|
Post by rosebud on Oct 31, 2006 7:51:37 GMT -6
Does anyone know how the darlie routier case is proceeding.
Last I heard she had a stay.
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Flower on Oct 31, 2006 8:10:03 GMT -6
Her Habeas brief was denied 04/30/06; however a Motion for Reconsideration was filed immediately after and that is still pending. Routier is asking for DNA/blood testing to be redone with new technology.
|
|
|
Post by bigmama on Oct 31, 2006 10:06:11 GMT -6
That is one whose execution I will be celebrating. What she did to those boys is unspeakable and that she's got crime scene pics of her babies on her website is about as disrespectful to those boys as it gets. What mama who DIDN'T do such a thing is going to allow that?
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Oct 31, 2006 10:20:45 GMT -6
I know there's a lot of folks thinking she's innocent - so I hope that further testing can clear that up - confirm she's guilty, and then get it done with.
|
|
|
Post by bigmama on Oct 31, 2006 10:24:17 GMT -6
Here's a thought, let's drain her of blood completely and dna test every drop of it.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Oct 31, 2006 10:28:41 GMT -6
I know there's a lot of folks thinking she's innocent - so I hope that further testing can clear that up - confirm she's guilty, and then get it done with. Yes, Beej! The Juice is indeed strong in you!
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Oct 31, 2006 10:29:51 GMT -6
Here's a thought, let's drain her of blood completely and dna test every drop of it. If it reads guilty afterwards, works for me. An innocent executed, logically, shouldn't be the end of the DP - but I think if one got proven, beyond a doubt, a lot of dumb Americans would think twice about the sentence. An innocent executed makes a much better poster boy than Tookie Williams, that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Oct 31, 2006 10:32:55 GMT -6
I know there's a lot of folks thinking she's innocent - so I hope that further testing can clear that up - confirm she's guilty, and then get it done with. Yes, Beej! The Juice is indeed strong in you! I've been thinking about posting a question about stays. Even as somebody who still affiliates themselves as an anti, I'm not sure that stays are a good thing - especially if they are only delaying the inevitable. I mean, who is a stay good for if the execution will take place a few months later anyways? Bad for the murderer and their family - bad for the victim's family. I think it's a political ploy to say "yeah, I'm torn on the issue - I'm compassionate and want to make sure"...come on, either do it or don't.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Oct 31, 2006 10:59:54 GMT -6
Yes, Beej! The Juice is indeed strong in you! I've been thinking about posting a question about stays. Even as somebody who still affiliates themselves as an anti, I'm not sure that stays are a good thing - especially if they are only delaying the inevitable. I mean, who is a stay good for if the execution will take place a few months later anyways? Bad for the murderer and their family - bad for the victim's family. I think it's a political ploy to say "yeah, I'm torn on the issue - I'm compassionate and want to make sure"...come on, either do it or don't. I guess the point of stays is that if you delay it long enough, you have a better chance of some pansy judge/politician commuting your sentence because he doesn't want to have the 1000th execution (or some other milestone) happen in his state. This bring me again to public executions. There is too much moral ambivalence in this country, and it time force people to make some unequivocal decisions about how we punish murderers.
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Nov 1, 2006 1:46:47 GMT -6
She IMO murdered thise children and I would be very very surprised if she was innocent.
How anyone can sleep through their children being murdered and then complain that she couldn't sleep in the bedroom because the baby was noisy. Make up your mind darlie.
|
|
|
Post by rayozz on Nov 1, 2006 2:04:44 GMT -6
Her Habeas brief was denied 04/30/06; however a Motion for Reconsideration was filed immediately after and that is still pending. Routier is asking for DNA/blood testing to be redone with new technology. Her case is on hold. I posted this some time ago, and a search would find it in another thread. Basically, and I could be well off the mark with my old memory, everything has stopped until Texas re-examines new and old DNA evidence. My reading is, that they have to test everything until the case continues. It will be the make or break of her. This hearing was meant to be held mid October, but has been rescheduled to November 13, I think. It was Routier's case that led me to this site, some years ago. I think we will know more within the next few weeks. Ray
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Flower on Nov 1, 2006 7:54:35 GMT -6
Her Habeas brief was denied 04/30/06; however a Motion for Reconsideration was filed immediately after and that is still pending. Routier is asking for DNA/blood testing to be redone with new technology. Her case is on hold. I posted this some time ago, and a search would find it in another thread. Basically, and I could be well off the mark with my old memory, everything has stopped until Texas re-examines new and old DNA evidence. My reading is, that they have to test everything until the case continues. It will be the make or break of her. This hearing was meant to be held mid October, but has been rescheduled to November 13, I think. It was Routier's case that led me to this site, some years ago. I think we will know more within the next few weeks. Ray Ray, That's very optimistic of you, even though this IS Texas. However, this IS also Routier... so something being known in the next few weeks is unlikely. She's got enough of the waah-waahs following her that they will drag out her case. That, coupled with being a woman, her case will drag on for years yet. waah-waahs are defined as the groups that claim anyone and everyone is innocent, until they are proven innocent.. aka Amnesty [anything].
|
|
|
Post by Elric of Melnibone on Nov 1, 2006 8:15:58 GMT -6
I honestly believe she is guilty. She killed those children. HER children.
|
|
|
Post by Eminey1 on Nov 1, 2006 11:25:21 GMT -6
Most of you know I have stepped off the anti bench and found a good ole comfy seat on the pro bench, however, I always find myself questionning this case. Yesterday I listened to the 911 call made by Darlie on the night of the murders, at first I sobbed for the loss of the children, listening to a hysterical mother screaming my babies are dead was dreadful. Anyhow! After a couple of minutes listening I noticed that Darlie made it quite clear that the 'man' had dropped the knife and she had touched it since. Would this be a priority??? I mean if your children and you had been attacked surely the weapon would be the last thing to shout about? It was like she was making sure that her plan was documented right from the first 911 call. IMO her husband is a guilty if not more so than Darlie, I reckon he and another man did this. I believe Darlie knows everything and for that alone she deserves the DP. If my partner laid a finger on our child I would whoop his ass, if my partner seriously hurt our child in anyway I would whoop his ass all the way to the police station not cover for him!
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Nov 1, 2006 12:04:16 GMT -6
Here is an excerpt from her habeas corpus In her habeas corpus petition, Ms. Routier set out a variety of facts suggesting that Darin Routier was responsible for the murders and the assault, by acting alone or by hiring another person to commit the crime. ? Has she changed her tune??
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Nov 2, 2006 8:03:59 GMT -6
Most of you know I have stepped off the anti bench and found a good ole comfy seat on the pro bench, however, I always find myself questionning this case. Yesterday I listened to the 911 call made by Darlie on the night of the murders, at first I sobbed for the loss of the children, listening to a hysterical mother screaming my babies are dead was dreadful. Anyhow! After a couple of minutes listening I noticed that Darlie made it quite clear that the 'man' had dropped the knife and she had touched it since. Would this be a priority??? I mean if your children and you had been attacked surely the weapon would be the last thing to shout about? It was like she was making sure that her plan was documented right from the first 911 call. IMO her husband is a guilty if not more so than Darlie, I reckon he and another man did this. I believe Darlie knows everything and for that alone she deserves the DP. If my partner laid a finger on our child I would whoop his ass, if my partner seriously hurt our child in anyway I would whoop his ass all the way to the police station not cover for him! I have listebed to that call many times and I have read the text. It just doesn't add up. Her stories do not ring true. Why would you pick up a knife that someone had stabbed your children with. If someone was sitting on top of you trying to kill you. Would you not remember their face or at least some sort of recognition?
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Nov 2, 2006 11:35:57 GMT -6
Here is an excerpt from her habeas corpus In her habeas corpus petition, Ms. Routier set out a variety of facts suggesting that Darin Routier was responsible for the murders and the assault, by acting alone or by hiring another person to commit the crime. ? Has she changed her tune?? If that is indeed her petition, it fully convinces me of her guilt.
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Nov 2, 2006 13:32:21 GMT -6
Yeah, didn't she claim for a long time that he was innocent and that she had no memory of that night??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2006 9:39:09 GMT -6
Hum, is that a case that was profiled on Unsolved Mysteries a few yrs ago?
I don't have the patience to read all the files on her case, but if she is innocent I hope that she is released. If not...gurney time.
Could her husband be guilty too, or was he somewhere else w/an alibi when the murders happened?
What was the motive? Something to do w/her being unable to keep the McMansion and the Jag, no?
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Nov 3, 2006 9:49:03 GMT -6
Hum, is that a case that was profiled on Unsolved Mysteries a few yrs ago? I don't have the patience to read all the files on her case, but if she is innocent I hope that she is released. If not...gurney time. Could her husband be guilty too, or was he somewhere else w/an alibi when the murders happened? What was the motive? Something to do w/her being unable to keep the McMansion and the Jag, no? If I remember rightly she was a woman who liked to have nice clothes and live beyond her means. I think they said she panicked when she had her last child as their money had run out.
|
|
Lady
Old Hand
Member of the Month - 9/08
I may live in Ohio but my heart belongs to the blue and the gold !
Posts: 659
|
Post by Lady on Nov 3, 2006 12:27:34 GMT -6
Hum, is that a case that was profiled on Unsolved Mysteries a few yrs ago? I don't have the patience to read all the files on her case, but if she is innocent I hope that she is released. If not...gurney time. Could her husband be guilty too, or was he somewhere else w/an alibi when the murders happened? What was the motive? Something to do w/her being unable to keep the McMansion and the Jag, no? I believe her hubby was asleep upstairs with the youngest child when the murders happened . That has always been my biggest question about this case , how could he just sleep through his wife being injuried and his 2 children being murdered ? I just don't get it .
|
|
|
Post by rayozz on Nov 3, 2006 14:19:00 GMT -6
Here is an excerpt from her habeas corpus In her habeas corpus petition, Ms. Routier set out a variety of facts suggesting that Darin Routier was responsible for the murders and the assault, by acting alone or by hiring another person to commit the crime. ? Has she changed her tune?? That is taken out of context. It refers to her first trial lawyer not investigating the role that Darin may have had in the murders, as there would have been a conflict of interest. It seems weird that the only other adult in the house (assuming there was no intruder) was not investigated by the defense. Ray
|
|
|
Post by supermax on Nov 3, 2006 14:19:07 GMT -6
This is the one case which confuses me greatly I honestly do not know if this person did kill her children, I wasnt there. I wasnt a juror, didnt see all of the evidence, didnt hear all of the technical information, so, I really dont feel I can form a judgement. If this person did not undertake the murders of those innocent children, I have faith that the appeals system will deal with it. If she did, I hope she faces her end knowing that she cannot ever undo the harm she caused and that the blood pumping through her veins is pure poison to society.
|
|
|
Post by bigmama on Nov 3, 2006 14:22:55 GMT -6
Hum, is that a case that was profiled on Unsolved Mysteries a few yrs ago? I don't have the patience to read all the files on her case, but if she is innocent I hope that she is released. If not...gurney time. Could her husband be guilty too, or was he somewhere else w/an alibi when the murders happened? What was the motive? Something to do w/her being unable to keep the McMansion and the Jag, no? I believe her hubby was asleep upstairs with the youngest child when the murders happened . That has always been my biggest question about this case , how could he just sleep through his wife being injuried and his 2 children being murdered ? I just don't get it . See that part doesn't bug me. She attacked the boys while they were sleeping. Why would there have been any noise or ruckus? Not until she was ready to start screaming for help.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Nov 3, 2006 14:27:04 GMT -6
Wouldn't you think she'd wake up if someone was stabbing her children? I can't believe they didn't make and sound. Also why would they stab the children first? I would think they'd want to get the mother out of the way first, after all she's bigger.
|
|
|
Post by bigmama on Nov 3, 2006 14:51:22 GMT -6
Whatever sounds those poor boys may have made while their Mommy stabbed them to death, if any, was probably not enough to travel upstairs through the bedroom door and wake up the dad.
|
|
|
Post by rayozz on Nov 3, 2006 14:53:30 GMT -6
"See that part doesn't bug me. She attacked the boys while they were sleeping. Why would there have been any noise or ruckus? Not until she was ready to start screaming for help. "
That's the disturbing part; the crime scene suggests that there should have been a ruckus. The lounge room is in a state of disarray, table overturned, glass cabinet disturbed with broken glassware; yet Darin doesn't come down until after the event. I know when my boys were young, the slighest of noises would wake me up, despite the fact that their rooms were at the other end of the house. To me it suggests a staged crime scene and Darin's involvement, even if after the event. I think that is why the refusal to investigate Darin is in the appeal. I'm not really sure how that helps Routier though.
Ray
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Nov 3, 2006 14:56:42 GMT -6
Here is an excerpt from her habeas corpus In her habeas corpus petition, Ms. Routier set out a variety of facts suggesting that Darin Routier was responsible for the murders and the assault, by acting alone or by hiring another person to commit the crime. ? Has she changed her tune?? That is taken out of context. It refers to her first trial lawyer not investigating the role that Darin may have had in the murders, as there would have been a conflict of interest. It seems weird that the only other adult in the house (assuming there was no intruder) was not investigated by the defense. Ray Thanks for clarifing!
|
|
|
Post by bigmama on Nov 3, 2006 15:01:36 GMT -6
"See that part doesn't bug me. She attacked the boys while they were sleeping. Why would there have been any noise or ruckus? Not until she was ready to start screaming for help. " That's the disturbing part; the crime scene suggests that there should have been a ruckus. The lounge room is in a state of disarray, table overturned, glass cabinet disturbed with broken glassware; yet Darin doesn't come down until after the event. I know when my boys were young, the slighest of noises would wake me up, despite the fact that their rooms were at the other end of the house. To me it suggests a staged crime scene and Darin's involvement, even if after the event. I think that is why the refusal to investigate Darin is in the appeal. I'm not really sure how that helps Routier though. Ray I'm glad you're here Ray, obviously you're more aware of the particulars in this case. Couldn't all that disarray have been done by Darlie AFTER stabbing the boys and before slashing herself? And that's when Darin finally heard it and came down?
|
|
|
Post by grandma on Nov 3, 2006 15:32:46 GMT -6
I know there's a lot of folks thinking she's innocent - so I hope that further testing can clear that up - confirm she's guilty, and then get it done with.
|
|