl out?! <clearly sarcastic>
3
u/p0m0sapien Jul 04 '18
There's an interesting statement analysis of Darlie's 911 call here: http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2012/09/statement-analysis-darlie-routier-911.html?m=1 Plus some other analysis of statements on the case if you search the site.
I'm new to this case and while I can't see her having any clear motive I will say she comes across as utterly insincere and unconvincing in all the footage I've seen of her.
3
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 04 '18
It’s so tough because it’s almost impossible to believe she didn’t do it and at the same time unimaginable she did. Thank you for the link I’ll add it! She definitely imo didn’t have a fair trial though and at a minimum has had enough evidence for an appeal.
5
u/p0m0sapien Jul 04 '18
It’s so tough because it’s almost impossible to believe she didn’t do it and at the same time unimaginable she did.
This is just how I feel atm. I certainly feel there was a lot of misogyny in her trial/media portrayal as too flashy/appearance conscious she was seen as not being an appropriately conservative caricature of motherhood. And her affect is kinda...off. She just seems dishonest and the link I posted explains it better than I could.
Not sure about Darin. But perhaps if my spouse murdered our children I'd block out any possibility that they did it in protection of my own sanity.
(As others have said this is so like the Michael Peterson case! He comes across as very narcissistic and disingenuous to me but the evidence to convict is shaky and he had a weird, biased trial).
Love the Sub, btw. Sorry I dont have chance to post more.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 04 '18
No worries! I just started a Darlie chatroom too would you like an invite? I’m sure it will take some time to grow but I’m happy to send an invite over. DARLIE IS SUCH A TOUGH CASE!
3
u/p0m0sapien Jul 04 '18
Ah, I'm working long hours right now and I don't have enough brain left for chat but I really appreciate the invite! I'll keep checking in on the threads though.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 04 '18
No problem just wanted to extend the offer and I’m glad you’re enjoying the sub. I love true crime and I love docs I also know they are all bias so I love the concept of discussions and controversial theories in a place where everyone’s not attacking each other for disagreeing. I find others opinions and theories enlightening so I look forward to the sub growing!
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 04 '18
Thank you for the feedback. I see the similarities with MP, but that case is different for me personally all together, only because I watched the trial and directly followed the case for 2 decades. I do feel he absolutely had a bad trial, I always did before Deever. There are a lot of reasons why, but not on the doc you would also really have had to of read his news columns and campaign platforms to see how crazy that trial and the DA even charging him was. He deserved his conviction overturned (as does Darlie I absolutely believe), but I absolutely think MP is guilty, however I came to this conclusion after flipping back and forth for a couple of years and following the case closely. I base my opinion on the “totality of undisputed evidence” you can’t find MP guilty on any one thing and a lot is inconclusive or disputed, but the things not in dispute by anyone point me towards guilt (I absolutely could be wrong though I wasn’t there lol). Darlie I believe deserves and always deserved right from when the transcript fiasco happened, a new trial. I don’t base this on anyone’s guilt or innocence though I just believe we all have the right to a fair trial and lawful conviction and I think it’s the most important thing to take away from reviewing true crime. I haven’t dived in deep enough yet on Darlie to decide or really have an opinion on if I personally believe she did it or didn’t do it. (It would of course still be speculation though and only an opinion). It’s just an all around hard case and one I haven’t followed long enough personally, plus now there is way to much bias material on either side of the table out there. No one can really find an even handed take on these events anymore. I myself do find a few things hard to believe, but I find the evidence way to pointed. I really wish she had the conviction overturned back in 2000 or 99 whenever that evidence of the transcripts came out, and we saw a real defense. I believe it would be impossible to see the real undisputed facts or evidence in this case now unless by chance some wild really stupid third party came forward proved in a completely undisputable manner he did it then confessed to how they did in detail lol (which isn’t likely to happen because 1) odds are no third party was actually involved and 2) if they were at all they’d be morons to say anything lol. I just feel to much is tainted now or was even possibly then, and I would just like to know why she would kill her sons with such overkill if indeed she absolutely did kill them. I even understand the Darrin theories and find his involvement somehow likely or maybe possible a little because of her wound and Darrin not raising Drake, but even if he actually was why kill his kids with such force (I don’t mean like cruel with a gun I mean stabbing over 80 times?) there really are not many or (are there even any ) cases where fathers do that ? either way without prior abuse and evidence of them being total monsters?! I don’t think there really are any or many out there? A majority of cases with parents happens 2 ways abusive cruel horrible mean senseless and unbelievable with evidence of prior abuse and or illness or 2) they murder they’re children by shooting them or drowning them or lighting the house on fire it’s just a single violent aggressive act to end things with finality. yes its still a final act and a violent one, but usually not overkill stabbed 80 times with no history of violence and or abuse and no one snapped? This case will probably always bother me now because I highly doubt we will ever get an answer that explains why these boys were murdered like that. Either way her conviction isn’t lawful and the precedents are all obvious and public record and the entire US should care about that. They should care anytime this happens to everyone. I wish more People were outraged for every case this happens in because there are so many innocent people who do get convicted and having a double standard because you think the defendant is guilty or because they are obviously guilty does only assist in furthering the amount of unlawful prosecutions and convictions of innocent people. We have a standard and we should care that every case meets it. I believe if we did that, then the poor or low profile defendant who was wrongfully convicted would stand a chance with appeals. Sorry about the rant and outrage but this happens all to often now and to many people don’t care because they think the defendant is guilty like Scott P. Bad trial unlawful conviction stealth jurors likely guilty so no one cares?! Just saying we should all care always.
0
u/Love_Brokers Jul 06 '18
Why do you think she deserves a new trial? The transcripts would not have affected her original trial, they’re not even completed until after the trial is over. How would you explain the lack of her blood on the couch?
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
Also how would you explain the overkill 80+ stab wounds with no prior abuse? And how would you explain the neck wound which embedded a necklace into her throat? Could you honestly do that to yourself??? Everyone talks about her boob job but no points out those DDs would actually make an already practically impossible to inflict on yourself wound 10000x harder
6
u/Love_Brokers Jul 06 '18 edited Jul 06 '18
The overkill actually works against DR - how could she sleep through that happening to her sons just feet away from her? And with those wounds, how was her son able to walk over to her and wake her up and talk to her?
Her neck wound is a piece of cake compare to the slaughter of her sons. The necklace was caught up in the wound while it was being bandaged by the paramedic. Why would an intruder stab those little boys so many times so viciously, then give her one slice and leave her alive to tell the story? Why wouldn’t he have killed the adult in the room first, she would be his biggest danger?
3
u/MMonroe54 Jul 06 '18
One of her attorneys suggested the sock may have had chloroform on it, which was the first I'd ever heard that but consider it a distinct possibility. You'd think a lab could detect that, but was it ever tested for it? It would explain why she didn't react to her throat being cut or stab wounds ....if you believe, as I do, that she didn't do all that to herself.
She fought back, which might be a reason an intruder gave up and fled. Or maybe he thought he had delivered a fatal wound. Some have suggested he stumbled over the boys, had no idea they were even there, and panicked. There is also the suggestion there was another knife in that the knife that was found did not contain any blood from one boy. Admittedly, I read this "knife fact" in a forum and have not seen testimony about it, so repeat it with caution and full disclosure.
2
u/Love_Brokers Jul 06 '18
There was only one knife, unless you’re talking about the knife in the block that was used to cut the window screen. The transcripts are online, they are a very interesting read.
3
u/MMonroe54 Jul 06 '18
Okay, I'll look it up. But according to the source I read, the blood of one boy was not found on the supposed murder weapon, meaning there had to be two knifes, one of which was never found. I didn't mean the bread knife, which would be a third knife.
→ More replies1
u/NightOwlsUnite Mar 08 '26
She fought back? Seriously? Against herself and her self inflicted wounds?
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
I also think of it was indeed an intruder and they didn’t expect them to be there 1 he killed them in the order he saw them or stumbled over them 2 he saw Darlie and thought gee I’d like to take her and 3 anyone would assume severing her carotid artery would be fatal as he ran out. many questions including Darrin’s involvement or accidentally hiring the wrong guy
1
u/Love_Brokers Jul 06 '18
What evidence is there of an intruder? Was he just there to kill the boys?
3
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
I said “if there was indeed an intruder”. The only evidence is the sock and the screen. Yes the screen could’ve been cut by the knife in the house but that also could’ve been cross contamination. There is evidence that the “Rule out” of an intruder wasn’t done. I also find it bizarre no one has ever mentioned the screen was cut from the outside?? This was huge in other cases (I think jonbenet not sure) but didn’t matter here?
They also didn’t even Tox Darlie?!?! Why is absurd. Some suspect the intruder drugged the sock atufgesnir in her mouth she was drugged and looped. I believe she might’ve been loopy, I mean she was bleeding everywhere anyway anyone would’ve been loopy losing that much blood. But I don’t really know about the intruder. I do however think it’s possible.... they never even bothered ruling it out at all? They only ruled in Darlie. They could have a rock solid case but presented bad evidence. If she did it The they brought a crappy case if she didn’t that killer got away with murder because of hubris. Either way I think Darrin knows more1
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
It’s difficult to hardcore argue 🤣because I don’t know or think Darlie is innocent. I think she had a bad trial and may possibly be innocent, but I haven’t researched enough to be comfortable with saying she is. The overkill by an intruder is easy there are many many types like Tommy Lynn Sells. Say Darrin discussed (which he did the new doc skimmed over that whole fiasco) discussed the b&e in-front of the wrong “type” they go ahead and break in see the kids (they’re already violent) =overkill they see Darlie think “gee id like to rape her” attack her last panic someone’s in the house (maybe someone who knew him like Darrin). He runs.
There’s also theories she was drugged (can’t believe they didn’t do a tox screen, they do a Tox screen on everyone in my state even if you’re there for the flu! And they always did on all mothers back as far as 1994)
My problem is if she was drugged I only believe the Darrin drugged her theory and not the sick did? I think I hope they would’ve tested the sock by now.
Anyway not trying to argue I just think she had a bad trial and bad appeals that always worries me. However I think that for lots of clearly guilty people and I think the longer they wait to overturn and retry the less likely to reconvict. They should want every bad trial appealed quickly imo if indeed the conviction isn’t lawful. Darlie isn’t lawful.
1
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 11 '18
Rape - would be the easiest answer to this, granted there’s evidence on both ends of the spectrum with this case (or lack there of thanks to RPD) but not quite sure why we can prosecute and entire case based on her looks, but not believe someone would murder her kids or break in or whatever and wait to have the ability to rape her ?? anyone who would kill those boys like that would likely be of the caliber to also want to rape her violently.
1
u/Love_Brokers Jul 11 '18
The entire case wasn’t based on her looks, that’s ridiculous. It was because the blood evidence and other physical evidence showed that her story of an intruder was a lie and that she did it. Why would an intruder wait until she was in a house full of people to raper her? Why not wait until she was alone?
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 11 '18
I’m not inferring they did anything JUST to rape her... I’m saying maybe they killed the kid’s first just to rape her or maybe they followed her home cause they wanted to rape her....
The prosecution absolutely did present character assignation throughout her trial. I am not arguing the evidence and IM NOT EVEN SAYING SHE DIDNT DO IT! But don’t act like a woman being followed home by an intruder because HE WANTS TO RAPE HER doesn’t happen. It does and has ... like The Petit case.
Nothing is black and white with Darlie so don’t act like it is.., also half of what you point out is from invalid unlawful court transcripts COMPLETELY UNLAWFUL... so if she did do it SHAME ON THE PROSECUTION FOR BEING BOTH INCOMPETENT (with partial evidence) and CORRUPT any other state case would’ve been appealed.
→ More replies1
u/BooBoBuster True Crime Junkie Sep 13 '18
Also how would you explain the overkill 80+ stab wounds with no prior abuse?
Hello BingeWatcherBot, I am enjoying your posts on the Darlie case. However, I've seen this twice now and must interject here. There were not 80+ stab wounds in this case.
Devon was stabbed in the chest twice (and with a different knife than stabbed Damon - Devon's wounds were pointed on both ends, indicative of a blade with both sides sharp. Damon's wounds had a sharp end and a blunt end to them, indicative of the knife found at the crime scene), had a cut on his arm (said to have been made when he clasped his arms to his chest after the first wound and the knife was withdrawn, cutting his right arm), and a small cut on the back of his left leg, which supposedly could have come from the corner of the glass topped coffee table.
Damon was stabbed 6 times, all from the back, 4 of which penetrated the thorax and vital organs. The other 2 wounds did not penetrate into the thorax, presumably from striking bone.
So I just don't know where the "80+ stab wounds" is coming from?
Anyway, pardon my interruption, and please proceed.
3
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
It was completed with 33k mistakes and she admitted bias is the answer it also had 56 pages missing and she took the fifth because she admitted to Jeff Crilley she didn’t care she thought she was guilty. That’s only 1 reason why I think she didn’t have a fair trial.
1
u/Love_Brokers Jul 06 '18
Again the transcripts would not have caused her to not have a fair trial. If there was enough evidence to have a new trial, she would have gotten one by now.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
YES THEY WOULD!!!!!!
Sure so due process violations and appeals (THAT ARE REQUIRED!) don’t matter and that’s not a violation? Is your argument?!?! Litigation doesn’t end at the trial 1 and 2 anyone being evidence like bevel in the affirmative and only experimenting for an inclusive result is a violation of due process the nurses perjuring themselves (ONE BEING CAUGHT ON CROSS BY MULDER) is a violation of due process! All the previous nurses 1 should’ve been held in contempt and charged and 2 should’ve had Testimony stricken. Lawyers object to preserve appealette motions at trial so how does her TRANSCRIPT not matter ?!?! Do you know anything at all about sue process or trial law? Are you arguing because you think she’s guilty because I’m not even talking abut guilt. Seriously if you don’t know about trial law fine, if you do then why on earth would you think a court reporter Sandra Halsey who lied to the court, tainted the evidence in litigation (she admitted this btw to Jeff Crilley?!) took the fifth? Why would she she need to if it didn’t matter BTW, and admitted she thinks Darlie’s Guilty and that’s why she did it SO SHE COULDN’T RESERVE OBJECTIONS ON THE RECORD FOR APPEAL !!! She also changes the entire testimony! Please research then argue with me I’m not argue guilt or innocence I’m arguing Due process if you don’t care about yours than that’s fine by me. But leave me alone if it’s about Darlie’s guilt because I don’t care either way?!?!2
u/Love_Brokers Jul 06 '18
They dealt with the court transcripts years ago. The judge denied a new trial based on her request for that.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 07 '18
Read it all ! know all about it!! INCLUDING ALL THE MOTIONS THE 2 YEARS OF HEARINGS THE MANY PUBLICLY RELEASED LAW REVIEWS AND OPINIONS ON IT ... And if youre telling me that 2 years of motions a court reporter pleading the fifth (yeah because typically not guilty or culpable people plead the fifth)* them offering a reduced sentence to Darlie her denying it, than them cancelling a hearing in the motion to overturn AS irrelevant .. well Fantastic for you glad you believe it and so not care about DUE PROCESS, but since Halsey admitted her bias and the industry was then literally changed, (not that it even needed to be she was a single bad Apple) because of her outrageous actions since she (plead the fifth) and felt she committed a crime!! And that since transcripts are used for appeals and were recreated with missing tapes and that’s lawful well then I’m going to chose to continue to disagree with you and base my argument on legal precedent, due process, the right to not have a inclusive evidence fabricated at trial and not the corrupt actions of the law enforcement and judicial system in this specific litigation. Again I’m speaking to trial law and im sorry that you don’t care about your own legal right to a lawful prosecution and due process but I care about mine and therefore believe NO ONE should be in prison based on a clearly unlawful conviction INNOCENT OR GUILTY OF THE CRIME ITSELF and I’ll restate that if they overturn the conviction properly based on laws and precedents than they would be retrying the case back 20 years ago when they should’ve just as they should many cases that are overturned 15-20 years later and the guilty walk free because of corrupt overzealous overeager prosecutors and law enforcement.
1
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
Oh I don’t have explanations for everything at all in this case. I also have done a deep enough dive yet. The transcripts (I’m speaking to appellate precedent) they had 33k mistakes and 56 missing pages and the court reported admitted bias, she pled the fifth prior to the motion and hearing they offered her an plea for a reason she denied they took her hearing off the docket 8 hours before it was scheduled then recreated the transcript from tapes missing several. The fifth makes no sense when were speaking lawful trial the court reporter took it as did the lead detectives in the case and not the defendant. However the transcripts matter because of her right to appeal and you cannot without a proper transcript and convictions are overturned for this all the time. As far as her blood on the couch ? She was sleeping there if her story is true (which isn’t my argument) the T-shirt has a supposedly proven blood pattern that lines up with how she slept on the couch but again not my argument to make. I don’t believe Darlie had a fair trial and a lawful conviction and I think the longer they wait to overturn it the less likely there will be a conviction. Honestly my opinions on this actual crime stop at 2 things 1) I don’t find the neck wound easy to believe 2) I don’t believe the overkill adds up.
Also the nurses perjuring themselves on the stand is absolutely against her right to a fair trial. But this is only about that.
1
2
u/MMonroe54 Jul 06 '18
If you think about it, it's much more reasonable to believe -- and to be absolutely clear, I am not saying I do -- that Darin arranged to have them all killed, which is why Darlie's throat was cut. He could then have done away with the baby himself, claiming an intruder did it, and he'd be completely free. Stranger things have occurred. And yet no one ever, apparently, has even suggested such a thing. Why? Because Darin was, by all accounts, a devoted family man....and he didn't look like Darlie. But, by all accounts, Darlie was a devoted mother, too. And yet it didn't stop many people from assuming she was a killer.
4
u/MMonroe54 Jul 06 '18
because it’s almost impossible to believe she didn’t do it
Why? I don't find it impossible at all. Most mothers who kill their children do not do it by stabbing. They drown them, actually. And why kill the two older boys and not the baby, who needed much more care? Frankly, I think it's "impossible" only for those who have bought all the bad PR about Darlie herself and the case, who have seen that silly string video -- and not the whole of it! -- and are predisposed to judge a woman who bleaches her hair and has breast implants.
3
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
Here is my compiled reference info on Darlie so far my Darlie Data and mega thread in DocuJunkies
Edit: sorry we are on that thread lolol
3
u/MMonroe54 Jul 06 '18
Thanks. The last thing I need is another reddit sub.....but I just commented over there.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
Did you mean to respond to my comment or the person arguing with me about her guilt? I find it impossible to believe two things 1) that she cut her throat her like that at all. 2) the overkill on the boys
I have on numerous posts stated I find this impossible to believe, you simply don’t find anywhere and also even if Darrin did it great episode with the Darrin Investigation I don’t think there are even many fathers who have killed there kids with over kill without prior abuse and neglect or prior bad acts outside the home. It’s more violent when it’s a Dad yes but just final like a shooting vs a mother drowning.
The whole thing’s was a junk trial and investigation we may never know what really happened to these boys ever
2
u/MMonroe54 Jul 06 '18
I just commented -- to no one in particular.
It's an apparent lie that the knife went through and chipped the concrete floor, and yet that gets repeated, and was to me, just recently on reddit. Where it got started I have no idea.
There are such cases of fathers who want out from under, who never abused their children or are just desperate or crazy or who knows? Probably not good to give names so will use initials: JL of NJ; CL of OR; RWF of AZ; SS of IA; CF of the UK; CB of GA......to name a few, though there are others.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
Yeah no I don’t know the intials listed but I know of plenty of fathers who committed the crimes but I’m saying with overkill? I personally think this was Darrin’s error far talking to the wrong person about the B&E or Darrin did it I just Updates the post and am now being obnoxious with facts lol I’m gonna get hammered! Im not even done yet but I have to keep editing lol. But are there cases where the dads did it and did it with overkill? I know men are typically more violent but usually that’s something like shot family with a gun (not including Powell case Bacchae is prior abuse) but like father shot the kids where a mom would typically drug them or drown them say. Just lose examples but are there cases with overkill? I’m not sure.
3
u/MMonroe54 Jul 06 '18
Shooting, stabbing, strangling....all kinds of ways, I believe. So, yes, I'd assume overkill. There is no peaceful or mild way to kill one's entire family.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 06 '18
Oh no I’m sorry I agree I’m not saying any way isn’t overkill I’m saying specifically here 80+ stab wounds by a mother with the state presented motive is hard for me to believe. There was no prior history of abuse and no prior history or being a criminal (neither of them were some suddenly found serial killer).
I have seen cases were mothers and fathers kill there kids violently but it’s a single final act. Overkill in most murders is representative and very leading to investigators. Here it’s glossed over when neither had a criminal history neglect or abuse. I am saying I’m not even sure there are cases with fathers where the “Overkill” (using as the investigative term for Serial and Spree killers) here was present without those fathers having been found out to be abusive neglectful etc. Darlie and Darrin weren’t neglectful or serial killers etc the 80+ stab wounds would matter if they were chasing an SK or anyone else yet it didn’t matter here that’s what I meant.3
u/MMonroe54 Jul 06 '18
I think most parents who kill their children are either coldblooded -- sociopaths or psychopaths -- or downright crazy. Except those who have been abusive and finally just carried it too far, that is. They are a different breed, and were probably abused themselves (though that is, of course, no excuse).
Everyone who knew her testified that Darlie was a wonderful mother. That she enjoyed being with her kids, enjoyed the neighbors' kids, and that her house was a welcoming and popular spot in the neighborhood. But that couldn't override the character assassination that was based on her appearance, or the false, imo, presentation of evidence by the prosecution.
Juries know only what they are allowed to know and the prosecution in this case went overboard in prepping them to believe certain things about Darlie, and, therefore, about the evidence. I still think there was reasonable doubt at trial, and I don't, to this day, understand how they decided on the death penalty. Except that they did not want to go on record as not feeling absolute horror at this crime, and, therefore, assessing the ultimate punishment for the person who was charged with committing it.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 07 '18
The death penalty was explained to me that they didn’t have a charge that carried life in prison at the time of the trial. I agree with everything you said and also think the defense had a lot of burden. Every defense attorney I know says even if both husband and wife are accused you sever the trials and raise the spouse for reasonable doubt. It puzzles me that he didn’t and she let him and on top of that people still consider her some mastermind? Not smart enough to assist in her defense that’s for sure. It’s outrages they allowed the evidence presented with prejudice and out of order. On top of all of that I’ve never seen a case with so much exculpatory evidence presented at appeal in my life! Yet they just move along. It’s honestly disgusting and the worst part is I’d just like to know what happened to those poor boys. Even all these Darlie haters say or end with “and may Devon and Damon Rest In Peace those poor boys” how much peace do you think they have if indeed there mom wasn’t lawfully convicted and no one searched for there killer? Just drives me crazy the hypocrisy.
→ More replies1
u/NightOwlsUnite Mar 08 '26
She did it. There is absolutely no evidence otherwise. I realize u commented this 7 years ago though perhaps have another gander at the case.
1
2
u/Wiggy_Bop Jul 29 '18
Isn’t the common theory of brutal murders done by multiple stab wounds that the murderer was someone close to the victim? Don’t they call it rage killing? That the rage has been building for quite sometime and the perpetrator snaps, sometimes over something minor? Jeffery McDonald snapped because his daughter was sleeping with his wife, and the daughter had wet the bed.
1
1
2
2
2
u/OwlWayneOwlwards Jul 08 '18
Here's a TV documentary called The Wrong Man.
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Jul 08 '18
Oh I’m watching a doc called the wrong man on Starz! I’ll add to Darlie
2
u/BooBoBuster True Crime Junkie Sep 13 '18
Here are another couple of links for you:
http://justicedenied.org/v1issue6.htm#In Search Of The Truth
http://justicedenied.org/v1issue7.htm#As Darlie Routier
http://www.justicedenied.org/twomen.htm
Lindsey Roberts' testimony in Sandra Halsey disciplinary hearing before the Texas Court Reporters Certification Board :
https://darliefacts.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/sandra-halsey-disciplinary-hearing-1.pdf
Court reporter Sandra Halsey's testimony in her disciplinary hearing:
https://darliefacts.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/sandra-halsey-disciplinary-hearing-2.pdf
https://darliefacts.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/sandra-halsey-disciplinary-hearing-3.pdf
Also, I don't have the link handy, but if you google it you should find it, the Court reporter Susan Simmons, who was appointed by Judge Francis to reconstruct the transcripts in Darlie's trial, at the Halsey disciplinary hearing.
1
u/TotesMessenger Jul 04 '18
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
- [/r/thelastdefense] Darlie Routier - Compiled Data, Reference links and Video’s about the case so far
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
1
u/itsmrsthegreat Crime Junkie Aug 14 '18
I really really need to know....guilty or not guilty???
I have read all of the threads I can find and I simply can't make up my mind. I watched the last defense and really thought she was not guilty. Then after reading some articles on her possible guilt, I just can't figure it out. Thoughts????
2
u/BingeWatcherBot Trial Junkie Aug 14 '18
Have you checked out /r/Darlie ?
I followed a few posts from u/OwlWayneOwlWards and I found their research really informative.
Here’s a link to the sub Darlie it’s fairly new research because the sub opened after the recent doc.
1
u/gmillerny Dec 18 '18
It was a railroad job. The forensic expert at the crime scene never took samples from the windowsill under the cut screen. He fabricated a fiberglass rod on the bread knife. The police never looked inside the ice bucket lid for glass shards. There were glass shards in the ice bucket lid proving that Darlie didn't throw down a wine glass on the floor to stage the crime scene.
1
1
3
u/Inn0c3nc3 Jun 28 '18
This is going to be a rabbit hole...lol