Darlie Routier - Guilty or innocent?

[TracyLynnS]

IIRC, the reason the jury saw the silly string video and not the video of the Darlie grieving is because the silly string video was taken by a news crew and the grieving video had been obtained illegally by the authorities so it couldn't be used as evidence.

[nikkispence1989]

What makes me believe that Darlie's story is untrue are the following-

How did the killer enter the property? This tube sock that was used by the killer if he in fact did exist was presumably to cover up his prints. Then there should be prints before he found the sock found in the home leading up to before the sock was found.
Now we cant presume that the killer entered through the cut screen because a knife from the kitchen block was used to cut the screen. So it's therefore impossible for a killer on the outside of the home to cut the screen to gain entry as the knife is on the inside in the kitchen.
Another issue I have that centers around the knife, Darlie claims while chasing the intruder he dropped the knife on the kitchen floor. So how did he cut the screen in the garage to escape if he had dropped the knife?

With these three statements in mind that means the killer entered through a different place that the garage, firstly scoured the home for the sock, then went to the kitchen to get the knife, then went into the garage to cut the screen in advance then went back to the room where Darlie and the children were to kill them. I fail to understand that if the killer was wandering around the home for that long that Darlie wouldnt of heard.

[TheCars1986]

Darlie's defense withheld the inclusion of the surveillance video. They could have used it to counter the silly string video, but for whatever reason they didn't.

[Mysteryphile]

I just listened to Generation Why's podcast on this case. They laid out the facts of the case (not what was widely believed to have happened).


There is no doubt in my mind that she is guilty.

What I find really strange is her husband and the dog managed to sleep through (or did they????) what had to be a very loud and disturbing bunch of noises.

Also her baby was sleeping in another room. Two of her children are slaughtered and she didn't even ask about the baby...if the baby was okay or not. That would be the first thing on my mind after I knew my two other children were dead. She didn't have to ask about the baby because she KNEW the baby was okay.

[wiseguy182]

Originally Posted by Mysteryphile

What I find really strange is her husband and the dog managed to sleep through (or did they????) what had to be a very loud and disturbing bunch of noises.

Also her baby was sleeping in another room. Two of her children are slaughtered and she didn't even ask about the baby...if the baby was okay or not. That would be the first thing on my mind after I knew my two other children were dead. She didn't have to ask about the baby because she KNEW the baby was okay.

Say what?

To clarify, her husband and the youngest son were sleeping upstairs. They were on a whole other level. I have no doubt Darren would have told her (without her even asking) if anything happened to Drake. Being that she had the emergencies of dealing with her 2 oldest children, not to mention all the injuries to herself, I don't blame her for not immediately asking about Drake. She had enough going on.

Also, Damon was still alive when the paramedics first arrived and was not dead at that point.

I never realized this but 5 people in the household and everyone's name starts with D. Weird.

[TracyLynnS]

Originally Posted by wiseguy182

I never realized this but 5 people in the household and everyone's name starts with D. Weird.

OFF TOPIC

And not such a good idea, imo, even if people think it's cute to do that to their kids.

My mother in law did it with her 5 kids and they all have the same initials too. Talk about a life long headache!

One BIL and SIL had their homeowner's insurance company accidentally insure my house, instead of theirs, for months before the mistake was discovered. Her purchases have shown up on my store credit cards.

Another brother in law married a woman with the same exact name as me. Hubby and I have been denied credit because they thought we were them. I've had my store credit cards frozen for her non-payments. My car payments were deposited into her savings account at our credit union. And their messes have turned up on my credit reports, which are almost impossible to get removed.

We had to move out of town, change banks, close out our credit union accounts, and drop our store credit cards to get away from it all.

[wiseguy182]

I found these assorted and frequent calls to police of suspicious activity near or at the Routier home on the day of or near the day of the murders from another website. I copied them word for word here. It should be noted that some person has responses to all of the calls, but pigeonholes the entire lot by claiming they were "all checked out" (how would they know that?) and states that there's nothing suspicious about any of them because everyone in the neighborhood owned cars, which doesn't come off as very convincing.

Here is the list:

On June 6, Sally Bingham reported to police that she was a neighbor of the Routier family. She described being awake at 1 to 1:30 a.m. the morning the murders took place. Bingham stated she “kept seeing car lights driving through the neighborhood”. Her bedroom had a bay window. The vehicle made several trips down the street before Bingham finally got up and looked outside to see a white vehicle. The only other description of the vehicle was “celebrity-type.”

-On June 7, Betty Jung reported that her son saw a suspicious looking man in the morning wearing blue jeans, a white t-shirt, and a black cap. He was also carrying a knapsack. A note on the memo states, “probably same person Officer Caillet questioned on 66 at Barretts”. The sighting took place at the Rowlett Vet Clinic, located about 3 miles west of the Routier home.
An additional lead sheet described a man fitting the same description, carrying a backpack, near I-30 and Dalrock. The tip was dated June 6, 1996, 4 p.m. It described the sighting as taking place at 5 a.m. I-30 was located south of the Routier home about 2 and a half miles away.

-Also on June 7, Jonathan Hartley called police to report that the Dallas Morning News mail carrier had threatened him. He stated the man’s name was Ray Clemons and suggested that police look into him. Hartley lived on 8301 Eagle Drive, approximately 285 feet from the Routier home.

-Kory Keith lived in the neighborhood and contacted police on June 7 to report an incident that occurred during the week before the murders. He described returning home at 2:30 to 3 a.m. and seeing an older style mini van driving slowly down Eagle Drive. He described the occupants of the van as “shining lights on houses”. The van left the area as Keith approached. He tried to turn around to get a better look at the van, but was unable to locate it once he did. The only other description of the van was that it was possible light tan in color. The driver appeared to be a white male in his 20s. No description was given for the passenger.

Julie Clark was another person who contacted the police the day after the murders. She described herself as a close friend of the Routiers when she testified at Darlie’s trial. She indicated that on the day of the murders, a woman who cleaned Darlie’s house saw a black vehicle.

The sighting of the black car was reported by the woman’s daughter, Barbara Jovell, as well. Jovell’s mother reportedly saw a black 2-door sports car driving slowly down the alley located behind the Routier home. The vehicle stopped in the alley and was described as having a dark complexion. When Jovell’s mom went into the garage the vehicle was driven away.

-On June 8, John Reed contacted police to report that the day of the murders he was in the front yard, cleaning up. His two grandchildren were with him and they saw a white male sitting in a “faded blue older model 4 door car.” He described the man as “suspicious”. The distance from the address indicated on the telephone memo and the Routier home is 0.4 miles.

-On June 9, Bill Knuth contacted police and gave information about seeing a vehicle “cruising his neighborhood the evening of the murders”. Knuth said the driver was a young white male who was acting suspiciously. The car apparently stopped near the Routier’s corner house around 7 to 8 p.m. He was unable to get a license plate number, saying only that the vehicle he observed was either a Geo Storm or a Dodge Neon. The vehicle had 2 doors, a hatchback, and was either blue or purple.

-On June 17th, Officer Needham described a report police received of a black Nissan with an identified Texas license plate was observed in the area of the Routier home. Officer Needham and Detective Latham also saw this vehicle. The lead sheet states, “Owner had been in the area after the murders – sight seeing.” No further information was given about the owner of the car or whether police established the individual had an alibi the night of the murders.

-Perhaps one of the stranger vehicle sightings was reported by Bob Salsey. He first called into the police department on June 8. He was a delivery person for the Daily Business News and delivered the paper across the street from the Routier home at 12:30 a.m. the night of the murders. In the first description it says, “did not see anything suspicious”. The following day, Detective Needham spoke to Salsey. He reiterated that he was in the area the evening of the murders at about 12 to 12:30 a.m. However, this time he said he saw a white car in the driveway of the Routier home. It was described as a suburban type.

-In 2002, Darlene Potter gave an affidavit describing an unusual sighting during the early morning hours of June 6. Potter was returning to her residence after visiting her daughter in Cleburne, Texas. Sometime after 2 a.m. she reported that she had reached Dalrock Road, north of Highway 66 “approaching the ‘S’ curve.” As she approached the curve she slowed considerably because she was pulling a trailer behind her van. She stated the following: “I suddenly saw a man walking on the edge of the left side of the roadway headed in the same direction I was going. He was about six feet tall, medium build, had shoulder length brownish hair which was messed up, wearing a black t-shirt. He was barefooted.”

Potter then observed a second man walking on the left edge of the road as well. She described the second man as wearing a light colored baseball cap, a white shirt, and blue jeans. She said he was tall and stocky, standing at about 5’8?.

In reference to the second man, Potter added, “As I approached this man, he stepped from the side of the road as if he were walking toward my vehicle. I was just starting to accelerate slowly from out of the curve at this time and when I saw the man stepping towards my car, he looked in the direction of the first man. I then looked in my mirror again and saw the first man shaking his head as if to say ‘no’ to the second man”.

The sighting stood out in her mind because one of the men was barefooted and also because it occurred so early in the morning. It made her uneasy because she lived in the area. She returned home and tried to sleep. About 45 minutes later she said she observed a small dark-colored car driving through the field next door to her home. She said it appeared as if it were riding its brakes. No address is given for Potter so it is difficult to determine which field she was referring to or how far she lived from the Routier home.

The sighting of the two men on foot happened approximately 0.6 of a mile from the Routier’s residence.

[TheCars1986]

Darlie Routier's "defense" at her trial consisted of the following people:

-Sherry Moses: Darlie's aunt. Her testimony was basically her saying how good of a mother Darlie was before the murders, and that she never saw or heard of Darlie feeling depressed. Her testimony was called into question by the prosecution when she admitted that she had talked with Darlie's family members (as well as Darin's aunt who was taking notes throughout the trial) with regards to who and what was testifying. That goes against the Rule of Evidence. Therefore, her testimony was essentially a flop. But she did make a note of how awful Darlie's bruises were (almost a year after the fact), but on cross admitted that she didn't even mention the bruising to a doctor or nurse (the medical staff were tending to the cuts on Darlie) because it "wasn't her place to".

-David Rogers: the clergy who presided over the boy's funerals. His testimony was that Darlie appeared to be grieving as appropriately as any mother would under the circumstances. On cross, he brought up the fact that "Gangsta's Paradise" was the first song selected by Darlie to be played at the funeral. His testimony was somewhat damaged when the prosecution got him to admit that prior to the jury selection, he had visited Darlie once while she was incarcerated. Afterwards, he had seen her upwards of fifty times. The prosecution was trying to hint that Darlie was staging this strong Christian faith and a strong relationship with her pastor, to help play up her innocence more.

-Dana Godfrey: Darlie's neighbor. She testified that Darlie and the boys were doing great prior to the murders. On cross, the prosecution brought up the fact that Darin interrupted her suicide attempt and got her to admit that anyone committing suicide was not "doing great".

-Cara "Jeanie" Byford: Darlie's mother's friend. She had generally testified that there is no set grieving pattern for a mother who lost a child. She also had lost a child, and Darlie reached out to her for help and support. On cross examination, she said that after the murders, she visited Darlie in the hospital and asked what had happened. Darlie told her a man came in and killed her boys and then attacked her, in that order. The prosecution then asked how many times after Darlie left the hospital did she visit with Darlie, and she said about 15 times. Not once did Darlie ever go into more detail about the murders. She never once offered a description of her attacker, or any sort of struggle or chase with this intruder.

-Julie Clark: Darlie's friend. More general testimony about Darlie's actions and emotions after the murders. The prosecution then brought up Darlie's lavish lifestyle (the various vacations they had taken, the new spa in their backyard, the furniture in their house, their 28 foot boat they had) and the fact that the Routier's were facing financial dire straits, coupled with Darlie's stress after Drake being born generally had her in a depressed mood. The prosecution also got her to read Darlie's suicide note out loud addressed to her three children.

-Luann Black: Darlie's aunt. Similar testimony of Darlie's other aunt. Went over the bruises that she noticed in the hospital. The prosecution got her to admit that Darlie never discussed the bruises, or how she got them. Her family just assumed they happened during the attack, but Darlie never offered up an explanation for them.

-Karen Neal: Darlie's neighbor and friend. She testified to Darin running over to her house on the night of the murders, and entering the Routier home to render aid (she was a nurse). She also testified to seeing a dark car with tinted windows parked in front of her house but "angled" towards the Routier house. This was a week before the murders. When she approached the car, it sped off through the neighborhood. On cross she admitted to only seeing the car one time prior to the murders, and at no point after. She also admitted that the Routier's dog was growling, barking, and nipping at the responding officers, and that since the dog recognized her she was able to calm it down. The prosecution presented how implausible it was that the dog would have remained silent if an intruder were definitely in their house.

-Detective Jimmy Patterson: detective assigned to the case. His testimony was him walking through his arrival at the crime scene, and also a mention of another neighbor reporting a small black car being seen in an alley about 2 hours before the murders were called in. The defense called him because they wanted to show a somewhat inept attitude the cops had taken in investigating the case, and preserving the crime scene. He testified that he did not take any notes while he was at the crime scene, and was essentially going off of memory. The defense also brought up the police tapping the Routier's phone lines. After a long day of testimony, Patterson was asked to step down. The next day, he plead the fifth for all further questions.

-Mary Rickels: a lady who said that on the night of the murders, two men had attempted to break into her house. She was up late waiting for her husband to come home, when she heard someone trying to open the front door. Assuming it was her husband, she went to the door and turned on the porch light, and saw two men fleeing from her house. A couple of minutes later, she heard noises coming from one of her windows, and saw the same two men back at her house. She scared them away again by turning on a light, and they never returned. She never called police until a week later, and she claims they seemed uninterested in her story. On cross examination however, she claimed that the "jiggling" noises she heard at the door were "very loud" and went on for several minutes but she sat there and did nothing. It was only when she heard wood splinter that she decided to get up and see what was going on. She also said that one of the men was wearing a knit cap and a jogging suit, and the other man was wearing a cowboy hat, a long sleeved western style shirt, and blue jeans. Neither of the men matched the description Darlie gave of her attacker. After scaring the men off the first time, she went back and continued to watch a horror movie on television, and never once thought it prudent to call the police until a week later. She also admitted to having a stroke, her brother dying, and having three heart attacks shortly before these people showed up at her house trying to break in. It was obvious from her testimony that she was flat out unreliable.

-Sarilda Routier: Darin's mother. She testified about how great a daughter-in-law Darlie was, and attested to Darlie's good overall character. The prosecution didn't cross examine her.

-Darin Routier: His testimony can be found in it's entirety here :http://darliefacts.files.wordpress.c...-routier-1.pdf
http://darliefacts.files.wordpress.c...-routier-2.pdf

-Officer Chris Frosch: he plead the fifth amendment and didn't testify.

-Dr. Vincent DiMiao: his testimony was that it was his belief that Darlie's wounds were not self inflicted. On cross, the prosecution got him to admit he was hired by Darlie's defense (implying bias), and that he had only examined the photographs of Darlie in making his determinations. He also never conferred with the medical staff that tended to Darlie at the hospital she was taken to. The prosecution also got him to admit that Darlie's wounds could have been self inflicted.

-Dr. Lisa Clayton: defense expert on traumatic amnesia. http://darliefacts.files.wordpress.c...sa-clayton.pdf

-Andrea Langford was called as a witness, but when it was shown that she was in the courtroom during another witnesses testimony, she was not allowed to testify.

-Lloyd Harrell: defense investigator. His testimony went over the surveillance of the Routier grave site and how the recording of it was illegal in his opinion. He also testified as to how he interpreted the 911 transcript differently than the prosecution. On cross examination, he admitted that he used no software to transcribe the 911 tape and simply had done so by ear. The prosecution also got him to admit to recording a conversation with a state's witness without the witnesses consent, and got him to admit that what he had done was, in his opinion, not illegal.

-Darlie Routier: http://darliefacts.files.wordpress.c...nn-routier.pdf

These witnesses were called for Darlie's defense. Not such a strong "defense", when you think about it. The only thing the defense did right, IMO, was to refute the silly string video by showing that the cops had "illegally" been spying on the Routier's at the grave sites of Damon and Devon. There were no witnesses to any intruder, and when the defense put on the lady who claimed to have had an attempted home invasion on the same night as the murders, she fell apart on cross examination. She's guilty as sin, IMO.

[LilMissKryssy]

I've always believed shes guilty. I realize everyone can go back and forth with reasons they believe she is or isn't. The main reason I've always believed she is guilty is simply a stranger breaking into a house without a weapon, takes a butcher knife from the kitchen, overkills two children, "injuries darlie", then flees the scene. It makes no sense. There's no motive for a stranger to overkill to children. Her 9-11 call is ridiculous too. She talks about forensic evidence (such as fingerprints ect) which I don't know any mother who would talk about that as their small children lay dying.

[wiseguy182]

Originally Posted by LilMissKryssy

I've always believed shes guilty. I realize everyone can go back and forth with reasons they believe she is or isn't. The main reason I've always believed she is guilty is simply a stranger breaking into a house without a weapon, takes a butcher knife from the kitchen, overkills two children, "injuries darlie", then flees the scene. It makes no sense. There's no motive for a stranger to overkill to children. Her 9-11 call is ridiculous too. She talks about forensic evidence (such as fingerprints ect) which I don't know any mother who would talk about that as their small children lay dying.

Conversely, there is no motive that I know of for her to kill 2 of her children, but leave another one unharmed.

In regards to the knife, my theory is this: The intruder never intended to use a knife, or any weapon, or kill anyone. I personally think this was a burglary gone bad (evidenced by the ransacked jewelry). He didn't bring a knife because there was no need to. I don't know whether or not he thought the house was empty, but he certainly couldn't have counted on Darlie, Devon and Damon sleeping downstairs (since that wasn't certainly not their usual routine).

[TheCars1986]

The Routier's back yard was fenced in by a wood fence, and the gate in which you entered or exited was secured tightly with a wire strap. Darlie claims the man ran out through the garage, slit the screen, and fled into the backyard. When the police arrived, they found no evidence of the wire strap being disturbed. And the Routier fence was built in such a way that it would be virtually impossible for someone to climb over it. Not to mention had an intruder actually been in the house, he would have been covered in blood. No blood was found in the backyard at all. There is no explanation for that. Darlie supporters need to explain that, but they can't.

ETA: How would an intruder know where Darlie kept her jewelery? Don't most women keep their jewelery in their bedroom? Conveniently where Darin and Drake were sleeping?

And an interesting tidbit from Darlie's testimony at her trial. She claims to have slept downstairs because Drake would roll around in his crib (which was in the master bedroom), and that because she was a light sleeper she would constantly wake up any time he moved. So how is it possible that Darlie slept through the brutal murders of her two sons as well as the purported attack on her?!

[FantasticallyFlawed]

So I finally decided to post on this topic, and I spent hours reading through the other threads on this case. I have trouble with absolute guilt or absolute innocence, and those who have that opinion because they don't really listen to the other side of the argument. And quite frankly Cami is a bit scary... haha. I tend to lean more toward innocence or in the very least reasonable doubt. I would not have convicted her.

My opinion is simply that, an opinion. I know people have posted to read the transcripts before forming an opinion, but the transcripts had tons of errors, where yes was actually no, etc. So I don't trust them. In addition, if evidence was left out, then I would only be biased because all the evidence wasn't presented.

The sock:

So I think this is quite strange, to stage a sock 75 yards away, and risk being seen by neighbors, or the kids getting help, because I believe the kids were still alive at this time. If Im playing devils advocate, if I were Darlie, only half kill my boys, then plant evidence outside my home, to come back and place bruises, cut screens, stab myself, etc.... sounds a bit hokey, and extremely far fetched. Now if it was an intruder, and he used the sock to protect his hand, and initially attacked Darlie, covering her mouth and nose, while she fought and possibly passed out, hence the bruises, and not remembering the attack. Maybe the boys woke up so he had to attack them. If he discarded sock on way out of neighborhood, he could have pulled it off, turning sock inside out and therefore leaving dna of Darlie's inside the sock. Not sure which way it was but both stories leave doubt in my mind...... reasonable doubt

Trail of blood out of house

To me this can go either way for guilt or innocence. I believe another poster said that why didn't the supposed intruder leave a blood trail? Well why didn't Darlie leave a blood trail either when she planted the sock?? Reasonable doubt

Two knives used or only one?

This is very strange to me. Why isn't one of the boys blood on the knife? This suggested two knives were used. If so then where is it? This suggests an intruder brought a murder weapon, used it to gain entry, started with one boy. Well what if the knife broke? Or became too slippery? Maybe he grabbed one from the kitchen.... If we are going the other way, why was it missing blood from one of the victims. I suppose its possible that it came off when the next child was stabbed.... but as I said before.... reasonable doubt

Motive

People have talked over and over about how she was materialistic and wanted insurance money. Really? 10,000 bucks. Funerals cost more than 5,000 per person, not much gain there. Or she was sick of taking care of kids... now this one is the dumbest one Ive heard. She had a baby, who is likely the most time consuming. I have 3 children, I know. The suicide and take the boys with me theory doesn't jive either. Ive also heard that they were in all this financial trouble, and her lavish lifestyle was about to be taken from her. This doesn't jive either. This sounds like most middle class families in America. We are generally one or two paychecks from being in the poor house. I don't think a viable motive is killing the older two boys for money would have made that much of a financial impact on their situation. I found a very interesting article where Greg Davis called her a psychopath which has no basis in fact. A very interesting read.... (I couldn't post URL because I haven't posted enough, but the title of article is "Prosecutor accused Rowlett homemaker of being a psychopath"

Talks about how the prosecutor never had an expert witness testify as to whether or not she is a future danger which could have changed the death penalty verdict. Very interesting.

Im not here to stir up trouble with a few of the die hard kill Darlie posters, however I seriously question so much of this case, a bunch of which I haven't commented on. Im not 100% either way, but i think at the very least she deserves a new trial.

[nikkispence1989]

Originally Posted by FantasticallyFlawed

The sock

It could be possible that Darin was the one who planted the sock. My gut feeling is that he is more involved, maybe he did it to try and divert the attention from his wife.

Originally Posted by Mysteryphile

What I find really strange is her husband and the dog managed to sleep through (or did they????)

I'm sorry I didnt know there was also a dog in the house! Mega impossible the dog didnt hear anything! (I have 2 dogs and grown up with dogs all my life) To think that the dog was never disturbed is beyond me. 100% sure if it seen a stranger fighting with its owners it would bark/growl. Maybe not so much if it seen its owner attacking another owner. Probably wouldn't react.

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by nikkispence1989

I'm sorry I didnt know there was also a dog in the house! Mega impossible the dog didnt hear anything! (I have 2 dogs and grown up with dogs all my life) To think that the dog was never disturbed is beyond me. 100% sure if it seen a stranger fighting with its owners it would bark/growl. Maybe not so much if it seen its owner attacking another owner. Probably wouldn't react.

The dog did not react at all if someone was around known to the dog. When the police arrived at the scene, the dog was barking so loud and was trying to get down the steps it was also attempting to break the doggie gate at the top of the steps, IIRC. The police had a neighbor go upstairs to calm the dog down. There's no way a dog would have remained silent if an intruder was inside the house.

[FantasticallyFlawed]

Originally Posted by nikkispence1989

It could be possible that Darin was the one who planted the sock. My gut feeling is that he is more involved, maybe he did it to try and divert the attention from his wife.

True, I now believe he is more involved somehow.

Originally Posted by nikkispence1989

I'm sorry I didnt know there was also a dog in the house! Mega impossible the dog didnt hear anything! (I have 2 dogs and grown up with dogs all my life) To think that the dog was never disturbed is beyond me. 100% sure if it seen a stranger fighting with its owners it would bark/growl. Maybe not so much if it seen its owner attacking another owner. Probably wouldn't react.

I didn't know about the dog either!!! That is so weird. My dog woke up from the slightest noise outside., though he generally slept downstairs. One night he barked the intruder bark and my husband ran downstairs to find our garage open. I think it depend on where the dog is sleeping. If dog was upstairs with a door closed, I suppose it's possible but strange.