|
Post by tee2000 on Oct 22, 2016 6:32:25 GMT -5
Blood Evidence Convicted Darlie RoutierI recommend viewing the You Tube video, Forensic Files – Season 4, Episode 1"Invisible Intruder" (www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff_ln9LR_wI ). This video describes one of the nation’s most gruesome crimes, which occurred June 6, 1996, when a 5-year-old boy and his 6-year-old brother were stabbed to death while sleeping during the middle of the night after falling asleep watching television with their mother. Both boys were repeatedly stabbed with great force. Their young mother, Darlie Routier, was cut in the throat with the same butcher knife (taken from the kitchen) that killed the boys. The mother claimed the knife that killed her sons was dropped on the floor by the attacker following the attacks and she picked up the knife in disbelief, which was the reason she had the blood of both of her sons on her, especially a large amount of their blood on her hands and arms. As described in the news across the nation, this young mother claimed a stranger had come into the house after cutting a window screen and then this stranger killed her two boys, as well as trying to kill her. Tom Bevel the so called blood expert in this case is a master manipulator and fraudster. How can you state something is scientific when you use no scientific methodology to carry out your experiments, no measurements of how much blood he put on the knife no measurements or notes of heights he dropped the knife at. Also taking into account darlie found it on the floor and so he really has no idea on whether the knife was placed there or thrown or what.also there are half moon blood transfers in the utility room doorway that they dismiss, I have the crime scene photos. Also the crime scene was changed and items removed prior to his experiments which makes his experiments unrealistic and scientifically invalid. I mean even a college science student would fail their project on these bases alone. There are a number of cases of innocent convictions he has been involved in, not to mention the bad peer reviews of his so called expert book on the subject. There is also another case he was involved in where a man was murdered by cops in his cell. They called on Tom Bevel to make up a fairy take that fitted with the cops story and low and behold they got off. Now when you see the crime scene photos its just ridiculous that anyone would buy this mans story of a deliberate suicide by the victim. He manipulates evidence to suit his position in a trial.
|
|
|
Post by Joanna on Oct 22, 2016 18:22:04 GMT -5
Tom Bevel the so called blood expert in this case is a master manipulator and fraudster. How can you state something is scientific when you use no scientific methodology to carry out your experiments, no measurements of how much blood he put on the knife no measurements or notes of heights he dropped the knife at. Also taking into account darlie found it on the floor and so he really has no idea on whether the knife was placed there or thrown or what.also there are half moon blood transfers in the utility room doorway that they dismiss, I have the crime scene photos. Also the crime scene was changed and items removed prior to his experiments which makes his experiments unrealistic and scientifically invalid. I mean even a college science student would fail their project on these bases alone. There are a number of cases of innocent convictions he has been involved in, not to mention the bad peer reviews of his so called expert book on the subject. There is also another case he was involved in where a man was murdered by cops in his cell. They called on Tom Bevel to make up a fairy take that fitted with the cops story and low and behold they got off. Now when you see the crime scene photos its just ridiculous that anyone would buy this mans story of a deliberate suicide by the victim. He manipulates evidence to suit his position in a trial. In court, both the plaintiff and defendant are required to disclose their experts and the gist of their testimony to the other side, to give them a chance to investigate the expert and find a rebuttal witness. The defense didn't do that. Without a rebuttal witness, the jury assumed what Tom Bevel said was true. The person you should be blaming is Darlie Routier's lawyer and those who insisted on hiring him.
|
|
|
Post by tee2000 on Nov 1, 2016 12:07:50 GMT -5
Tom Bevel the so called blood expert in this case is a master manipulator and fraudster. How can you state something is scientific when you use no scientific methodology to carry out your experiments, no measurements of how much blood he put on the knife no measurements or notes of heights he dropped the knife at. Also taking into account darlie found it on the floor and so he really has no idea on whether the knife was placed there or thrown or what.also there are half moon blood transfers in the utility room doorway that they dismiss, I have the crime scene photos. Also the crime scene was changed and items removed prior to his experiments which makes his experiments unrealistic and scientifically invalid. I mean even a college science student would fail their project on these bases alone. There are a number of cases of innocent convictions he has been involved in, not to mention the bad peer reviews of his so called expert book on the subject. There is also another case he was involved in where a man was murdered by cops in his cell. They called on Tom Bevel to make up a fairy take that fitted with the cops story and low and behold they got off. Now when you see the crime scene photos its just ridiculous that anyone would buy this mans story of a deliberate suicide by the victim. He manipulates evidence to suit his position in a trial. In court, both the plaintiff and defendant are required to disclose their experts and the gist of their testimony to the other side, to give them a chance to investigate the expert and find a rebuttal witness. The defense didn't do that. Without a rebuttal witness, the jury assumed what Tom Bevel said was true. The person you should be blaming is Darlie Routier's lawyer and those who insisted on hiring him.
As iv said in previous post I believe Mulder failed Darlie miserably as her defense. However its not as simple as to just blame him. Tom Bevel gave false testimony regarding evidence and that evidence Is what your saying is the reason for her conviction. Tom Bevel mislead the jury as he has done in many other cases. Anyway my aim is not to blame any one individual but to review different aspects of this case particularly the physical evidence and how that pertains to her guilt or innocence!
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Jun 7, 2018 9:20:31 GMT -5
Yesterday was the 22nd anniversary of these murders and I guess Darlie's still on death row. Have there been any recent updates?
|
|
|
Post by catherine on Jul 3, 2018 22:10:21 GMT -5
In tonight's episode, that son-of-a-bitch Darin claimed that he was lying when he said he had been trying to find someone to help him carry out an insurance scam. I wouldn't believe him if his tongue came notarized. Darlie was a self-centered airhead, but he was (and is) a totally unprincipled SOB. What kind of man brags about his wife's breast implants while people are trying to save the lives of his sons?
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Jul 7, 2018 12:48:51 GMT -5
I watched it and I don't believe what Darin said about the defense lawyer telling him to lie about planning the insurance scam where someone would break in and steal jewelry. That would be an outright lie and I've known of lawyers who got disbarred for letting someone lie about something if the lawyer knows it's a lie. Just from the way people said that Darin was acting that night makes me think that he had something to do with what happened.
|
|
|
Post by sundanceim on Oct 18, 2018 21:03:42 GMT -5
One of the things that bothered me was those Daisy Mae shorts she wore to the cemetery party. Women wear short shorts because they think that showing a lot of leg makes them look sexy. If my son had died, the last thing I would the concerned about was looking sexy. I don't know if she killed those 2 boys or not, but she wasn't acting like a normal mother who had just buried 2 of her children. She wore shorts to a funeral? Even white trash knows better than that. This woman is an imbecile. I hope she's been taking classes in prison and trying to learn how to do something other than bleach her hair and flaunt herself.
No, she didn't wear shorts to a funeral. And there was no loud music. It was a mock 'birthday party' for Devon at the cemetary. Devon's birthday invitations had already gone out to the children, and several had already purchased a gift for that party. Their closest little friends they played with everyday were asked to come to the cemetary party IIFC.
It was to show Devon and Damon's friends that even though D & D were gone now, they were in Heaven, and that was a GOOD thing. 'That's where they are so we're GLAD that's where they were' type of message to their little friends.
|
|
|
Post by sundanceim on Oct 18, 2018 21:14:31 GMT -5
There were so many requests for the reports, most from the general public, that the courthouse staff was to the brink of overwhelmed. So the judge said "OK that's enough". That's what I heard, and it makes sense to me FWIW
|
|
|
Post by madeline on Oct 18, 2018 23:13:26 GMT -5
There were so many requests for the reports, most from the general public, that the courthouse staff was to the brink of overwhelmed. So the judge said "OK that's enough". That's what I heard, and it makes sense to me FWIW What reports?
|
|
|
Post by pat on Oct 19, 2018 3:56:56 GMT -5
No, she didn't wear shorts to a funeral. And there was no loud music. It was a mock 'birthday party' for Devon at the cemetary. Devon's birthday invitations had already gone out to the children, and several had already purchased a gift for that party. Their closest little friends they played with everyday were asked to come to the cemetary party IIFC.
It was to show Devon and Damon's friends that even though D & D were gone now, they were in Heaven, and that was a GOOD thing. 'That's where they are so we're GLAD that's where they were' type of message to their little friends. The children who received the invitations didn't show up at the cemetery with their gifts. No matter what her intentions were, those Daisy Mae shorts, the chewing gum, the silly string, etc. were way out of line.
What does IIFC stand for?
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 2, 2019 16:35:02 GMT -5
Since now people are saying that blood spatter evidence is junk science and that's what convicted this woman, I don't see why she can't get a new trial.
|
|
|
Post by madeline on Jan 3, 2019 4:09:05 GMT -5
Since now people are saying that blood spatter evidence is junk science and that's what convicted this woman, I don't see why she can't get a new trial. I don't either. I also don't understand why that revolting David Temple, who blew his pregnant wife's head off with a shotgun, was granted a new trial and has been free now for over a year waiting for his trial. That also happened in Texas. whatliesbeyond.boards.net/thread/6382/update-trial-texas-wife-killer
|
|
|
Post by kitty on May 13, 2019 1:22:16 GMT -5
Did anybody watch 20/20 last Friday night about this case? I watched it and the woman who saw the strange black car was one of the people interviewed. I still can't understand why the police didn't follow up on leads like that. It seemed like they decided Darlie was guilty and just closed the file.
|
|
|
Post by madeline on May 13, 2019 12:07:52 GMT -5
Did anybody watch 20/20 last Friday night about this case? I watched it and the woman who saw the strange black car was one of the people interviewed. I still can't understand why the police didn't follow up on leads like that. It seemed like they decided Darlie was guilty and just closed the file. I saw it, but there wasn't anything that I didn't already know. That juror though that was talking about Darlie's breast implants and jewelry should be reason enough for her to be granted a new trial. I wonder why her lawyer didn't tell her not to wear a lot of jewelry to the trial. He really did a lousy job defending her.
|
|
|
Post by catherine on Feb 19, 2020 15:56:00 GMT -5
The story about Darin planning a break in only came out a year later - to deflect from Darlies evil deeds. Latest DNA released June 17, 2015 show zero evidence of an intruder, only Darlie. Her supporters are peeved about this so they have asked the court to seal past and future DNA results. All evidence points only to Darlie. No one else. She claimed it was guys, then a man but that it wasn't Darin. They had a massive fight that night. On the 911 call you can hear him coming down the stairs and say what did you do. She told him "I didn't do anything, Darin, someone came in here. She also didn't help the boys one single time. She stayed on the phone setting up her alibi, "I picked up the knife, we probably could have gotten prints". Darlie did it. Darlie will die for it. Bob Kee, Darin's father-in-law, signed an affidavit swearing that in 1996, Darin approached him about hiring someone to stage a break-in, so that he could collect insurance money. (Insurance scams are common with white trash.) At first, Darin denied it, then he claimed that Darlie's appellate lawyer goaded him into claiming he was arranging a break-in. But in 2002, when questioned by Skip Hollandsworth of Texas Monthly, Darin finally admitted it was true, that he had the conversation with Bob Kee and he was planning to stage a robbery to scam the insurance company.
|
|