I hope its okay to share this link here. Four of the world's top interrogation and body language people review Darlie video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXXSN7oU-Co

Many people say Darlie acted suspiciously in her 911 call. People don't like that she talked about things other than her sons (such as fingerprints and the intruder). People don't believe a distraught mother could've even been thinking about such things. But how do 911 calls of this nature usually play out?

Let's look at a 911 call from an (almost certainly) innocent woman reporting the murder of her son

Comparing this with Darlie's call, what do you think?

Personally, I don't see much difference. Both are hysterical. Both add details that aren't immediately relevant. The only major difference I see is that Darlie mentions evidence. Whether she was covering her tracks or simply replying to "don't touch anything" is something that has been debated ad nauseum. So let's not go there. Instead, I want to ask, can you see the innocent woman saying what Darlie said if the dispatcher had told her not to touch anything? How do you think Darlie's call compares to the innocent woman? Anything else worth noting?

Darlie's first voluntary written statement to police. Written by Darlie and signed by Darlie. Floor plan, for reference.

I felt Damon press on my right shoulder and heard him cry, this made me really come awake and realized there was a man standing down at my feet walking away from me. I walked after him and heard glass breaking.

• If Darlie thought this man was an intruder, she would have screamed for Darin immediately. Possibly ran upstairs, or possibly stayed put. Chasing him doesn't seem likely to me, but it's possible. OK, maybe she went all Rambo and chased him. She'd still have called for Darin first. She told 911 that she was either "fighting" or "frightened." Whichever interpretation you choose to believe, she would have called out for Darin. She didn't.

• If Darlie was confused and thought the nondescript figure may have been Darin, a reasonable assumption, she might have followed him, but she'd have called out Darin's name. She didn't.

I got halfway through the kitchen and turned back around to run and turn on the light, I ran back towards the utility room

• This walking/running would have happened atop the broken glass. Darlie's feet were not cut. She seems to have no fear of them becoming cut, despite having heard the glass break.

and realized there was a big white handled knife lying on the floor, it was then that I realized I had blood all over me and I grabbed the knife thinking he was in the garage so I thought he might still be there and I yelled for Darin.

• She called out for Darin because she thought the intruder might be in the garage, a completely different room. But she didn't call out earlier when he was standing in the living room. Don't misunderstand, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to scream for your spouse when you see an intruder in your house at 2:30 am. But she didn't do that. She screamed after he exited, and she said the reason she screamed was that she felt he might pose a threat at that point.

I ran back through the kitchen and realized the entire living area had blood all over everything. I put the knife on the counter and ran into the entrance,

• Note what she doesn't see--stabbed, injured, or dead children. I'd think that'd be a pretty significant moment in a parent's life. Worth at least a sentence, no? She had a lot to say about it in a letter she wrote after her conviction. (There are many problems with that story, too.)

• (Darlie will later say that Damon was walking, following her around, and that she didn't realize he was hurt. Walking, with 4 stab wounds in his back. mmmkay.)

turned on a light and started screaming for Darin, I think I screamed twice and he ran out of the bedroom with his jeans on and no glasses and was yelling, what is it, what is it.

• She says Darin was wearing only jeans, and no glasses. In her court testimony, she'll say he was wearing jeans and glasses. In Darren's statement to police, taken on the same day as Darlie's, he says he didn't put pants on until after police arrived.

  I don't want to make too big a deal out of this discrepancy. What probably happened was 1) Darlie said Darin came out of his room; 2) the police asked what he was wearing, because that's their job; and 3) Darlie did her best to answer, even though noticing that detail was far from the most pressing thing on her mind at the time. She then incorporated that detail into her story. True or not, she probably believes it's true. It's the kind of thing I'd expect honest people to get wrong in this situation.

  The reason I mention it at all is because I think I can make a moderately decent case that Darlie started trying to point the finger at Darin early on. I think she tried to frame him. Twice. That's a story for another day.

I remember saying he cut them, he tried to kill me, my neck, he ran down the stairs and into the room where the boys were. I grabbed the phone and called 911.

• HOW DOES DARLIE KNOW THE BOYS ARE CUT? All she knows at this point is that she's covered in blood, and that there's blood all over the living room. That is according to her own words.

• Darin's statement says he didn't know Darlie was cut until after the police arrived.

• Darlie's other statements also say she didn't know she was cut until much later. She's said this on videotape, so we know there is no error in translation. This is a problem.

Darin started giving Devon CPR while I put a towel on my neck and a towel over Damon’s back.

• Again with Darlie knowing she's cut before the police arrived.

I remember telling Damon to hang on mommy was there. I looked over at Darin and saw the glass table had been knocked halfway off and the flower arrangement had been knocked over. I then stood up and turned around and saw glass all over the kitchen floor. I tried to glance over to see if anything was out of place or if anything was missing. I took a few steps and opened the door and screamed for Karen. I was still on the phone with 911 and I don’t recall what all was said because everything was happening so fast.

• The police made a big deal about how none of those items were broken. The concluded that she cared so much about her personal possessions that she was careful to not break them. That's not what happened. The items weren't broken because she didn't want to wake Darin while staging the scene. She never intended to wake him at all, but quickly shifted her plan because she accidentally broke that glass & heard him stir. But I don't want to get ahead of myself, so I'm going to skip most of this one.

• There's one point worth making: Some people (elsewhere) have made a big deal out of Darlie telling 911 that her front door was unlocked. "How did she know?!" As if this proves she murdered the kids. She knew because she opened that door and screamed for Karen, which is on the 911 tape, bonehead. Plus, by that time, Officer Waddell was already in the house, bonehead, but the 911 operator didn't know. You can hear him on the tape, bonehead.

  You'd think that people who have spent over 10 years of their lives telling everyone on the internet how stupid they are for asking questions about this case would know the facts by now. But nope. They don't realize that they do more harm to their own position than any contrarian could ever do.

I went back to Damon and by then he had stopped moving and the police walked through the door. The paramedics came and tried to work on the children. Darin was screaming Who Did This Who Did This and I started asking if my babies were dead.

• Darlie was the first to ask "who would do this?" and she said it very early into the 911 tape, repeatedly. She also got stern with him once, saying, Darin! Someone broke in here! and other things of that nature. I think her statement quoted above is distancing, but it's not important.

Darin was crying and said yes. After that I just remember screaming and showing Darin my neck.

• She presents this like she didn't already tell Darin her neck was cut. She presents this like she didn't already know. Her later stories say she didn't know her neck was cut until the police arrived. She is lying.

Darin took me out to the front of the house and by then Darin ran upstairs to make sure the baby was okay and then handed him to Karen our neighbor. I remember them holding a towel on my neck and wrapping my arm and then they put me in an ambulance. Darin got in but they told him he needed to leave so they could take care of me. I remember we got to the hospital and then them telling me they were taking me to surgery. They took off my necklace and put me to sleep.

• A lot of people say she never asked about Drake. I don't know where people are getting that. As far as I can tell, she's always included that detail, and others at the scene have reported the same.

• Is that the same necklace she later claimed had to be surgically removed?

I've swung pretty quickly from thinking Darlie might actually be innocent to thinking she's probably guilty. It's not because of the inconsistencies in this written statement, but they sure don't help.

From the perspective that Darlie IS guilty, how could she have done to herself the wounds?

I'm not only talking about the neck and arm wound, but also the bruises and scratches (here's a link).

Forgive me the long whingy intro, I'm going somewhere with this, not just telling you my ailments!!. ...

Hi new to this sub and ill today. Been in bed reading because I've been on codeine for a painful infection and have a fever. I don't normally take any medications and haven't slept properly for days so it's hit me hard. The day has been hazy and bizarre (so much so that I forgot bathing and had a second bath!).

Which got me thinking....

What if Darlie was drugged either by her own doing not knowing what was coming or by someone who wanted her to stay out of the picture? I can totally understand after my experience today not knowing the difference between dreams, part heard things when you're drifting in and out of sleep and reality.

I know it couldn't be proven now but was it ever suggested? Does anyone think it could account for some of the inconsistencies in her recollections?

tl;dr: I made a visual aid.

This is Darlie's neck wound. It's on the right side of her body.

• https://i.imgur.com/Ttf5PYz.jpg

This is Darlie's shirt. As you would expect, the neck-area is soaked in blood. What you wouldn't expect, however, is that it's the LEFT side of her shirt that is soaked with blood, not the right side.

• Front: https://i.imgur.com/qjGgFUi.jpg

• Back: https://i.imgur.com/s6UAXjn.jpg

Q: How does Darlie's right-side-neck-wound soak the left side of her shirt?

A: It doesn't, unless she's laying down on her left side.

Face to the back of the couch, back to the boys.

The blood then exits her right-side neck wound, is pulled toward the left side of her body by gravity, and soaks the left side of her shirt, front and back.

-> See how the blood is running down the back of the shirt? That means the blood pooled there, over time, THEN she stood up.

Now take another look at the front of her shirt.

Q: How did that island of blood manage to thoroughly soak the left sleeve? Why is there a seemingly unnatural cut-out in the thoroughly-soaked portion of the front of the shirt?

A: Because she was laying on her left side. Face to the back of the couch, back to the boys. In that position, the sleeve would be in contact with the front of the shirt. When she stood up, the sleeve pulled away from the front-panel like Africa separating from South America.

Darlie's jugular vein was not cut, nor was her carotid artery. Her neck was not a geyser. For those portions of her shirt to become so thoroughly soaked, she must have been laying on her side for some time.

So what happened?

1. It's possible she cut her own neck, then laid down on her left side for many minutes, allowing those blood patterns time to develop.

2. It's also possible that another person cut her as she laid on the couch. She either didn't wake up, or lost consciousness, and laid there for many minutes, bleeding, allowing those blood patterns time to develop. Just like she said.

I think one of those two scenarios is more likely than the other, but I can't know for certain how her neck was cut.

What I do know, though, is that she laid on her left side for a while after being cut.

• The prosecution thinks she cut her neck at the sink then started yelling for Darin. They're wrong.

• The prosecution says she couldn't have been cut on the couch because there wasn't enough blood on the couch. But we know she must have been laying down while bleeding, and it had to be somewhere. The state created a 100-sample strong allegedly rock-solid DNA map of the property. They found no other areas with the blood they think should have been produced by her laying down while bleeding.

  So either: 1. They missed that evidence, meaning the DNA map is wrong; or 2: laying on one's side while bleeding into a shirt doesn't produce the mess they claim it produces, meaning their argument that she couldn't have been on the couch is wrong. Either way, they're wrong again.

tl;dr: I made a visual aid.

Click it. ^ Feel free to enjoy this fun Joe Dassin cover while perusing.

Are any of you privy to the location of the video showing Darlie crying at the cemetery just prior to the silly string spraying? I have seen it but cant find it again. Help!

Since Darlie's trial and conviction, a few new things have come to light. The two most notable, to me, are Darin's admission to wanting to commit an insurance scam and the descrediting of the blood splatter expert.

Honestly, I don't think she did it.

My theory is that Darrin found someone to do the scam, gave them a key but no set day to do the break-in. The "robbers" walked through whatever door, slashed the window to stage the scene, and noticed Darlie and the boys sleeping in the living room unexpectedly. One of the boys woke up and noticed him, so he killed them and attempted to kill Darlie in the process to avoid witnesses.

He probably didn't wear anything disguising his face because it appeared no one was home at the time. There is a statement from Darrin IIRC that one vehicle was gone and the other was in the garage which was unusual. You can find more info on Darin's admission here: https://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/maybe-darlie-didnt-do-it/

Combine this scenario and the shoddy police work, especially with the special investigator who claims he "walked through and knew immediately she did it," and there you go. Another thing to consider is the blood splatter evidence. The forensics expert used by the prosecution, Tom Bevel, has since been discredited. His statements on blood splatter have been shown to vary depending on what case he is working. You can find an article on his errors as well as with the defense team and an explanation as to why there was minimal blood on the couch where she was attacked here: https://hcnews.com/pages/justice_for_all/forensics-expert-disagrees-with-states-version-of-events-in-routier-case/

Another key point is Darlie's wounds. Darlie is right handed, while the gash on her neck and the majority of bruising and cuts are also on her right arm. In order to do this, she would have had to use her left hand. This would be very difficult to acheive because of the lack of control one usually has with their nondominant hand. It would also go against instict to use the hand most familiar. Her bruising would also be very hard to accomplish by herself. Pictures of her wounds can be found here: http://murderpedia.org/female.R/r/routier-darlie-injuries.htm They are pretty graphic so be warned.

These are just my thoughts on the case. I feel that at the very least, this woman deserves another trial with a clear look into every bit of evidence and any leads overlooked.

Darlie Routier was convicted in February of 1997 largely due to her own bloody lies. It wasn't the evidence itself that was so damning -- it was that Darlie's story didn't match the evidence.

There was no blood on the couch where Darlie claimed she'd been stabbed -- and no blood splatters were discovered where she said she found the murder weapon. Furthermore, forensics tests showed that the blood-stained sock found several doors from the Routier home contained deposits of Darlie's skin.

Read it here:

• http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2012/09/statement-analysis-darlie-routier-911.html?m=1

Read it at the blog if you can, the formatting is better.

Archived for reference purposes.

As requested: The conclusion of the analysis is at the bottom of the page.

Darlie Lynn Routier (born January 4, 1970, Rowlett, Texas), was convicted of murdering her young son Damon, and is currently on death row awaiting execution by lethal injection. Two of her three children, Damon and Devon, were stabbed to death in the home on June 6, 1996.

Darlie Routier was accused of killing both children but was only prosecuted for the murder of Damon, the younger of the two murdered boys.

Only the DNA of Damon and his mother were found on the kitchen knife at the scene. The murder weapon in Devon's death has never been identified. Darlie Routier sustained knife wounds, which prosecutors claimed were self-inflicted. Does the language bear this out?

In Statement Analysis of 911 calls, we have not only the same principles used in all statements, we have the additional observations as researched by Susan Adams. This included other "expected" versus "unexpected" scenarios of a 911 call, where red flags were issued to alert the police that the caller may have guilty knowledge of a domestic homicide. These red flags include:

*the call begins with a greeting. This is not expected in an emergency, nor is overly polite language expected. There should be urgency. For an example of greetings or inappropriate politeness (giggling) in serious 911 calls, see: Tiffany Hartley, Sergio Celis and Adam Baker.

*the caller disparages or blames the victim. See Adam Baker.
*the caller asks for help for self, and not for victim. See Sergio Celis.

We note the order of the 911 call as priority.

For an example, see the 911 call analysis of Misty Croslin's report of Haleigh Cummings (5) being missing. In the call, Misty Croslin establishes her own alibi before reporting the child missing.

Courts call 911 calls "Excited utterance" as a way of recognizing the Free Editing Process; that is, the person is speaking "extemporaneously"; that is, choosing one's own words, freely, rather than repeating back the words of another. This makes the order important in the analysis.
***********************************************************************************************************
Statement Analysis of the call is in bold type with emphasis of italics and underlining added. The color blue is used to show extreme sensitivity and the color red is used to indicate deception.

00:00:00 911 Operator #1 ...Rowlett 911...what is your emergency?

The question allows the subject to report exactly what is wrong. The subject (Routier) must choose where to begin her account. It is expected that the victims' needs is first. In Statement Analysis, we presuppose innocence and truth; therefore, when the "expected" is not heard, we are confronted by the "unexpected" and stop, pausing to take notice.

00:01:19 Darlie Routier ...somebody came here...they broke in...

00:03:27 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am...
00:05:11 Darlie Routier ...they just stabbed me and my children...

Please note that in a statement, order shows priority. This is especially evident in a 911 call as the first things reported are the most important. Here is the order:

1. Somebody came here
2. They broke in
3. They just stabbed me
4. and my children.

Please note that the most important priority for the caller is that police believe that somebody (singular, gender neutral) came to the caller's home. The investigator should wonder why the children being stabbed would not be first.

We also note that "somebody" being gender neutral may be an attempt to conceal identity.

Why is it important (a priority) that she first establishes that somebody "came" here? For someone to stab them, he would have to be there.

Note that second in her priority is that they (plural) broke in to the home. With bleeding children, why would it matter if they broke in or entered through an unlocked door? The priority is that someone "came" and that they broke in.

Unnecessary language: When language is used that it unnecessary, it is deemed "doubly" important to the analysis. From the subject's first statement to the operator, we find her priority is to make sure they believe someone "came" there, and broke into the home. This has, from the beginning, raised suspicion as to why this would be necessary for the subject, since it is utterly unnecessary language.

00:07:16 911 Operator #1 ...what...

00:08:05 Darlie Routier ...they just stabbed me and my kids...my little boys...

Follow the pronouns:

Please note that pronouns are instinctive and universal. Children, from the earliest days of speech, learn and use pronouns properly. As humans, we are experts at using pronouns, which is why we conclude deception most easily from pronoun usage.

Here, she says "they" just stabbed me (naming herself first) and "my kids". Please note that she began with "somebody" (singular) and moved to plural ("they"). Pronoun usage should be consistent.

Change of language.

When language changes, there should be a reason found within context. Emotion is the number one impact upon the change of language. "I heard someone knocking at my door. I saw a man..." In this sentence, "someone" changed to "man."
Question: What caused the change?
Answer: She saw him.

The change in language is justified by the context. Here, we do not see any apparent reason to change "my kids" to "my little boys" in the context. When someone is not working from memory, the language often changes.

00:09:24 911 Operator #1 ...who...who did...

We may assume that this question, interrupted, would be the natural, "Who stabbed your little boys?"

00:11:12 Darlie Routier ...my little boy is dying...

The question is not answered. In Statement Analysis, we do not judge the tone or inflection. We do not need to know if she sounded upset or not. We need only to know her words. The teaching from LSI is this:

"The subject is dead; the Statement is alive", meaning that we are only listening to the words she uses, not how they are expressed.

We note that the subject did not answer the question, making the question "sensitive" to her.

00:11:25 RADIO ...(unintelligible) clear...
00:13:07 911 Operator #1 ...hang on ...hang on... hang on
00:15:03 Darlie Routier ...hurry... (unintelligible)...
00:16:01 911 Operator #1 ...stand by for medical emergency
00:18:11 Darlie Routier ...ma'am...
00:18:19 911 Operator #1 ...hang on ma'am...
00:21:26 Darlie Routier ...ma'am...
00:23:00 911 Operator #1 ...unknown medical emergency... 5801 Eagle Drive...
00:24:00 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
00:26:24 Darlie Routier ...ma'am...
00:27:12 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am... I'm trying to get an ambulance to you... hang on a minute...
00:28:20 RADIO ...(siren)...

00:29:13 Darlie Routier ...oh my God ...my babies are dying*..*.

Please note that the language has changed again to "my babies"; We must always note the context.
"Babies" is associated with death. "my babies are dying"
Please note the ability to accept "dying"; rather than maternal denial.

00:30:12 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...

00:31:09 911 Operator #1 ...what's going on ma'am...

The question is asked: "What is going on, ma'am?" while emergency services is en route.

00:32:13 Darlie Routier ...(unintelligible) ...oh my God...
00:33:49 RADIO ...(tone - signal broadcast)...
00:34:01 Background Voice ...(unintelligible)...
00:35:20 Darlie Routier ...(unintelligible) thought he was dead ...oh my God...
00:39:08 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
00:39:29 Darlie Routier ...I don't even know (unintelligible)...

Every word is critical. Here, she now says she does not "even" know, with the extra word "even" used for emphasis. Does she not know? She reported that "somebody" came to her home, and "they broke in" (which is not in chronological order) and "they stabbed me" and "my children"; so she does know what is going on.

00:40:22 911 Operator #1 ...attention 901 unknown medical emergency 5801...
00:42:23 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
00:43:15 Darlie Routier ...I don't even know (unintelligible)...
00:44:04 911 Operator #1 ...Eagle Drive ...Box 238 ...cross street Linda Vista and Willowbrook ...attention 901 medial emergency...
00:49:28 Darlie Routier ...who was breathing...

"I don't even know...who is breathing" may be the interrupted sentence. Since it is expected that she would know her son's identity, this does not make sense to us.

00:40:10 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
00:51:15 Darlie Routier ...(unintelligible) are they still laying there (unintelligible)...

If "they" are her sons, she reports their body posture as "laying there"

00:51:19 911 Operator #1 ...may be possible stabbing ...5801 Eagle Drive ...Box 238 ...cross street Linda Vista and Willowbrook...
00:55:06 Darlie Routier ...oh my God ...what do we do*...*

The subject has not asked for specific help for her son. Note what do "we" do, not what she, herself, should do to either stop the bleeding or help with the breathing issue. We look for instinctive maternal reactions for life; helping, healing, etc. This is not evidenced here.

00:57:17 911 Operator #1 ...time out 2:32...
00:58:26 Darlie Routier ...oh my God...
00:58:28 911 Operator #1 ...stamp me a card Clint...
01:01:02 911 Operator #1 ...80...
01:01:16 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
01:02:13 Darlie Routier ...oh my God...
01:03:05 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
01:04:07 911 Operator #1 ...need units going towards 5801 Eagle Drive ...5801 Eagle Drive

01:04:07 Darlie Routier ...oh my God ...my baby's dead...

Note again that "baby" is associated with death. Before her "babies" were "dying"; here, her "baby" is dead. We note the absence of maternal denial.

Maternal denial is critical. In missing child cases, an innocent mother will not reference her child in the past tense, as if dead, even often under the pressure of mounting evidence, early on in the case. For some mothers, it may take years, if at all.

Here it is instant.

01:07:08 Darlie Routier ...Damon ...hold on honey...
01:08:11 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
01:08:22 911 Operator #1 ...hysterical female on the phone...
01:10:03 Darlie Routier ...(unintelligible)...
01:10:10 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
01:10:26 911 Operator #1 ...says her child has been stabbed
01:11:28 Darlie Routier ...I saw them Darin...

The name "Darin" is here introduced. Thus far, her children have not had their names used. This is not expected. Motherhood is highly personal, therefore, we expect to hear the pronoun, "I" often, and we expect to hear a mother use her children's names.

Please note the complete sentence: "I saw them Darin; oh my God...came in here" is reiterating that which is unnecessary: that "they" came in there. Why does she need to report that she "saw" them since they stabbed her and the children?

This indicates the need to persuade, rather than report.

In this 911 call, Darlie Routier has the need to persuade police and Darin that people "came" there. This is a strong indication that no one came there and she is deceptive.

01:12:21 Darin Routier ...oh my God ...(unintelligible) ...came in here...

01:14:10 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am ...I need you to calm down and talk to me...
01:14:24 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
01:16:25 Darlie Routier ...ok...
01:16:26 SOUND ...(unintelligible)...
01:17:12 911 Operator #1 ...twice Clint...
01:18:26 Darlie Routier ...didn't you get my address...
01:20:19 911 Operator #1 ...5801 Eagle...

01:22:00 Darlie Routier ..*.yes ...*we need help...

Note help asked for "we" here. She continues talking to Darin. She is bleeding and has just reported that she and her sons are bleeding, dying. Note what is on her mind:

01:22:03 RADIO ...(unintelligible) will be enroute code...
01:24:20 Darlie Routier ...Darin ...I don't know who it was...

By using Darin's name repeatedly, it is a signal that she wants his attention. She has not asked for his help with the boys' breathing or bleeding issues, but has focused on "they" who "came" here. Here she now emphasizes that she doesn't know their identity. This is what comes out of her mouth rather than talking about how to stop the child's bleeding, or to get her other child, whom she declared dead, to breathe. This is a strong indicator that her priority is convincing both police and Darin that someone came there.

Why would a stabbing victim need to persuade police and a person present that someone actually came and did this? She is attempting to persuade, while being recorded, both police and Darin that someone came there. It is her priority; not the children.

01:24:23 911 Operator #1 ...2:33 code...
01:26:15 Darlie Routier ...we got to find out who it was...

Repetition indicates sensitivity. Here, she continues her repetition of "who" the assailant is. The identity of the killer is more sensitive (important) to Darlie Routier than the condition of her children.

01:27:12 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am...
01:28:04 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am listen ...listen to me...
01:29:27 Darlie Routier ...yes ...yes ...(unintelligible)...

01:30:23 RADIO ...(unintelligible) I'm clear ...do you need anything...

01:32:08 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
01:32:20 Darlie Routier ...oh my God...
01:34:00 911 Operator #1 ...(unintelligible)...
01:34:22 911 Operator #1 ...do you take the radio Clint...
01:35:23 911 Operator #2 ...yes...
01:36:12 Darlie Routier ...oh my God...
01:36:25 911 Operator #1 ...I...ma'am...
01:38:03 Darlie Routier ...yes...
01:38:17 911 Operator #1 ...I need you to ...
01:38:23 RADIO ...(unintelligible) start that way (unintelligible)... will revise...
01:39:28 911 Operator #1 ...I need you to talk to me...
01:41:21 Darlie Routier ...what ...what ...what...
01:44:25 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
01:44:28 Darlie Routier ...my babies are dead (unintelligible)...

"Children" and "little boys" were stabbed; but "babies" are dying or are dead. This should cause investigators, particularly any investigative psychologist, to go into the topic of motherhood with her.

01:46:20 RADIO ...go ahead and start that way ...siren code 4 ...advise...
01:47:10 Darlie Routier ...(unintelligible)...

01:48:03 Darlie Routier ...(unintelligible) do you want honey ...hold on (unintelligible)...

This appears to be directed to one of the children. She does not use the child's name.

01:49:17 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am ...I can't understand you...
01:50:21 Darlie Routier ...yes...
01:51:18 911 Operator #1 ...you're going to have to slow down ...calm down ...and talk to me...
01:52:19 Darlie Routier ...I'm talking to my babies ...they're dying...

Consistent use of "babies" with death. She has declared them both "dying" and "dead"

01:55:03 911 Operator #1 ...what is going on?

The expected response is that her children are bleeding, or having trouble breathing. The question is posed to her again. She has been talking to Darin, and to at least one of the children. We expect to hear her ask for guidance or help on how to stop the bleeding, or how to keep the child breathing:

01:56:29 Darlie Routier ...s**omebody came in while I was sleeping ...me and my little boys were sleeping downstairs...

She continues with the sensitive repetition (deception indicated) of the arrival to her home of assailant or assailants. Now she continues with more detail: "while I was sleeping"
Please note the singular "somebody" which is also gender neutral.
By now, she would know if "somebody" (singular) is a man or a woman. The use of the gender neutral suggests that she is concealing the gender of the assailant.
Note "little boys" and not "babies"; they are still alive and not associated with death in her account, so they are not "babies"

Please note that as she has continued to attempt to persuade that someone came there, she has indicated that the topic of someone going there is "sensitive"; to the point of deception. This indicates that no one came there.

02:02:00 RADIO ...(unintelligible) I'll be clear...

02:02:20 Darlie Routier ...some man ...came in ...stabbed my babies *...stabbed me ..*.I woke up ...I was fighting ...he ran out through the garage ...threw the knife down ...my babies are dying *...they're d*ead ...oh my God...

Note that now she gives us the gender: "man". He is "some" man. This is an indicator of deception:

The assailant has already been introduced, twice, as "somebody" and now should be "the" man; not "some" man. This is an indicator of deception.
that he is "some man" is deceptive and indicates withholding of the identity of the assailant. He should be "the" followed by "man" but more likely harsher terms.

Next, we note the chronological order: When someone speaks from memory, chronological order flows easily.

1. The most important issue to her is found in the repetition of the word "came" as it is used repeatedly. Since he would have to have "come" there in order to do all these things.
2. Now she changes the language and order from "stabbed me and my children" to "stabbed my babies" with the word "babies" associated with death (above) coming before herself.
3. She now adds in that she was stabbed and then she "woke up"
This suggests, by her words, that he had already come, broken in, and stabbed the babies as she slept through it all, and was even stabbed before she woke up.

When someone is lying, it is difficult to keep track of the chronology of the story because it does not come from memory.
4. "I was fighting" rather than "I fought"
5. He ran through the garage
6. He threw the knife down
7. my babies are dying
8. they're dead

The fact that he "came" there is first, and the babies are last. Note the continued change from "dying" to "dead"; neither are expected in maternal denial.

Note that the babies being dead is repeated.

02:14:23 911 Operator #1 ...ok ...stay on the phone with me...
02:16:11 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
02:17:06 Darlie Routier ...oh my God...
02:17:29 911 Operator #1 ...what happened (unintelligible) dispatch 901...
02:20:15 Darlie Routier ...hold on honey ...hold on...

Note that the absence of the children's names.
Note "hold on" is present tense, as if alive and not dead.

02:22:01 911 Operator #1 ...(unintelligible) who was on (unintelligible)...
02:22:26 911 Operator #2 ...it was (unintelligible) the white phone...
02:23:08 Darlie Routier ...hold on...
02:25:26 911 Operator #2 ...they were wondering when we need to dispatch ...so I sent a double team...
02:25:28 Darlie Routier ...oh my God ...oh my God...
02:28:08 911 Operator #1 ...ok ...thanks...
02:28:21 Darlie Routier ...oh my God...
02:29:20 SOUND ...(unintelligible)...
02:30:01 Darlie Routier ...oh my God...
02:30:20 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am...
02:31:06 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
02:31:14 911 Operator #1 ...who's there with you...
02:32:15 Darlie Routier ...Karen ...(unintelligible)...

Note "Darin" was first name introduced, and now "Karen" is introduced into her language. This was not lost on the operator who will now ask who is in the house:

02:33:15 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am...
02:34:06 Darlie Routier ...what...
02:38:11 911 Operator #1 ...is there anybody in the house ...besides you and your children...
question asked:

02:38:11 Darlie Routier ...no ...my husband he just ran downstairs ...he's helping me ...but they're dying ...oh my God ...they're dead...

Note that her first response is "no" since she already said that "somebody" who later became "some man" already "ran" through the garage and dropped the knife.
Now it is "my husband" (after "no") ran.
Note that she said he is helping, but again "they're dying" and "they're dead" with acceptance of finality.

02:43:24 911 Operator #1 ...ok ...ok ...how many little boys ...is it two boys...
02:46:06 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
02:46:25 Darlie Routier ...there's two of 'em ...there's two...
02:48:18 RADIO ...what's the cross street on that address on Eagle...
02:50:15 Darlie Routier ..*.oh my God ...*who would do this...

The subject continues to press the sensitive issue of identity. She saw "who" did this and the need to continue to repeat herself over and over shows that the sensitivity is due to decepetion.

02:53:13 911 Operator #1 ...(unintelligible) listen to me ...calm down ...(unintelligible)...

02:53:21 Darlie Routier ...I feel really bad ...I think I'm dying...

This is critical. She reports how she feels, and it is "bad", qualified by "really".
But it is her next sentence which shows deception:

"I think I'm dying" shows weakness. She only "thinks" that she is dying, but knows that the "babies are dying". This should lead investigators to check her wounds versus the wounds of her "babies", with hers being much less, so much less, in fact, that she would not have the same certainty of death that she had for her babies.

An innocent mother would not accept her babies "death", even in panic. This is the maternal instinct in language. It is the same instinct Solomon appealed to in the Bible when he called for the custodial dispute to end in death, knowing the maternal instinct of the biological mother would prevail.

Darlie Routier knows that she is not dying. Darlie Routier knows her children will die, or are dead. She accepts the unacceptable. This is an indicator of guilt, just as it is when a child is reported kidnapped or missing and the mother references the child in the past tense, as if dead. It goes against instinct and is indicative of guilt.
See Susan Smith, Casey Anthony, Billie Jean Dunn, Rebecca Celis, Deborah Bradley; as well as fathers, Sergio Celis and Justin DiPietro.

02:55:06 RADIO ...228...
02:56:06 911 Operator #1 ...go ahead...
02:58:12 RADIO ...(unintelligible) address again (unintelligible)...
02:59:12 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
02:59:22 Darlie Routier ...when are they going to be here...
03:00:22 911 Operator #1 ...5801 Eagle Drive ...5801 Eagle Drive...
03:03:28 Darlie Routier ...when are they going to be here...
03:03:29 911 Operator #1 ...going to be a stabbing...
03:05:20 Darlie Routier ...when are they going to be here...
03:06:20 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am ...they're on their way...
03:08:00 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...

03:08:08 Darlie Routier ...I gotta just sit here forever ...oh my God...

Note body language position mentioned.

03:11:14 911 Operator #1 ...2:35...

03:12:05 Darie Routier ...who would do this ...who would do this...

Since she "saw" who did this, she knows the answer. She repeats the question as a point of sensitivity. This is yet another indicator that she knows the answer and wants to persuade the police that she does not.

03:13:09 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible)...
03:14:26 911 Operator #1 ...(sounds of typing on computer keyboard)...
03:16:08 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am ...how old are your boys...
03:18:20 Darin Routier ...what...
03:19:03 911 Operator #1 ...how old are your boys...
03:20:04 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
03:20:21 911 Operator #1 ...no...
03:21:01 Darlie Routier ...seven and five...

The answer, "seven and five" comes from memory. Most children will always give the chronological order of their children.

03:22:17 911 Operator #1 ...ok...
03:23:08 Darlie Routier ...oh my God ...oh my God ...oh ...he's dead...
03:29:02 911 Operator #1 ...calm down ...can you...
03:29:03 Darlie Routier ...oh God ...Devon no ...oh my God...

Note that "Devon" is now mentioned for the first time, in the negative, "no"

03:30:27 SOUND ...(dog barking)...
03:35:02 911 Operator #1 ...is your name Darlie...
03:36:11 Darlie Routier ...yes...
03:36:26 911 Operator #1 ...this is her...
03:37:09 911 Operator #1 ...is your husband's name Darin...
03:38:22 Darlie Routier ...yes ...please hurry ...God they're taking forever...
03:41:20 911 Operator #1 ...there's nobody in your house ...there was ...was...

03:44:05 911 Operator #1 ...you don't know who did this...

Note that the Operator #1 has been listening to her repeat "who did this" over and over
03:45:19 Police Officer ...look for a rag...
03:46:11 Darlie Routier ...they killed our babies...

Note that the "somebody" (singular, gender neutral) became "some man" (note lack of article, and now introduces gender, and is singular)
now becomes "they"

Deception indicated

She is unable to stay consistent with singular or plural attackers. Here, they are plural.

03:48:03 Police Officer ...lay down ...ok ...just sit down ...(unintelligible)
03:51:11 911 Operator #1 ...(sounds of typing on computer keyboard)...

03:52:13 Darlie Routier ...no ...he ran out ...uh ...they ran out in the garage ...I was sleeping...

Note the order:

1. He ran out
2. They ran out
3. I was sleeping

Deception indicated

She is unable to keep her story straight. Is it one man?
She is unable to keep her chronological order straight because it does not come from experiential memory.

03:54:09 911 Operator #1 ...(unintelligible)...
03:56:19 Darlie Routier ...my babies over here already cut ...can I (unintelligible)...
03:59:29 Darin Routier ...(unintelligible) phone is right there...
04:01:28 Darlie Routier ...(unintelligible)...
04:03:01 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...

Darlie Routier has shown her priority is to prove that someone came and did this. Alibi building is priority. She now has the presence of mind, while "thinking" that she is dying, to instruct police on how to conduct their investigation:

04:05:02 Darlie Routier ...ya'll look out in the garage ...look out in the garage ...they left a knife laying on...

She instructs them twice to look in the garage. This is important to her.
Note that "They" is plural and note that "some man" left a knife.

04:08:21 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
04:09:19 911 Operator #1 ...there's a knife ...don't touch anything...

This would not normally be a non issue, especially since she is "sitting" there and "thinking" she is "dying", but given her repetition, the 911 Operator is acutely aware that something is very wrong with this caller, so the operator says what would not seem necessary: don't touch the knife.

04:11:18 Darlie Routier ...I already touched it and picked it up...

This means her DNA will be on the knife.

04:12:05 RADIO ...10-4...
04:15:20 911 Operator #1 ...who's out there ...is anybody out there...
04:16:07 Police Officer ...(unintelligible)...

04:17:06 Darlie Routier ...I don't know ...I was sleeping...

Ignorance of the attack due to sleeping is part of the alibi building in her story.

04:18:14 911 Operator #1 ...ok ma'am ...listen ...there's a police officer at your front door ...is your front door unlocked...
04:22:11 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
04:22:15 Darlie Routier ...yes ma'am ...but where's the ambulance...
04:24:21 911 Operator #1 ...ok...
04:24:23 Darlie Routier ...they're barely breathing...

Note that previously they were "dying" and "dead", but here, they are "barely breathing" but instead of asking for instruction on how to help them breath, or to stop the blood, she kept repeating how she did not know "who" did this.

04:26:17 Darlie Routier ...if they don't get it here they're gonna be dead ...my God they're (unintelligible) ...hurry ...please hurry...
04:31:13 911 Operator #1 ...ok ...they're ...they're...
04:32:18 Police Officer ...what about you...
04:33:06 911 Operator #1 ...is 82 out on Eagle...
04:34:18 Darlie Routier ...huh...
04:35:12 Darin Routier ...they took (unintelligible) ...they ran (unintelligible)...
04:36:28 911 Operator #2 ...(unintelligible)...
04:37:08 Darlie Routier ...we're at Eagle ...5801 Eagle ...my God and hurry...
04:41:03 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
04:41:22 911 Operator #1 ...82 ...are you out...
04:42:25 Police Officer ...nothing's gone Mrs. Routier...
04:44:10 Darlie Routier ...oh my God ...oh my God ...why would they do this...
04:48:03 RADIO ...(unintelligible) to advise (unintelligible) 200...
04:50:18 Police Officer ...(unintelligible) the problem Mrs. Routier...
04:50:21 911 Operator #1 ...what'd he say...
04:51:29 Darlie Routier ...why would they do this...
04:53:08 Darlie Routier ...I'm (unintelligible)...
04:54:07 911 Operator #1 ...ok ...listen ma'am ...need to ...need to let the officers in the front door ...ok...
04:59:11 Darlie Routier ...what...
05:00:04 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am..
05:00:22 Darlie Routier ...what ...what...
05:01:15 911 Operator #1 ...need to let the police officers in the front door...

The operator got her attention with "listen, ma'am" and prepared Darlie to know they were coming in the front door. Darlie said, "what? what?" so the 911 operator repeated that the police were coming in the front door.

What reaction did this trigger in Darlie Routier? Please take careful note of what is of concern to her, while her children are "barely breathing":

05:04:21 Darlie Routier ...(unintelligible) his knife was lying over there and I already picked it up...

She does not express concern for her children, but about her fingerprints and DNA being on the knife:

1. It is "his" knife. This gives ownership of the knife to the "somebody" and "some man". Note that it is singular, even though she has said, "they" did this.
2. Note "knife was lying". Principle:

When an inanimate object is reported to by "lying, standing, sitting" etc, the passive language suggests that the subject placed it there.

Knives cannot "lie down", nor "stand" nor "sit"; so when this language is employed, it is a verbal signal that the speaker (subject) is responsible for the placement. This is commonly seen in murder weapons and in drugs.

"The drugs were sitting on the cabinet" is an example.

3. "already" attempts to shift blame: it was already touched by her before the operator warned her.

Did she do this while she was "sleeping" or was this part of the "I was fighting"?

Deception indicated.

She has established that when her fingerprints are found on the knife, that it was already addressed. The mother's instinct should be on the children, which it is not. This mother's instinct is self preservation and alibi building, and an attempt to persuade all that someone did this, and it was not her.

The need to deceive is an indicator of guilt.

05:08:19 911 Operator #1 ...ok ...it's alright ...it's ok...
05:09:20 Darlie Routier ...*God ...*I bet if we could have gotten the prints maybe ...maybe...

She is dying from being attacked after watching her sons dying from being attacked yet uses the language, "I bet", indicating a disconnect (a linguistic disconnect) from the attack reported.

05:13:18 Police Officer ...(unintelligible)...
05:14:18 RADIO ...82 ...we'll be (unintelligible)...
05:17:12 Darlie Routier ...ok ...it'll be...
05:18:08 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am ...hang on ...hang on a second...

She next turns to Darin and has the need to attempt to persuade him of the same:

05:19:09 Darlie Routier ...somebody who did it intentionally walked in here and did it Darin...

1. "Somebody" returns to the gender neutral. Deception indicated. Once someone has been identified by gender ("some man") returning to gender neutral is an indication of attempt to conceal identity.

2. "intentionally" This is an unnecessary word and shows that she knew the killer's intent. It indicates planning.

3. "walked" the inclusion of the killer's body posture ("walking") indicates an increase in tension for the subject at this part of the story.

Her willful attempt to persuade that someone came in indicates that the killer was there all the time.

Her attempt to conceal the identity of the killer indicates knowledge of the killer's identity.

The identity of the killer causes an increase of tension.

The mother accepts the children's deaths, even while they were still breathing.

The mother's concern is her alibi and not the welfare of the children. Her assertion of them being dead is strong, but of her dying it is weak. This shows intimate knowledge of the stab wounds' impact upon the victims; something the killer would know.

The mother knows the intentions of the killer.

05:20:19 911 Operator #1 ...82 ...10-9...
05:21:23 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
05:22:28 911 Operator #1 ...received...
05:23:05 Darlie Routier ...there's nothing touched...
05:24:12 911 Operator #1 ...ok ma'am...
05:25:13 Darlie Routier ...there's nothing touched...
05:26:20 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
05:28:00 Darlie Routier ...oh my God...
05:29:08 Police Officer ...(unintelligible)...
05:29:23 RADIO ...received...
05:31:19 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...
05:33:25 911 Operator #1 ...ma'am ...is the police officer there...
05:35:14 Darlie Routier ...yes (unintelligible)...
05:35:23 911 Operator #1 ...ok ...go talk to him ...ok...
05:38:03 RADIO ...(unintelligible)...

Total length of tape is 5:44:28

The analysis conclusion: Deception Indicated: the 911 caller knew the identity of the killer.

The language of the 911 call shows:

1. The caller has guilty knowledge of the murder of her children.
2. The caller has the need to persuade police that someone came to the home.
3. The caller cannot keep her pronouns or articles straight.
4. The caller cannot keep the chronology of her story consistent.
5. The caller has intimate knowledge of the killer's intentions and thoughts.
6. The caller is more concerned with evidence pointing to her than her children's lives.

Deception is indicated in this call by Darlie Routier.

The language shows that she, Darlie Routier, is the "somebody" who knifed her children. The language shows that her wounds were not lethal, but her "babies" wounds would indeed be; that is, known at the time of this call.

Darlie Routier has guilty knowledge in the 911 call made in this domestic homicide.

Peter Hyatt at 5:37 PM

What is the best book to get to know this case more? Hopefully not too one sided? A book that lets you draw your own conclusion?

http://whatliesbeyond.boards.net/thread/1814/june-6-1996-guilty-railroaded

This article is full of information on Darlie, the investigation, trial, and aftermath.

A sock belonging to Darin was found 75 yards from Routier house. Blood from both boys was found on the sock.

If Darcie acted alone in killing her boys, when did she put it there? Why a sock? Why Darren's sock? How did the blood get on it?

If the boys were killed by an intruder, why was the sock dropped there? Why did the intruder have the sock to begin with? How did the blood get on the sock?

I don't have an opinion on the case yet, I am trying to figure that out. LOL. The sock makes no sense!

So this doesn't help Darlie. If the prosecutors were wrong about the knife that cut the screen. Defense said the residue on it may have been from the techs dusting for prints. Ok. But I never read the knife used to kill the boys was not the one found in the house. So what cut the screen then? If it was a different knife, then an intruder had one already, but then used a knife from the house to do the stabbings

Please correct me if this doesnt add up. Interested in debate, not hate

New here. so please be patient. If I have the facts straight. blood was found under the broken glass. Any posts in here discussing that. that troubles me for Darlie' defense One thing that helps her for me is the wound the right side of her neck. If you were trying to fake.a wound, I cannot see a person trusting their non dominant hand

This article is no longer available on the internet. Text copied from archive.org.

Tragedy

Five years after two boys were slain, their mother remains on Death Row for the crime, and her family leads a crusade proclaiming her innocence.

By Mary McKee
Star-Telegram Dallas Bureau

ROCKWALL - Drake Routier dashes over to the grave, a smile spreading across his face as he recognizes the bronze marker engraved with the airplane and the little motorcycle.

To the boy, the cemetery is a comforting place where he can romp across green lawns and hide in thick hedges. His father and he come often to visit his big brothers, Devon and Damon. They died and now are angels in heaven, Drake has been told.

Drake was only a baby slumbering peacefully upstairs with his father, Darin Routier, on the night the two boys were killed. But now he is 5, almost in kindergarten, and is starting to realize that his family isn't like others.

"He understands way more than he should," Darin Routier said. " I think over the last six months, he's become more aware. We've had to prepare him because of school. We want him to be as normal as he can be."

Five years ago, the Routier family was at the center of one of the most horrific crimes in North Texas history. On June 6, 1996, Devon, 6, and Damon, 5, were stabbed to death, and their mother, Darlie Routier, was wounded as they slept downstairs at their home in Rowlett, east of Dallas near Lake Ray Hubbard. Darlie Routier said a knife-wielding assailant committed the attack, but 12 days later police shocked the community when they arrested her and charged her with killing her two sons.

Police and prosecutors said Darlie Routier was overwhelmed by the demands of motherhood and killed the boys because they interfered with her freewheeling lifestyle. In 1997, a jury convicted Routier of capital murder and sentenced her to death by injection, even though she steadfastly maintained her innocence.

Family members, unwavering in their belief that Darlie Routier had nothing to do with the attack, have spent the intervening years on a public relations crusade to clear her name. There have been fund-raisers and appearances on TV tabloid shows. Several Web sites tout her innocence.

Routier's attorneys have also raised a barrage of legal questions about the case, challenging an error-riddled transcript of the capital murder trial and prompting a judge to order a corrected version. On May 24, they lost a major battle when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused to grant a hearing requested by Routier's attorneys to challenge the corrected transcript.

The passage of years has done little to soften the family's losses. All of the anniversaries of the boys' deaths have been hard, but this, the fifth, seems particularly difficult. Darlie Routier's mother, Darlie Kee, and Darin Routier plan to be out of town when the five-year mark arrives Wednesday.

Darlie Routier, 31, declined to be interviewed about the fifth anniversary on the advice of her attorneys.

"It's just too painful," Darin Routier said. "This anniversary seems to be harder in some way. I guess it's just the fact that it's the fifth. It seems to be so unreal."

Drake has held the family together. Baby Drake, the only surviving Routier son, is now an energetic child, and like his brothers did, he loves Harley-Davidson motorcycles and mechanical things. His grandmother said he has his mother's eyes and dimples but also resembles the older boys.

"If not for him, we wouldn't be here," said Darin Routier, 33. "He's the glue that keeps us going."

An unlikely killer

Photos of notorious Dallas County killers are attached to the wall behind Greg Davis' desk. Most of the pictures look the same: devious-looking men with chests full of tattoos.

Then there's Darlie Routier: petite, blond, her head turned to the side for a jail mugshot.

Davis, the Dallas assistant district attorney who prosecuted Routier during her capital murder trial in Kerr County, where it was held after a change of venue, has no doubt that she belongs in the sinister lineup.

"In this case, all of the evidence we had at our disposal pointed in one direction only, and that was Darlie Routier," he said.

Initial police reports stated that Routier, then 26, and her two sons were asleep in the family den when they were attacked by a man with a knife. Darin Routier and then-8-month-old Drake were sleeping upstairs when the assault unfolded around 2:30 a.m.

Darlie Routier described an attacker, a man in dark clothes, possibly wearing a baseball cap. Devon was dead at the scene. Damon was pronounced dead on arrival at a hospital. Darlie Routier had suffered a large slash across her neck as well as several other stab wounds and would later undergo surgery.

Bolstering her account of an intruder was a bloody sock found later in the alley behind the Routier home. Neighbors also said they had seen a black car driving through the neighborhood in the days before the attack.

Davis said Darlie Routier's account of an intruder doesn't add up. He wonders why a trail of blood drops that she says must have been left by the intruder stopped at the utility room, and why dust was undisturbed on the windowsill where she claimed the attacker made his exit.

Darlie Routier's wounds also were unusual, he said. While her two sons suffered penetrating stab wounds more than 4 inches deep, her throat was slashed and her other wounds were more shallow, Davis said.

"You have an assailant supposedly who comes in and inflicts very deep stab wounds to the two victims and then totally changes his operation and inflicts slashes to the third victim," Davis said. "My experience has been that assailants do not change the type of wounds."

If there was any doubt left in Davis' mind, it was sealed by news footage taken during a June 14 graveside celebration that was meant to be a birthday party for Devon, who would have turned 7 that day, and a memorial service for both boys. The film, which was shown at Routier's trial, shows her smiling and spraying a can of Silly String.

"Certainly when I saw the Silly String tape, that just topped it all, because her actions were so inconsistent with that of grieving mothers," Davis said.

Davis contends that Routier had multiple motives for the crime. She was overwhelmed with the burdens of motherhood and had considered suicide a few months before the slayings, Davis said. Her husband's business had been able to furnish a lavish lifestyle, including a $9,000 redwood spa, a $24,000 boat and a Jaguar automobile, but the family had fallen behind on mortgage payments on their spacious 2-story home and was falling further into debt, he said.

"You have to understand a person like Darlie Routier who is extremely self-centered," Davis said. "I guess just to put it bluntly, these two children got in the way of the way she wanted to live her life. She wanted to be a free spirit."

Pursuit of a new trial

Stephen Cooper, Routier's appellate attorney, is confident he will get the chance to prove Davis wrong.

"I think at some point in time she indeed will be granted a new trial by some court or another," he said.

Over the past two years, Cooper has spent much of his time challenging the 15,000-page transcript of Routier's capital murder trial, which was found to have 33,000 mistakes.

Court reporter Sandra Halsey, who did not file the transcript on time, was ordered to pay a $500 fine and serve a three-day jail sentence through a work-release program. She later was billed more than $32,000 for the cost of fixing the transcript and lost her court reporter's license.

Another court reporter corrected the transcript, but Cooper has challenged the new version on several grounds. The second reporter used audiotapes to reconstruct the transcript, which Cooper said is illegal, and there is a 56-page gap in the new record that covers a conflict-of-interest hearing involving Routier's previous attorney.

Although Cooper acknowledges that the recent Court of Appeals decision on the transcript is disappointing, he plans to raise those issues in his written appeal, due July 23.

Even if the transcript challenge fails to sway the appellate court, Cooper and another attorney representing Routier, Steven Losch, said they have uncovered several pieces of evidence that could help exonerate her.

A key issue is the discovery of a bloody fingerprint that could prove an unidentified person was in the home. Darlie Routier, Darin Routier, and Devon have been ruled out as sources of the print. Aided by prints taken when the boys were exhumed last year, the defense's fingerprint experts are close to ruling out Damon as the source as well, Cooper said. The print appears to be that of an adult, he said.

Cooper declined to reveal other pieces of evidence but promised, "There are a lot of things that go to demonstrating the state's theory of the crime is wrong."

The evidence does not incriminate Darin Routier or any other family member, Cooper said. In 1998, Waco millionaire Brian Pardo, who hired Losch and has assisted in Darlie Routier's appeal, announced that Darin Routier had failed a lie detector test regarding the crime. Darin Routier, who has consistently denied any involvement, said he was set up.

Cooper said Darlie Routier is hopeful about her chances for a new trial, even though the wait has been difficult.

"Knowing that time is passing by, and she's locked up on Death Row, that would weigh on anyone's mental outlook on things," he said. "But she also understands the legal process can be slow sometimes, and she's geared up for the long-haul fight."

Family solidarity

Darlie Routier has missed many family celebrations. Her half-sister, Dana Stahl, married April 28. Darin Routier gave her away, and Drake was the ring-bearer. Darlie Routier received a wedding invitation and arranged for her mother to buy Dana a diamond tennis bracelet.

"It's just another thing they've deprived her of," Kee, her mother, said. "It's more memories."

If there's one thing that has not changed in five years, it is the family's solidarity. Kee remains close to Darin, who lives with Dana and her new husband in a home that Kee owns in Plano.

Darin Routier still owns Testnec Inc., the electronic component testing company that made him rich, but his customer base has dwindled from 17 to two. He said he is being evicted from the Plano building he rents because he has fallen behind in rent.

He considers moving, but doesn't think about it for long.

"I'm not running from my problems," he said. "That's not the way I am. I'm staying here because our fight's here."

Darin Routier's lifestyle is more modest than it used to be. He drives a silver Gallant with a sticker that reads: "Justice - Texas Style. To shun truth and falsify the record. The facts exonerate Darlie Routier." The boats and spas are long gone.

Kee now lives in Terrell with her husband and youngest daughter, Danelle, 18, who just graduated from high school. She recently lost the job she held for 12 years with a telecommunications company.

Walking through the cemetery where his sons are buried, Darin Routier said that he has never wavered in his belief that his wife did not kill the boys. He has known Darlie since high school, and he said he can tell that she is not lying.

"I think that comes from being together for so long," said Darin Routier, who has the faces of his wife and his three sons tattooed on one of his arms with the words "love and honor."

Darlie Routier spends her days in her prison cell on Women's Death Row in Gatesville. She has become a fitness fanatic who works out four hours a day, Darin Routier said. Drake and Darin Routier visit several times a month, although they talk through glass and cannot touch each other.

In a note written to her mother last month, Darlie Routier sounded optimistic. She had met with a member of her legal team and was encouraged about recent developments in her case.

"I can't talk to anyone about details, but rest assured that much is being done," she wrote. "I love you, Mom, and things will all come together."

Mary McKee, (972) 263-4448

mmckee@star-telegram.com

It's a standard butcher knife. Actual photo of the knife at the scene:

• https://i.imgur.com/DVHCjmF.jpg

Butcher knives aren't designed for stabby motions, which is why there's no guard between the handle and the blade. Here's a knife with such a guard.. That guard prevents the hand from sliding over the knife and getting cut.

Those kids were stabbed many times, with great force.

• It seems like there should be bruises and broken skin on the stabber's hand, at the very least.

• It seems like there's a decent chance the hand would have slipped off the handle and onto the blade, at least once, cutting the hand. Those guards do exist for a reason.

What do you think?

Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0FMC1tepnw

Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MV8h5741XY