Bleedingheart
04-17-2007, 07:29 AM
Only a short portion of the 911 tape was played. This is a hysterical woman going on for 5 minutes pleading for help while Damon is still alive. She is telling him to hang on. He dies after paramedics arrive. You can hear Darin yell in the background early in the tape. Shortly after the police arrive, you hear Walling's radio through the phone when he enters. The 911 operator does not realize that an officer is in the house and Darlie is now talking to the officer and 911 for a minute before she hangs up. This is why she is not responding coherently to the 911 operator.
During one of the hearings, it was reported to the judge that a hair was found in the screen that looked like Darlie's. Later testing showed that this hair actually belonged to a female police officer who was not at the scene. Could someone have planted that hair to coerce a plea? or to force Darlie to come up with something on her husband?
During jury deliberations, the jury found it important enough to clarify a point of fact. They sent out a question. When the court reporter read back the testimony, she said the opposite of what the witness actually said and the jury subsequently voted guilty. During the appeal, this error in the read back was discovered by the witness. The defense discovered many other errors in the transcript. The court ordered the reporter to produce the tapes. She said there were no tapes because the microphone did not have a battery in it. Then she changed her story and said they are lost and took the Fifth amendment. After several attempts to get the court reporter to produce the tapes, the judge indicated that a new trial was imminent. The DA, faced with this disaster, made a last ditch heavy push on the reporter and she finally turned over the tapes. The error in the read back was confirmed as an error, as well as thousands of other errors. The Court eventually rejected this transcript and had another reporter edit it using the tapes. Once edited, the court accepted the transcript as a certified accurate record over the objections of the defense. The defense objected for several reasons including the fact that the reporter could not certify a record of a trial which she did not see. Especially when there is a tape missing for one of the volumes. And throughout the trial there are writings like, "nodding affirmatively" etc. There is no way the new court reporter can be sure if the witness is saying "a-ha" or "u-ua" since they sound so similar.
Also found on this list is DNA tests on the limb and facial hairs that were found on Darlie's body, and the pubic hair from the floor. The results did not match known persons in the house that night. At that point further testing was stopped. This was never disclosed to the defense during trial.
Darlie remembers getting a rape exam after arriving at the hospital. The State has claimed for years that there was never a rape exam. Long after the trial and after many appeal hearings, the DA was finally required to produce the evidence list they had generated at one time. On that list they show a rape kit. So why is it on the DA's evidence list if it was not done? Where is it? Did it get lost when they stopped the above DNA tests?
Chad Patterson, son of lead investigator Jimmy Ray Patterson, told Jeff Crilley of Channel 4 news that he was at home the morning and days following the murder when his dad was receiving numerous calls and leads and would not follow up on many of them.
In the morning following the murder, the police received a 911 call from a man named Reggie Salter who was reporting a suspicious man that fit the description given by Darlie of the intruder. Lead investigator Jimmy Ray Patterson chose not to check him out. Had Patterson already decided to build a case against Darlie? Was he concerned that he might find his criminal son who was at large at that time? Patterson's son (Chad) was waiting trial for a drive by shooting of a girl for which he was later convicted. Why would investigator Patterson not check out a 911 call that was made within hours of a murder when that call was about a person who fit the description of a suspect of that murder? Read his explanation in the trial transcript for yourself. This is shortly before he takes the fifth amendment. After hearing what he has to say I am sure you would feel very uncomfortable about his police work.
During Darlie's prosecution, lead investigator Jimmy Patterson's son (Chadwick) was facing charges for a gang related drive by shooting. He was friendly with the secretary of Darlie's Lawyer (Doug Mulder) and calling her on a regular basis and getting inside defense information of defense activities. This explains how many pretrial activities of the defense were so affectively thwarted by the state. This was discovered by Darlie's mother while visiting Mulder's office. Could Chad have been doing this for a reduced sentence in his case? How could Mulder be so careless in supervising his office? Once this was confirmed, Mulder fired the secretary. By the way, Chad ended up getting probation for this drive by shooting of a girl even though this is not the first time he has been convicted of a bad crime.
During a hearing and on Court TV, the prosecution claims the bruises showed up after she left the hospital. This is false. States exhibit 52F shows that big bruise forming under her right elbow while she is still in the hospital hooked up to IV's.
She was in surgery for 2 hours, the necklace was removed by doctors from her neck wound. See States Exhibit 26. Looking at the photos, of her injuries, I have never heard of someone inflicting that much damage to themselves.
Anyone who goes through all the crime scene photos can see that stuff is being moved during the investigation. The photos are not being logged. This makes interpreting the scene impossible. Knowing this, how can Cron claim that the scene shows no evidence of a struggle? What about all the blood?
The prosecutors claim that Darlie's emotions in the hospital were flat. The nurse's notes on Darlie's files say different. Those notes say "very emotional", "very tearful", "Encouraged emotional support".
You will notice that the Court TV stated the DNA mixed with the bloody fingerprint is from an unknown male. This would have to be an intruder because the print was taken immediately after the crime, and being in blood, it would have to have been placed by someone who was there during or immediately after the crime.
The chain of custody of the fingerprints is flawed. One of the transfers is undocumented and that person had it for 2 months. According to author Chris Brown, one of the officers stated that there was a report stapled to the exhibit stating that the fingerprint did not match anyone at the scene, therefore the identity is unknown. This report is missing but there are staple marks. During trial the police testify that the finger print is unidentifiable. After trial, experts say there is enough points to run the print through the database. The DA has not done this yet.
There was a second knife used in the murder that was not found. According to the forensic report, some of the wounds on the children were too deep and narrow to be made with the recovered knife. Could there have been a second intruder? Could the missing knife belong to the perp and used to cut the screen?
Additional information on Barry Fife -
3 years prior to the murder, Darlie was in Pennsylvania visiting relatives. When she returned to Dallas, Darin told her that his car was stolen. Being suspicious, Darlie confronted Darin. Darin fessed up to her and admitted that he went to Barry Fife to have the vehicle stolen. She got angry and Darin and Fife, did not approve of Fifes influence on Darin, and confronted Fife about what he did. She threatened to report him to the police. Fife (who used another party to steal the car) told her, "You do not know who you are dealing with. He would hurt your family and hurt your kids." Darlie eventually let it go because of the threat and the concern of getting her husband into big trouble. When the murders happened three years later, Darlie and Darin both named Barry Fife and Ben Claybour (Denton TX) as possible suspects. Claybour had once stolen Darin's credit cards and charged up $10,000. The Routiers reported this to the FBI, but they never charged Claybour despite the fact that he signed his own name on the charge slips. It was not till years after Darlie's conviction that Darin revealed that a short time before the murders, he had approached Fife to burglarize his house. Fife has a history of this kind of activity to defraud the insurance company. Fife's friend, Ben Claybour, left the state when police wanted to question him. The police did not do any further follow up on Fife or Claybour and arrested Darlie for the murder. They probably arrested her in hopes that she knew more and would rat out her husband rather than face capital murder charges. However, this plan failed because Darlie knew nothing and was not withholding any information from the DA. Unfortunately, after the DA's plan failed, they were now committed to following through her prosecution. They certainly could not release her after making such a public arrest, even though behind the scenes, it was intended to setup her husband. If Fife did arrange a burglary and he used the same person that stole the car, then that person would have a reason to kill Darlie since she would immediately suspect Fife's involvement.
More information of Patterson and Frosch taking the fifth amendment -
The next day Patterson and Frosch took the fifth, it was done before the jury came into the court room. After that, both Patterson and Frosch were excused and not required to testify again. The fact that the officers were excused for taking fifth was kept secret from the jury. The lawyers were restrict from telling the jury that they took the fifth because it my prejudice the case. I would think the jury would believe that there is nothing left to cross the cops on and their statements on direct go unchallenged though plausibly false. Along with pleading the fifth, the grave scene video was much more complete was also suppressed since it related to the fifth. This tape shows the silly string incident in a different context than what the news showed and the defense was denied this evidence. This definitely hurt Darlie's defense because if prevented her from being able to challenge the officers earlier testimony and clarify the silly string.
Lead investigator Jimmy Patterson's Arrest Affidavit is full of discrepancies. Jimmy Ray Patterson's arrest affidavit is covered below point by point. Every point is commented on and as you will find here, he did very poor police work and his conclusions are based on false logic and not the evidence. He had nothing solid on her.
1) Patterson is critical and suspicious of Darlie because she uses the word "they" when referring to her attackers when she is only able to describe one person. This is bad logic on Patterson's part because the attack began in her sleep. Although she saw one person, she does not know how many were with him. Besides, a neighbor witness said she saw a car waiting outside with someone in it. Shortly after arriving at the seen approx 2:35 in the morning, police stopped a suspicious car with several individuals in it. They were quickly let go without taking note who they were, or checking the occupants for blood.
2) Patterson is also critical of her words "my boys are dying", and "my babies are dying", while one of them is already dead. This is bad logic on Patterson's part because one of them IS still alive when paramedics arrive. She is hysterical and is unable to make an affirmative judgment on this, however it is obvious to her that they are seriously wounded and will probably die if not already dead. Her statements are reasonable.
3) Patterson is critical of her words "ran" and "walked" when describing the attacker leaving. If the assailant was walking away leaving Darlie for dead, and then Darlie gets up, the assailant would then run. After such an attack, with the adrenaline running, you loose sense of speed and timing. It is unreasonable to be so critical on this issue.
4) Patterson complains that according to Officer Waddle, who was the first officer on the scene, Darlie did not show concern for her injured children. The 911 tape shows different. The Routier's state that when Waddel arrived, Darin was on the floor performing CPR on Devon while Darlie was tending to Damon. Darin looked up at Officer Waddel, and Waddel had a sick overwhelmed expression and went to the bathroom. Darlie was panicked and Waddel did not know what to do. Waddel's opinion is worthless.
5) Patterson got a verbal statement at the scene from Darlie, talked to officers as to what she told them, and then got a written statement from Darlie 2 days later. In one statement she says that she realized that her stabbing took place on the couch, in another she says that she noticed she was stabbed after finding the knife, and in the written statement she talks about talks about when she found the knife after turning on the light. Patterson complains that this is inconsistent because these are different times. This is false logic on Patterson's part because knowing she was stabbed while sleeping on the couch, recalling the time she realized she was stabbed, and the moment she finds the knife are all three different times very close to each other. Reporting the actual time of stabbing, and remembering the moment she noticed she was stabbed, could very well be described as different moments. Besides, these time are all within a moments (a single minute) and would not be in conflict.
6) Patterson complains that Darlie said she found the knife after turning on the light and seeing it in on the floor on the other side of island. He complains that you can not see there when standing at the light switch. She did not say she saw it from the light switch. She said she saw it after turning it on. This is bad logic because Patterson in assuming she did not walk up to the island after turning on the light where she could see the floor.
7) Patterson claims that the physical evidence is not consistent with Darlie's claim that the intruder left through the garage window, and the mulch outside was not disturbed. The fact is that there is evidence the intruder went through here. The garage has a slit window screen with traces of blood on the screen. State Exhibit 13A and 13C show cement under the window, not mulch. Also, Patterson claims that Cron is a crime scene expert and respects his work. Unfortunately Cron is only a fingerprint expert. Max Courtney, who is an expert for the state, said that the crime scene was botched by police so prosecutors relied on Cron instead. Although the bloody fingerprint has enough points, and does not match any known person at the scene, Cron never ran that print through AFIS.
8) Patterson claims that since there was so much blood in the kitchen, the intruder would have tracked blood onto the garage floor. This is false logic on Patterson's part because the blood would not get on the floor till she got up from the couch bleeding from her wounds. Therefore it is logical that it is only her footprints and do not include prints of the intruder. Any blood on the intruder would not be dripping because it would be absorbed or held in his clothes like a sponge. Also, trying to duplicate the blood patterns of a knife hitting the floor would be nearly impossible because you have no idea what position the knife is when it hits the floor, or how it might be twisting or turning as it fell. Even if there is a pattern, I would be easily lost when Darlie steps on it.
9) Patterson claims that there was not a lot of blood on the couch, but luminal tests show blood was once at the kitchen sink, indicating she cut herself at the sink. This is bad logic on Patterson's part because blood from any type of meat from meals would test positive, and you can not tell when the sink may have been cleaned. There was blood on the couch, just not a lot because the shirt will hold a lot of it until it is saturated.
10) Patterson claims that screen residue was found on a kitchen knife. This is a bad assumption by Linch and Patterson because during trial it was determined that the residue was consistent with the fingerprint brush which was used on that knife. Patterson's affidavit confirms that the screen was cut from the outside. It is not known for sure what knife was used. If the intruder used his own knife to cut the screen, and walked through the kitchen to get to the family room, it is likely that the intruder decided to take the larger kitchen knife and holster his own in case he had to stab someone. The knifes were in plane view on the kitchen island. He may have put the socks on his hands to avoid leaving fingerprints and that is why one of them may have been found discarded in the alley.
11) According to Patterson, Cron reported that the scene is not consistent with a struggle. This is false. State's exhibit 35C shows the coffee table turned and covers stroonned on the floor. What else would you expect to find after a struggle on the couch? Are the wounds not considered evidence of a struggle? Cron also gets critical about terms like "chasing" the assailant and no high velocity blood spatter was found in the kitchen. First of all she would slow down when she reaches the kitchen if you think you are about to confront someone. Also, we don't know how agile she is because of injuries. This would also slow her down. I would also think she would hesitate once reaching the kitchen, because she does not know what she is about to confront.
12) Patterson complains that the wounds on the children are mortal and deeper than on Darlie's, which cause him to believe that they are self inflicted. This is bad logic on Patterson's part because Darlie is much larger and better able to put up a defense. When coming out of a sleep, and directly into a panic life and death situation, it will take a few moments to get your bearings. She would remember only parts of those moments till she is fully conscious. Also the mode of attack on her would be different on her than her children. If she was being held down at one end of the couch by one person being smothered and losing consciousness (there were lacerations in her mouth), and awhile being attacked/raped by another (her panties were removed), her kids would at that point come to her aid. It was dark and the attackers my not have noticed the children were under blankets nearby. At that point the attackers would be surprised. One intruder would turn and brutally stab the kids, while the other holding her down slices her throat. Not knowing who else was in the house they immediately flee. The first guy gets out of sight and than Damon approaches Darlie who is now conscious again now that she can breathe. She then sees the second guy leaving through the kitchen and follows after him. Then she turns on the light in the kitchen, discovers what has happened and we know the rest.
13) Patterson was misleading when he reported the doctor's opinion about the wounds. The doctors felt the wounds were defensive but when repeatedly pressed by Patterson with "isn't it possible that she could do this to herself?", the doctors eventually gave in that it was possible. Patterson then reports that the doctors said its "possible" the wounds were self inflicted, but makes no mention that the doctors believe they were defensive wounds. Patterson statement is misleading because it deliberately leaves the reader with the wrong presumption.
During one of the hearings, it was reported to the judge that a hair was found in the screen that looked like Darlie's. Later testing showed that this hair actually belonged to a female police officer who was not at the scene. Could someone have planted that hair to coerce a plea? or to force Darlie to come up with something on her husband?
During jury deliberations, the jury found it important enough to clarify a point of fact. They sent out a question. When the court reporter read back the testimony, she said the opposite of what the witness actually said and the jury subsequently voted guilty. During the appeal, this error in the read back was discovered by the witness. The defense discovered many other errors in the transcript. The court ordered the reporter to produce the tapes. She said there were no tapes because the microphone did not have a battery in it. Then she changed her story and said they are lost and took the Fifth amendment. After several attempts to get the court reporter to produce the tapes, the judge indicated that a new trial was imminent. The DA, faced with this disaster, made a last ditch heavy push on the reporter and she finally turned over the tapes. The error in the read back was confirmed as an error, as well as thousands of other errors. The Court eventually rejected this transcript and had another reporter edit it using the tapes. Once edited, the court accepted the transcript as a certified accurate record over the objections of the defense. The defense objected for several reasons including the fact that the reporter could not certify a record of a trial which she did not see. Especially when there is a tape missing for one of the volumes. And throughout the trial there are writings like, "nodding affirmatively" etc. There is no way the new court reporter can be sure if the witness is saying "a-ha" or "u-ua" since they sound so similar.
Also found on this list is DNA tests on the limb and facial hairs that were found on Darlie's body, and the pubic hair from the floor. The results did not match known persons in the house that night. At that point further testing was stopped. This was never disclosed to the defense during trial.
Darlie remembers getting a rape exam after arriving at the hospital. The State has claimed for years that there was never a rape exam. Long after the trial and after many appeal hearings, the DA was finally required to produce the evidence list they had generated at one time. On that list they show a rape kit. So why is it on the DA's evidence list if it was not done? Where is it? Did it get lost when they stopped the above DNA tests?
Chad Patterson, son of lead investigator Jimmy Ray Patterson, told Jeff Crilley of Channel 4 news that he was at home the morning and days following the murder when his dad was receiving numerous calls and leads and would not follow up on many of them.
In the morning following the murder, the police received a 911 call from a man named Reggie Salter who was reporting a suspicious man that fit the description given by Darlie of the intruder. Lead investigator Jimmy Ray Patterson chose not to check him out. Had Patterson already decided to build a case against Darlie? Was he concerned that he might find his criminal son who was at large at that time? Patterson's son (Chad) was waiting trial for a drive by shooting of a girl for which he was later convicted. Why would investigator Patterson not check out a 911 call that was made within hours of a murder when that call was about a person who fit the description of a suspect of that murder? Read his explanation in the trial transcript for yourself. This is shortly before he takes the fifth amendment. After hearing what he has to say I am sure you would feel very uncomfortable about his police work.
During Darlie's prosecution, lead investigator Jimmy Patterson's son (Chadwick) was facing charges for a gang related drive by shooting. He was friendly with the secretary of Darlie's Lawyer (Doug Mulder) and calling her on a regular basis and getting inside defense information of defense activities. This explains how many pretrial activities of the defense were so affectively thwarted by the state. This was discovered by Darlie's mother while visiting Mulder's office. Could Chad have been doing this for a reduced sentence in his case? How could Mulder be so careless in supervising his office? Once this was confirmed, Mulder fired the secretary. By the way, Chad ended up getting probation for this drive by shooting of a girl even though this is not the first time he has been convicted of a bad crime.
During a hearing and on Court TV, the prosecution claims the bruises showed up after she left the hospital. This is false. States exhibit 52F shows that big bruise forming under her right elbow while she is still in the hospital hooked up to IV's.
She was in surgery for 2 hours, the necklace was removed by doctors from her neck wound. See States Exhibit 26. Looking at the photos, of her injuries, I have never heard of someone inflicting that much damage to themselves.
Anyone who goes through all the crime scene photos can see that stuff is being moved during the investigation. The photos are not being logged. This makes interpreting the scene impossible. Knowing this, how can Cron claim that the scene shows no evidence of a struggle? What about all the blood?
The prosecutors claim that Darlie's emotions in the hospital were flat. The nurse's notes on Darlie's files say different. Those notes say "very emotional", "very tearful", "Encouraged emotional support".
You will notice that the Court TV stated the DNA mixed with the bloody fingerprint is from an unknown male. This would have to be an intruder because the print was taken immediately after the crime, and being in blood, it would have to have been placed by someone who was there during or immediately after the crime.
The chain of custody of the fingerprints is flawed. One of the transfers is undocumented and that person had it for 2 months. According to author Chris Brown, one of the officers stated that there was a report stapled to the exhibit stating that the fingerprint did not match anyone at the scene, therefore the identity is unknown. This report is missing but there are staple marks. During trial the police testify that the finger print is unidentifiable. After trial, experts say there is enough points to run the print through the database. The DA has not done this yet.
There was a second knife used in the murder that was not found. According to the forensic report, some of the wounds on the children were too deep and narrow to be made with the recovered knife. Could there have been a second intruder? Could the missing knife belong to the perp and used to cut the screen?
Additional information on Barry Fife -
3 years prior to the murder, Darlie was in Pennsylvania visiting relatives. When she returned to Dallas, Darin told her that his car was stolen. Being suspicious, Darlie confronted Darin. Darin fessed up to her and admitted that he went to Barry Fife to have the vehicle stolen. She got angry and Darin and Fife, did not approve of Fifes influence on Darin, and confronted Fife about what he did. She threatened to report him to the police. Fife (who used another party to steal the car) told her, "You do not know who you are dealing with. He would hurt your family and hurt your kids." Darlie eventually let it go because of the threat and the concern of getting her husband into big trouble. When the murders happened three years later, Darlie and Darin both named Barry Fife and Ben Claybour (Denton TX) as possible suspects. Claybour had once stolen Darin's credit cards and charged up $10,000. The Routiers reported this to the FBI, but they never charged Claybour despite the fact that he signed his own name on the charge slips. It was not till years after Darlie's conviction that Darin revealed that a short time before the murders, he had approached Fife to burglarize his house. Fife has a history of this kind of activity to defraud the insurance company. Fife's friend, Ben Claybour, left the state when police wanted to question him. The police did not do any further follow up on Fife or Claybour and arrested Darlie for the murder. They probably arrested her in hopes that she knew more and would rat out her husband rather than face capital murder charges. However, this plan failed because Darlie knew nothing and was not withholding any information from the DA. Unfortunately, after the DA's plan failed, they were now committed to following through her prosecution. They certainly could not release her after making such a public arrest, even though behind the scenes, it was intended to setup her husband. If Fife did arrange a burglary and he used the same person that stole the car, then that person would have a reason to kill Darlie since she would immediately suspect Fife's involvement.
More information of Patterson and Frosch taking the fifth amendment -
The next day Patterson and Frosch took the fifth, it was done before the jury came into the court room. After that, both Patterson and Frosch were excused and not required to testify again. The fact that the officers were excused for taking fifth was kept secret from the jury. The lawyers were restrict from telling the jury that they took the fifth because it my prejudice the case. I would think the jury would believe that there is nothing left to cross the cops on and their statements on direct go unchallenged though plausibly false. Along with pleading the fifth, the grave scene video was much more complete was also suppressed since it related to the fifth. This tape shows the silly string incident in a different context than what the news showed and the defense was denied this evidence. This definitely hurt Darlie's defense because if prevented her from being able to challenge the officers earlier testimony and clarify the silly string.
Lead investigator Jimmy Patterson's Arrest Affidavit is full of discrepancies. Jimmy Ray Patterson's arrest affidavit is covered below point by point. Every point is commented on and as you will find here, he did very poor police work and his conclusions are based on false logic and not the evidence. He had nothing solid on her.
1) Patterson is critical and suspicious of Darlie because she uses the word "they" when referring to her attackers when she is only able to describe one person. This is bad logic on Patterson's part because the attack began in her sleep. Although she saw one person, she does not know how many were with him. Besides, a neighbor witness said she saw a car waiting outside with someone in it. Shortly after arriving at the seen approx 2:35 in the morning, police stopped a suspicious car with several individuals in it. They were quickly let go without taking note who they were, or checking the occupants for blood.
2) Patterson is also critical of her words "my boys are dying", and "my babies are dying", while one of them is already dead. This is bad logic on Patterson's part because one of them IS still alive when paramedics arrive. She is hysterical and is unable to make an affirmative judgment on this, however it is obvious to her that they are seriously wounded and will probably die if not already dead. Her statements are reasonable.
3) Patterson is critical of her words "ran" and "walked" when describing the attacker leaving. If the assailant was walking away leaving Darlie for dead, and then Darlie gets up, the assailant would then run. After such an attack, with the adrenaline running, you loose sense of speed and timing. It is unreasonable to be so critical on this issue.
4) Patterson complains that according to Officer Waddle, who was the first officer on the scene, Darlie did not show concern for her injured children. The 911 tape shows different. The Routier's state that when Waddel arrived, Darin was on the floor performing CPR on Devon while Darlie was tending to Damon. Darin looked up at Officer Waddel, and Waddel had a sick overwhelmed expression and went to the bathroom. Darlie was panicked and Waddel did not know what to do. Waddel's opinion is worthless.
5) Patterson got a verbal statement at the scene from Darlie, talked to officers as to what she told them, and then got a written statement from Darlie 2 days later. In one statement she says that she realized that her stabbing took place on the couch, in another she says that she noticed she was stabbed after finding the knife, and in the written statement she talks about talks about when she found the knife after turning on the light. Patterson complains that this is inconsistent because these are different times. This is false logic on Patterson's part because knowing she was stabbed while sleeping on the couch, recalling the time she realized she was stabbed, and the moment she finds the knife are all three different times very close to each other. Reporting the actual time of stabbing, and remembering the moment she noticed she was stabbed, could very well be described as different moments. Besides, these time are all within a moments (a single minute) and would not be in conflict.
6) Patterson complains that Darlie said she found the knife after turning on the light and seeing it in on the floor on the other side of island. He complains that you can not see there when standing at the light switch. She did not say she saw it from the light switch. She said she saw it after turning it on. This is bad logic because Patterson in assuming she did not walk up to the island after turning on the light where she could see the floor.
7) Patterson claims that the physical evidence is not consistent with Darlie's claim that the intruder left through the garage window, and the mulch outside was not disturbed. The fact is that there is evidence the intruder went through here. The garage has a slit window screen with traces of blood on the screen. State Exhibit 13A and 13C show cement under the window, not mulch. Also, Patterson claims that Cron is a crime scene expert and respects his work. Unfortunately Cron is only a fingerprint expert. Max Courtney, who is an expert for the state, said that the crime scene was botched by police so prosecutors relied on Cron instead. Although the bloody fingerprint has enough points, and does not match any known person at the scene, Cron never ran that print through AFIS.
8) Patterson claims that since there was so much blood in the kitchen, the intruder would have tracked blood onto the garage floor. This is false logic on Patterson's part because the blood would not get on the floor till she got up from the couch bleeding from her wounds. Therefore it is logical that it is only her footprints and do not include prints of the intruder. Any blood on the intruder would not be dripping because it would be absorbed or held in his clothes like a sponge. Also, trying to duplicate the blood patterns of a knife hitting the floor would be nearly impossible because you have no idea what position the knife is when it hits the floor, or how it might be twisting or turning as it fell. Even if there is a pattern, I would be easily lost when Darlie steps on it.
9) Patterson claims that there was not a lot of blood on the couch, but luminal tests show blood was once at the kitchen sink, indicating she cut herself at the sink. This is bad logic on Patterson's part because blood from any type of meat from meals would test positive, and you can not tell when the sink may have been cleaned. There was blood on the couch, just not a lot because the shirt will hold a lot of it until it is saturated.
10) Patterson claims that screen residue was found on a kitchen knife. This is a bad assumption by Linch and Patterson because during trial it was determined that the residue was consistent with the fingerprint brush which was used on that knife. Patterson's affidavit confirms that the screen was cut from the outside. It is not known for sure what knife was used. If the intruder used his own knife to cut the screen, and walked through the kitchen to get to the family room, it is likely that the intruder decided to take the larger kitchen knife and holster his own in case he had to stab someone. The knifes were in plane view on the kitchen island. He may have put the socks on his hands to avoid leaving fingerprints and that is why one of them may have been found discarded in the alley.
11) According to Patterson, Cron reported that the scene is not consistent with a struggle. This is false. State's exhibit 35C shows the coffee table turned and covers stroonned on the floor. What else would you expect to find after a struggle on the couch? Are the wounds not considered evidence of a struggle? Cron also gets critical about terms like "chasing" the assailant and no high velocity blood spatter was found in the kitchen. First of all she would slow down when she reaches the kitchen if you think you are about to confront someone. Also, we don't know how agile she is because of injuries. This would also slow her down. I would also think she would hesitate once reaching the kitchen, because she does not know what she is about to confront.
12) Patterson complains that the wounds on the children are mortal and deeper than on Darlie's, which cause him to believe that they are self inflicted. This is bad logic on Patterson's part because Darlie is much larger and better able to put up a defense. When coming out of a sleep, and directly into a panic life and death situation, it will take a few moments to get your bearings. She would remember only parts of those moments till she is fully conscious. Also the mode of attack on her would be different on her than her children. If she was being held down at one end of the couch by one person being smothered and losing consciousness (there were lacerations in her mouth), and awhile being attacked/raped by another (her panties were removed), her kids would at that point come to her aid. It was dark and the attackers my not have noticed the children were under blankets nearby. At that point the attackers would be surprised. One intruder would turn and brutally stab the kids, while the other holding her down slices her throat. Not knowing who else was in the house they immediately flee. The first guy gets out of sight and than Damon approaches Darlie who is now conscious again now that she can breathe. She then sees the second guy leaving through the kitchen and follows after him. Then she turns on the light in the kitchen, discovers what has happened and we know the rest.
13) Patterson was misleading when he reported the doctor's opinion about the wounds. The doctors felt the wounds were defensive but when repeatedly pressed by Patterson with "isn't it possible that she could do this to herself?", the doctors eventually gave in that it was possible. Patterson then reports that the doctors said its "possible" the wounds were self inflicted, but makes no mention that the doctors believe they were defensive wounds. Patterson statement is misleading because it deliberately leaves the reader with the wrong presumption.