Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There was plenty of evidence to support the verdict. And no thinking person could listen to that 911 tape without hearing her repeated attempts to cover her asinine.
That dame is right where she belongs, and she's going nowhere.
There was plenty of evidence to support the verdict. And no thinking person could listen to that 911 tape without hearing her repeated attempts to cover her asinine.
That dame is right where she belongs, and she's going nowhere.
I agree the 911 call is very incriminating. She seemed a lot more concerned with building an alibi than getting help. And you can hear from the background conversation with Darin that even he was skeptical of her story.
I think there is a slight possibility that the Husband was involved somehow, but what makes me question that is that they divorced years ago. And in my mind, there is no way that Darlie WASN'T involved. So that would mean that they worked together on it. If that's the case, why would she still be protecting him? And there was no evidence that he was in any of the affected rooms during the killings, so why leave it all up to Darlie to do the deed?
Then again, you could question why he never doubted her innocence and did everything in his power to help maintain her innocence. I would think most Husbands would be suspicious and possibly angry that their wife might have taken away their sons unless they were part of it.
I am not sure. At first I believed she was guilty as sin. Now, I'm not so sure. I've heard about the vanity and the jewlery and wanting expensive things etc, but I believe the life insurance on those boys was 5,000 if I'm not mistaken. So that couldn't have been it. And what's the story on Darin? He was a drug user? And he sold them? If that's the case, that would have been the first thing I looked at. I hope she gets a second trial. I'm not hopeful though. Texas isn't known for their lets help them out and prove they're innocent. PS The surviving son, Drake ( really handsome kid BTW, has cancer, diagnosed in 2013, I believe. (Leukemia) anyone who is inclined, may be ask your higher power for help for him.
Yep I have the same nagging doubts about her guilt as well and let me tell you I come from a law background . My grandfather is a retired ada and my father is also a retired prosecutor . Let me tell you some of the things that came out about this just did not sit right with me or my dad . I just dont know what to think because you do hear of ppl breaking into ppls homes and attacking ppl and leaving other ppl for dead . Dont believe me look at the tv show I survived 90% of those cases are where ppl broke in and left someone dead and the other near death . Is it possible that the intruders thought that darlie was dead or near death ? sure it is . Is it possible that someone did break into her house and kill her sons yes . She had stated in court that her ex husband who was still living in the house was doing drugs and selling drugs and that right there was her first mistake letting her ex still live there knowing what he was doing . Im sorry she is prison but something just nags me about this case it really does .
I have to agree with this. Sometimes I think she is guilty but I still have nagging doubts. I watch 99 percent of the programming on the ID channel, in fact it's all I watch when I am at home and I noticed so many flaws in the way LE comes to a lot of their decisions on who is the suspect or not.
Maybe I am going off topic here but some of examples of this are on some programs you hear the Le's talking about how a person reacted when they were told about the murder of a loved one. I have heard some of them say the suspect "overacted" that or either they were "numb" and did not give a reaction at all, and then from that they are suspects. I then think and pray my mom never gets murdered because me and her have a long standing feud that all my relatives will say, and I could not tell you one way or the other how I would react after hearing something bad happened to her. I would be upset I am sure.
But back to this case, I do think she was maybe selfish and materialistic but that does not make her a murderer, and it does happen that people break in. That is just the system we live in, some will get away and some innocent people to do to prison.
If you have DNA that is not part of the Parties then it is the police's job to follow up on every lead to be able to walk away and say " I have done everything I could to prove this person did or did not do it". She had been denied her right to test all the DNA. Now finally it is coming out that there are DNA that excluded her and her husband from the killing. There is DNA that is on her night shirt that is someone Else's DNA. She had massive defense wounds. How many people do you honestly know that could slit their own throat. Hang, shot, slit writs, and poison would be how they would do it. She was a victim of a horrific crime. Her only living son states that she did not do it. Yes she may be selfish in her own way but ask your self this who is not out to make your mark in this world? I my self is in the non-profit world but however I would do what it takes to make sure that I do what it is I can do to help the individual or family within the law.
If I can change someone's life for the better then I would. She has not wavered from her innocence. Yes her story change because she was fast asleep. She trying to recall! How would you do? Seeing what she saw? Fear, confusing, getting her bearings together.
Now I know you ask your self how could someone not know that they are hurt? I can answer that first hand. When I was nine years old my bedroom faced the front of the house and I thought I heard my dad drive up so I went and stood on the ledge of the window and put my hands on the glass. The glass broke and my arm went through the glass and I did not feel a thing. My mom came running in and asked what happen I told her. She proceeded to check both me and my sister to see if we were okay. She lifted up my right arm and the glass slit my arm almost all the way to the elbow down to the bone. I lost almost 5 pints of blood. Still I did not feel a thing even though veins hanging out and skin missing. Adrenalin took over and that is why I survived.
So I now first hand what panic can do. I think that we need to give her the benefit of the doubt.
I think there is a slight possibility that the Husband was involved somehow, but what makes me question that is that they divorced years ago. And in my mind, there is no way that Darlie WASN'T involved. So that would mean that they worked together on it. If that's the case, why would she still be protecting him? And there was no evidence that he was in any of the affected rooms during the killings, so why leave it all up to Darlie to do the deed?
Then again, you could question why he never doubted her innocence and did everything in his power to help maintain her innocence. I would think most Husbands would be suspicious and possibly angry that their wife might have taken away their sons unless they were part of it.
she knows there is doubt and is hoping her case is reopened...she has been working on that for years...the ONLY way to implicate Darin is to ADMIT her own guilt as well, thus sealing her fate for good...
I struggled a bit with this as well and think one day she will start pointing her finger at her ex...a t first without implicating herself but more and more eventually
he supported her at first to hide his involvement, and divorced her later to do the same...took a leap trusting her to remain smart enough to NOT implicate him...
I think they were both involved at the very least know who did it...her wounds were not done by her...I think her ex did her wounds to make the crime scene
Her husband, Darin Routier, admitted that he had planned to hire a man to break into their home. It's not at all hard to see that his admission weighs huge in the exculpatory evidence bucket.
Moreover, one of the jurors post verdict, Rita Way, said: "I don't think the defense proved that she was innocent and no mother that had their children murdered can act that way after eight days. I mean eight days -- referring to the 15 second "silly string tape -- I just can't see it." [Can anyone figure out the incredible problem with this juror's reasoning?]
Her husband, Darin Routier, admitted that he had planned to hire a man to break into their home. It's not at all hard to see that his admission weighs huge in the exculpatory evidence bucket.
Moreover, one of the jurors post verdict, Rita Way, said: "I don't think the defense proved that she was innocent and no mother that had their children murdered can act that way after eight days. I mean eight days -- referring to the 15 second "silly string tape -- I just can't see it." [Can anyone figure out the incredible problem with this juror's reasoning?]
I guess know one explained to her the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
