ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

One More Look at Death Row Inmate Darlie Routier (updated)

Updated on October 6, 2014

Mommy or Monster?

After her graduation, Darlie married her high school sweetheart, Darin Routier, in 1988. Together they soon began a family. Following the birth of their first son, Devon Rush, in 1989, their second son, Damon Christian, was born in 1991.

Darin's computer-related business afforded the family's move to the affluent area known as the Dalrock Heights Addition in Rowlett, Texas, near Dallas. Living "the good life" the upper middle class family surrounded themselves with expensive items. A new Jaguar, a cabin cruiser boat, lavish home furnishings, jewelry, expensive clothing.

Sadly, it is rumored, Darin's business began to lag, and the family experienced a new aspect of life when their finances faltered. Despite other rumors that Darlie and Darin were having issues as a couple, they had their third son, Drake, in 1995. Darlie suffered postpartum depression after the delivery.

In an effort to lose her "baby weight" Darlie began to take diet pills, which proved unhelpful, and she developed mood swings. The couple discussed Darlie's thoughts, including fleeting ones of suicide. The couple reviewed their prospects, and things began to look up for the young family. Then something horrific happened.

On the morning of June 6, 1996, around 2:30 AM, the Rowlett Police Department received a 911 call from the Routier home. Darlie screamed that she and her sons had been stabbed, and that her sons were dieing. Darin, who had been awakened by his wife's screams, ran downstairs and found her and the two boys soaked in blood in the family room.

Devon was not breathing, and his father tried to save him by giving him CPR, only to have his son's blood sprayed in his own face. Damon, meanwhile, struggled to breath.

Soon emergancy personel filled the home. Paramedics worked on the boys as police searched for the intruder, who Darlie said ran toward the garage. A bloody knife was noted by Policeman David Waddell and Sergeant Matthew Walling, on the kitchen counter. Some of Darlie's jewelry was near by. A slashed window screen in the garage was noted, and blood was splattered on the floor.

Sadly, both boys died from their wounds, and Darlie was transported to the hospital, after giving statements to police officers. Her wounds included stab wounds to the right forearm. One of which was administered with such force the bone was splintered, and according to medical reports, marrow was leaking from the splintering. Her throat was slit to within 2mm of the carotid artery, and the carotid sheath was damaged. She had other less dangerous wounds as well, including stabs to her chest, and wounds inside her mouth.

While speaking to police in her blood drenched night shirt, she said an intruder came into the home, and "mounted" her while she was asleep. When she was awakened in this way, she screamed and began to fight off his blows. He then fled toward the garage, and at that point she saw her sons covered in blood. She said the intruder was a medium-to-tall man, dressed in a black T-shirt, black jeans and a baseball cap.

After Darlie was transported to the hospital, the Rowlett Police Department seized the house and began their investigation, which many now believe was botched. There were conflicting statements given by first responders. Seperate pieces of bloody evidence were collected together into common plastic bags, causing cross contamination. Some evidence was placed into plastic shopping bags. Objects were moved about the room before crime scene photos were taken. No fingerprints of the two childern were ever taken. Objects at the crime scene which could have had bearing in the case were ignored. Other methods of mishandling of the crime scene occurred.

Eleven days later, Darlie was arrested on murder charges of her sons. The prosecution's case against Darlie Routier was circumstantial and based on experts who theorized about evidence simply viewed, or collected at the crime scene. Darlie was convicted of the murder of only one son, because the murder weapon of her other son was never found.

Where other such cases have been known to drag at snail's pace through the court system, Darlie was awarded a speedy trial after only four months. Darlie sits on Texas' Death Row.

There are many questions surrounding the arrest, trial, defence, and conviction of Darlie Routier. The media swarmed the story, seemingly biased, hot on the heels of the Susan Smith double murder of her children, which that mother eventually confessed to. Darlie's attorney at trial had an apparent conflict of interest, since he reportedly had a pre-arrangement with Darin Routier and other family members not to pursue any defense that could implicate Darin . The court reporter at trial reportedly mishandled the recording and transcribing of the trial record. The list goes on.

There are those who believe Darlie is guilty, and those who believe she is innocent. Then there are others who simply believe the case was so mishandled the truth may never be found.

MORE:

Greg Davis, the assistant District Attorney who prosecuted Darlie Routier, was himself indited in Collin County, Texas in December 2010 for record tampering charges.

This man, who all together had many hours on national TV after the conviction of Ms. Routier, was quoted as saying, "If Darlie really is innocent, that only proves that I'm a great lawyer".

The state of Texas has "lost" some very important items of evidence in this case, including key elements from the rape exam done on Darlie the night of the murders. Also the state has spent large sums of money to block Darlie from access to critical evidence like the bloody fingerprint that has never been identified.

This fingerprint which the Greg Davis called "a smudge", actually has eight identifying points, yet has never been run through the AFIS database. This fingerprint was ruled out as belonging to any adult at the crime scene the night of the murders, including first responders, yet Darlie and her defense team have not been allowed to have the print tested. Why?

Dr. Elizabeth Johnson is a highly respected and well published DNA scientist. She has uncovered causes of errors for the DPS in both Austin and Houston, Texas. Dr. Johnson has submitted affidavits in Darlie's case explaining how new DNA technology could absolutely resolve the outstanding DNA issues. To date no new testing has been allowed. Why?

The nurses who testified at trial to Darlies state of mind while at the hospital, eventually admitted they had been "couched" by the prosecution regarding their testimony. Would Mr. Davis stop at nothing to get Darlie Routier's conviction?

I find it interesting that Sgt. Walling said to a superior officer, "Lieutenant, you won't believe what Mr. Routier said to me right before he left to go to the hospital with his wife. He turned to me and I swear to God he said, 'Golly, I guess this is the biggest thing Rowlett's ever had.' The man had two of his children slaughtered tonight, and he's acting like the damn circus is in town!"

On a special televised episode of 20/20, entitled "Her Flesh and Blood," which aired on February 3, 2000, and examined and updated the Routier case found, amoung other things, that the jury may not have been shown photographs of bruises on Darlie's arms (which strongly indicated she fought off an intruder), or the complete transcript of the court proceedings from which to make a final verdict. In fact, the transcript that they did review contained, upon latter examination, 33,000 errors and omissions. Also, the audio tapes the jury heard were incomplete.

One juror admitted he was peer-pressured into a guilty vote. On the televised program, he claimed he never saw the above-mentioned photos, and that the jury was never shown the police surveillance version of Devon's graveside birthday party where Darlie and her family sincerely grieved over the children before the "silly string" incident.

On July 25, 2001, Holly Becka of the Dallas Morning News reported that Darlie's lawyers filed an appeal for her charging conflict of interest and 13 claims of trial errors: Stating: "she deserves a new trial because the judge didn't properly handle her lead defense counsel's conflict of interest in representing the only other suspect in the crime -- her husband." Her appeal doesn't implicate Darin Routier as the culprit but notes that inconsistencies in Darin's testimony could have prevented her counsel from correctly presenting information to the jury.

In early June of 2002, Dr. Richard Jantz, a fingerprint expert, indicated that the unidentified bloody fingerprint left at the crime scene is "consistent with an adult" rather than a child. This testimony supports Darlie Routier's claim that an intruder was present in the house at the time of the murders.

Also in June 2002, Holly Becka of the Dallas Morning News reported that "Darin Routier asked his father-in-law (Robbie Gene Kee) whether he knew anyone who would burglarize his home as part of an insurance scam months before his sons were killed...Ms. Routier's family fears that Mr. Routier mentioned the plot to others, who broke in on their own. They say they think this is possibly why an intruder targeted the home." In fact, neighbors saw a black car watching the house before the Routier boys were killed.

Darin Routier admitted he had looked for someone to burglarize the family home to benefit from an insurance scam, but that he planned to have the burglary occur when the family was not at home.

Then there is the troubling string of deaths committed by confessed serial killer, Tommy Lynn Sells. Many of his murders were not unlike the Routier children's. On more than one occassion, Sells killed mothers and children, boys as well as girls. He did not always bring a weapon with him to the murder location, but used an object available at the scene.

After his arrest in Del Rio, Texas, Sells began extensive confessions to many such crimes, then halted after certain conflicts with the Texas Rangers. It is believed Sells still holds the answers to many unsolved crimes, and is saving information in an effort to extend his own life, since he is himself on death row in Texas.

Sells is also at the center of the wrongful-conviction allegation of Julie Rea-Harper in Illinois.

Julie Rea-Harper is serving a 65 year sentence in prison following her 2002 conviction for the 1997 stabbing death of her son, Joel Kirkpatrick, aged 10 years.

It was alleged that Rea-Harper killed her son in her home in Lawrenceville after she lost custody of him to his father as a result of a contentious divorce.

In May 2004, the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University Law School took up the cause, saying courts should grant a new trial based on two letters Sells wrote indicating he knows something about the case. Others have joined in the call for a new trial for the woman, who has continued to proclaim her innocence.

As I said when I first wrote this Hub, some think Darlie Routier is guilty, some think she is innocent. The questions are: Did she receive a fair trial? Was the investigation botched? And will we ever know the truth?



UPDATE

This is take from the following website:

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/HerProof/CourtTV.html

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 when 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.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Wayne Brown profile image

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      I live in the DFW Metroplex and remember this case well. It seems that more and more suburb communities are faced with their first real homicide case with varying complexities. Rather than learn from each other, it seems they have to botch one before they learn how to do it. Then again, all crimes scenes may be botched, its just that only some of them become controversial. I remember, at the time, Darlie state of mind was enough to make you feel that she had something to hide. I can't imagine any woman in a reasonable state of mind who could kill her kids. Susan Smith was a misguided trainwreck of psychological vines who was pushed over th edge by a stupid love affair...amazing. Thanks for a good review and refresher. WB

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      Wayne Brown, I don't understand how anyone can kill children. But when it happens, I believe, there is no excuse for investigating officers to make mistakes. Murder can happen anywhere, so those in a position to find the killer should always be prepared to do their jobs with precision and method. And I think you're right to say "Rather than learn from each other, it seems they have to botch one before they learn how to do it." With sad consequences toward the victims and justice in general.

      Thank you for your insightful comment.

    • carolina muscle profile image

      carolina muscle 6 years ago from Charlotte, North Carolina

      What a complicated case... it never helps when the evidence is not handled properly. Interesting post!!

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      carolina muscle, I couldn't agree with you more! Thanks for the comment.

    • John B Badd profile image

      John B Badd 6 years ago from Saint Louis, MO

      I support capital punishment, and if this woman killed her kids she should die. However based on the information in this hub (I have no other information) it does not seem like they had enough to convict her beyond a reasonable doubt. Because I do not have all the evidence or the court transcripts I will assume the justice system worked and she is guilty. They however should have handled the case better.

    • John B Badd profile image

      John B Badd 6 years ago from Saint Louis, MO

      I read more about this on the Tru Tv Website. I think she did it.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      John B Badd, thank you for the comment. I believe many people would like to read the transcripts, but the court reporter seemed to somehow mishandled those as well.

      What strikes me about this case the most, is the fact that so many aspects of the crimminal investigation, all the way through to the trial was so bazzar, with such mishandling. So again, I must express my thought that the whole truth and nothing but the truth will never be known.

      Also the fact that Darlie Routier was never tried with the murder of her second son, and the fact of the missing weapon used in that crime sheds doubt in my own mind.

      I read recently that a motion to introduce DNA evidence in an attempt to grant Mrs. Routier a new trial has been made. So this is a story to be watched.

      Thank you again for your comment.

    • profile image

      JANE 6 years ago

      I THINK HER HUSBAND DID IT.I JUST THINK HIS BUSINESS WAS FAILING AND HE WAS BACKED UP IN A CORNER.DARLIE WAS A MESS,EMOTIONALLY,AND SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN OURSIDE HELP FROM HER FAMILY.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      I am also suspisous of her husband. There were very large insurance plans on both Darlie and her husband, and only burial type plans for the kids. So there is logic about her being the target. I hope someday the truth is actually told.

    • vrbmft profile image

      Vernon Bradley 6 years ago from Yucaipa, California

      Whenever something horrific happens and it is botched to the nth degree, it makes me wonder what this horrific event or crime represents to those investigating, what is getting triggered that everyone seemingly unconsciously conspires to botch it up. Maybe we just don't want to recognize how horrific any one of us can be, so the quicker we find the villain, correct or not, the sooner we can lay to rest our own demons for a little while longer.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      vrbmft, you may be right about that. Even so, in this type of situation, the truth is so improtant, because Darlie is on Texas' death row. And Texas does, in fact, kill women.

    • queen cleopatra profile image

      queen cleopatra 6 years ago

      This story is very sad. I hope the DNA tests would help answer all the questions in our minds. Thank you for sharing this to us...

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      queen cleopatra, yes the DNA could prove alot. But there is foot dragging on the side of the state about the testing. Go figure,

    • Gypsy Willow profile image

      Gypsy Willow 6 years ago from Lake Tahoe Nevada USA , Wales UK and Taupo New Zealand

      What a horrible situation. I am sure that feelings ran so high at the time of the crime that either parent could be capable especially if their lifestyle was at risk. I'll watch the retrial with interest.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      Yes I will too. Thank you for reading and commenting Gypsy Willow!

    • ExpandYourMind profile image

      ExpandYourMind 6 years ago from Midwest USA

      I vaguely remember this case. How horrific and sad. Hopefully, the truth will come out.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      Yes I too hope the truth eventually comes out. Thank you for the comment ExpandYourMind!

    • profile image

      PLC 6 years ago

      You guys know the transcripts are available online, don't you?

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 6 years ago from USA

      It is my understanding that the court reporter "botched" the transcriptions. But I will check out online to see what I come up with.

      Thank you.

    • profile image

      laura.b 6 years ago

      darlie was guilty as sin and while i dont believe darin was in on it i do think he probably suspected her but was so obsessed with darlie he cudnt see the wood for the trees.people always say the case is cercumstantial but unless someone recorded it of course its going to be.the evidence was overwhelming and no more random babyslaying since she bin pouting on death row.

    • profile image

      watched on tv 5 years ago

      i do not believe she did it. texas is known for not caring about there mistakes! just put yourself in her shoes her children were murdered she was found cut bruised and she called 911 5 min after her son got his fatal cut why would a guilty mom do that?? the husband seemed more guilty if she did do it why didnt he hear it?

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 5 years ago from USA

      watched on tv, Yes, it's very suspicious. But with the mishandled evidence and trial, I wonder if the truth will ever be known. But I think a retrial is in order at the VERY least.

      I appreciate you reading and responding.

    • fpherj48 profile image

      Paula 5 years ago from Beautiful Upstate New York

      After seeing a documentary on this story, which seemed highly PRO-prosecution, I leaned toward believing Darlie committed this unforgivable act....but I should know better than to rush to opinion without much more detail and facts not readily available to the public. As a mother, it is the most difficult leap to even imagine doing harm to your own child (or ANY child) but the older and wiser we get.....we learn that despite our reluctancy to accept such outrageous horror.....it does, in fact, occur. All too often. Thank you for this hub. Up & interesting I have chosen to follow you. Excellent writing!

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 5 years ago from USA

      fpherj48, thank you for the comment, and for following me! I am still hoping Darlie will get a new trial, because I would personally like to know as much of the truth as possible.

      This was such a horrific crime, and if there is even the slightest chance the person who did it is not Darlie, then we should all guard our children more closely than ever begfore!

      Thanks again!

    • fpherj48 profile image

      Paula 5 years ago from Beautiful Upstate New York

      Hi again...there was one important point I meant to make...actually, question to pose: The description of Darlie's wounds sounded as though they were extremely severe....deep wounds, to the bone, and there were numerous defensive wounds......Could a young woman actually DO THIS TO HERSELF just to make it look real? That is a part so hard for me to conceive. YOU?

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 5 years ago from USA

      fpherj48, that is such a good question! One I have considered many, many times.

      Who can ever fully comprehend the capabilities of another human being? But this is a very huge question! If Darlie is right handed, and the wounds are on her right arm....? How DID she do that? If the wounds are there because of an intruder, he is probably left handed.

      The force involved in an injury to cause marrow to leak from a bone would be, in my opinion, hard to inflict on yourself. Especially if done without the dominate hand.

    • fpherj48 profile image

      Paula 5 years ago from Beautiful Upstate New York

      Thanks for replying. It seems fairly important to know which side is Darlie's dominant side, yes. However, to further complicate matters, she might be ambidextrous! I never realized how common this is. Just in my family alone, there are 7 ambidextrous individuals. In any event, when I think of self inflicting such severe wounds, my skin crawls.(no pun intended) Also, it would matter quite a bit if she were under the influence of a substance. Certain drugs can give a false sense of strength &prompt violence where there may have never been any before. I will be watching and listening to see where this all ends up. Take care!

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 5 years ago from USA

      fpherj48, Thank you too! I personally wish another trial will be allowed in this case. I would just really appreciate a better job at getting to the actual facts. Because I am still curious about why Darlie was never tried for the second murder, and where that murder weapon is. I find it very unsettling that there seems to be a lack of proof in the second murder. How could she have killed one of her children, but not the other one who was also killed?

      These were her kids, if she did do this horrible thing, I would like justice for both boys. If she did not do it, I would like justice for the boys and their mother.

      I guess I just really want the justice system to work. But for that to happen, the whole truth needs to be sought out, and told in court.

      Thanks again!

    • profile image

      Kelly Scott 5 years ago

      .. I think the most crucial factor that indicates to me that she did not kill her children or knife herself is that she is a narcissist and they do not and would not make any attempt to harm their looks physically. I seriously doubt that anyone who had intentions of killing their children would wound themselves almost to death .. if she were to kill herself or try more than likely she would have used pills.. women do not use this form of violentization as a behaviour and I doubt that she had a history of violence .. so I believe that she is unquestionably innocent and that they still need to investigate the murder of her two sons and the attempted murder of her. The knife wounds she received should have closed the investigation on her culpability .. whoever investigated this case as detectives must have been out to lunch because some day the truth will come out and hopefully she will be free well as free as she can be and that she is not murdered for a crime that obviously she did not commit.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 5 years ago from USA

      Kelly Scott, you make some interesting points. Thank you for reading and commenting.

    • profile image

      jenubouka 5 years ago

      This is my first reading and discovery of this case. At any rate whether she committed the crime, it is anyone's right to appeal and I fear a fair trial would be impossible now with so much time lapsed.

      For people who dive into a report done by the media should be intelligent enough that the report will be pro per which side is funding the story.

      If there is so many errors in a trial that ultimately decides capital punishment then by all sense of the law it should be looked over with a fine tooth comb. While any murder is unjust, the murder of a child is incomprehensible, but so is taking an innocent person's life for a crime they did not commit....

      As for the author you wrote one heck of an article, loved the update. I was literally glued to my screen. Awesome work!

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 5 years ago from USA

      jenubouka, I have followed this case since the beginning, and I have to say the more I learn about the investigation, the D.A. who handled the case, and the foot-dragging on allowing Darlie's new team of lawyers access to the evidence, the more I believe she is innocent.

      Thank you so much for the in depth comment!

    • profile image

      jix michels 5 years ago

      hi from australian in Thailand,after reading the transcripts and seeing the movies it is easy to make someone guilty and not guilty,I feel not all has been told nor been investigated.Iff all people were judged this way heaven help all off us.Everybody deserves a appeal on a court finding ,which in my view was not handled 100%,and I am sure 100 % is what we all need to have.I wish I could help re getting a appeal on a case which needs a fresh look at ,Without just thinking about children,and just about the jusice. It is so easy to shrug it all away,like poiltics or all religions who is right.Thank u for allowing me to tell my re

    • profile image

      gobblegoble 5 years ago

      This so sounds like tommy lyn sells.

    • profile image

      SerenityFaith 5 years ago

      As a criminal psych student I remember what caused me to look Darlies case up again and retread it. It was reading the book Through the Window about Tommy Lynn Snells. I immediately looked the Routier case back up bc it was in Texas and the similarities of the brutal stabbings, has this ever been investigated? I've read conflicting reports that he was incarcerated @ the time of these slayings, but no concrete reports. I've always leaned towards her being guilty, but after actually delving into this case deeper, the very least I could say is that ey didn't have enough to,prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, however that decision was reached on my part by evidence and findings her jury never saw. Given that fact, the case as it was actually presented in the court room, I too would have found her guilty based on what was actually presented. Which also calls to light the fact that her counsel must not have been very competent either. Finally, Texas is known for several wrongful convictions, so it's not like it's exactly beyond the realm of possibility. I'm interested to see final resolution to this case. It would not surprise me that between financial stress, diet pills coupled w/ post partum led to this young woman snapping.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 5 years ago from USA

      It's true that people do snap and committ terrible crimes. But one of the main questions for me is still, where is the murder weapon that killed the son she was never tried for? That question just blares out from all else to me.

      And the Tommy Lynn Snells issue is something I wish the authorities would at least consider investigating. If for no other reason, to rule him out.

      Thank you so much for reading and commenting.

    • profile image

      SerenityFaith 5 years ago

      Ive always been curious of John Douglas' take on the Routier case, as he believed the Ramsey's innocent in the Jon Benet case when everyone else believed them to be solidly guilty. It seems like the only rational conclusion one would make would be her guilt, but as we see from so many crime scenes, that isn't always the case. I saw the horrendous crime scene photos of the boys his evening for the very 1st time & all I can say as a woman who @ this very moment has children that age as well as several others & held one of my precious preemies as they died, being helpless to help them that whomever is in fact responsible fully deserves to burn in hell & I think should burn @ the stake. The Tommy Sells thing I would like to know if he was in fact incarcerated @ the time of the slayings, bc I remember after I read the book about him saying My God does that sound like the Darlie Routier crime & looking it back up I was so astounded.

    • profile image

      shaversmom 4 years ago

      Sells was in West Virginia State Prison for malicious wounding from June 1993 to May 1997.

    • profile image

      KS 4 years ago

      The last I heard it was 13 - the number of people who were later found to be innocent after being sent to prison and some receiving death sentences by dishonest prosecutors in Dallas County. Everyone in a trial should have the right to have a DNA test. From what I've read, it's difficult to get the courts to give the ok on this. I don't think Darlie is

      guilty, but I don't know what to do about it.

    • profile image

      HiHo 3 years ago

      "In an effort to lose her "baby weight" Darlie began to take diet pills, which proved unhelpful, and she developed mood swings."

      Diet pills and cocaine will make you nuts. I believe she's guilty. Read the transcripts (the errors her supporters speak of are just type-os) She did herself no favors taking the stand along w/ the silly string video a mere 8 days after the boys deaths.

    • profile image

      gerd.remy@bbox.fr 3 years ago

      no comment,but please keep smiling.......!!! Gerd

    • Levertis Steele profile image

      Levertis Steele 3 years ago from Southern Clime

      Nearly speechless.

      "Her wounds included stab wounds to the right forearm. One of which was administered with such force the bone was splintered, and according to medical reports, marrow was leaking from the splintering. Her throat was slit to within 2mm of the carotid artery, and the carotid sheath was damaged. She had other less dangerous wounds as well, including stabs to her chest, and wounds inside her mouth"

      This is too much damage for me to think that Darlie did this to herself!

    • profile image

      Magpieix 3 years ago

      Dr Jantz is NOT a fingerprint expert. He is an anthropologist and his theories on the case were rejected by the court and have not been peer-reviewed or accepted by any authority on fingerprint identification.

    • Pollyannalana profile image

      Pollyannalana 3 years ago from US

      I am a little surprised with this being so close to my Darlie Routier hub why you don't have more. I have over 55,000 views and 890 comments. I am really getting a little sick of it. apparently there is no new evidence and there are some who would love to kill Darlie bare handed and some who act like Texas judicial has to be right when they have falsely accused many times and had to pay off. Well just saw you here for the first time. Made me curious, but the wounds are what make me think she did not do it. People like Darlie do not hurt themselves, she didn't do that so why believe she killed her sons. She could be a real creep and not a murderer.

    • profile image

      gloria gonzales 3 years ago

      I worked in hospital and if a patient can get the wrong leg taken off by mistake I believe that people botch up in any way. They want to believe what they want to believe so go ahead and blame her beause they can't find the real truth and it OK because they have the power.I believe sometimes things are not always the way they look._

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      Gloria, I agree things aren't always as they look. I would love to see the DNA evidence finally released to the Routier defense team, and at least be done with that issue. I just keep believing the truth will someday, somehow come out.

      Thanks for reading and commenting!

    • profile image

      Bobby Brolin 3 years ago

      It's an interesting case but frankly it seems like Darlie's supporters (the Darlie-ites, lol) are increasingly moving away from the trial evidence to support their conclusions.

      As time goes by the Darlie-ites seem to be using a "faith based" defense which relies upon declaring Darlie innocent based on vague psychological claims such as "Darlie loved herself too much to ever cut her own body", etc.

      ...or "I know Darlie couldn't have done that because she was a loving mother", etc. LOL.

      For example, at PollyannaLanna's blog she literally "declares" Darlie innocent based on the fact that she believes Darlie couldn't do that to herself (as though she knows Darlie's innermost secrets from 1996).

      She also believes Darin is guilty and wants him in prison (yes, she would put him in prison if she had the power) even though there's no evidence to support that verdict other than speculation and gossip from the Darlie-ites.

      Most Darlie-ites also believe that the state of Texas judicial system exists for the sole purpose of framing innocent people.

      Once an emotional bond develops (once a person becomes a Darlie-ite) all trial evidence is declared "corrupt" unless it supports Darlie (lol). It's a common trend I've noticed. All trial evidence is replaced with talking points taken directly from Darlie's web site. These talking points ignore the volumes of trial facts which work against Darlie.

      Then we get articles and blog posts which aren't even remotely based on the totality of trial evidence (including Darlie's horrible testimony on the witness stand where she was caught lying numerous times; something which her supporters never want to talk about).

      Her supporters don't even know what Darlie said on the witness stand nor do they care. They don't care about anything which might implicate Darlie. It's called the ostrich syndrome. If it doesn't support Darlie's innocence it's just "corrupt" evidence or "unreliable" evidence.

      If you want to read some facts on this case you should read posts made by Pamela Collins at various Internet blogs. She's an expert on the actual trial evidence (not gossip).

    • Pollyannalana profile image

      Pollyannalana 3 years ago from US

      Pam has had her say here so we know what it is. This is a free world though (for the present time) and we are allowed our opinions just as Pam. The jury based their opinions on evidence they were given. Some of us say much was left out and that the time line does not allow for all they said she did and when I say what Darin said on the tape that makes him sound guilty of something Pam does not hear it and even brings in a second opinion to prove I can't believe my ears.

      I am no idiot and no one is changing my mind without new, clearer evidence she did all they said she did in 10 minutes or under it took her son to die and why would he be going to a mother who just stabbed him? To many doubts. Too many questions. I could have never convicted her I don't care how doped up she was and talking crazy. That sure made it easy on Darin to walk away, oh, but not with his baby...and do we know why they could do that or Darin allowed it? Another big question. Causing much more doubt.

    • profile image

      Mrsdoubt 3 years ago

      The problem I see here is there is a lot of misrepresentation of the facts. Darlie's arm was not stabbed so forcefully the bone splintered--if it did, none of the doctors who operated on her saw it. All of the photos of Darlie's injuries including the terribly bruised arm were not only testified to but were taken along the jury rail for the jurors to see. If the one juror didn't see them, he wasn't paying attention.

      Tommy Lynn Sells was in prison in N. Virginia when the Routier boys were murdered so you can cross him off your list.

      the DNA tests are ongoing and are being released to the family. It would really help if you verified your information. I've read the tests results from 2013, they are all on Darlie's websites run by her family. so far, there is nothing to give Darlie relief.

      Since when does a jury get a copy of the trial transcript in deliberations? They have to ask for a read back if they want to know what was said.

      Darin admitted to an insurance scam--six years after Darlie was imprisoned and just in time for her haebeas review? Yeah right, Darin was forced into doing that, he wasn't looking for someone to rob his house or there'd be some evidence of it.

      There really isn't a timeline, Damon was attacked but he didn't die in the first attack, he crawled across the room and was attacked again and it's the second attack that starts his 9:00 minute timeline. DArlie had lots of time to do everything that was done, including putting the sock in the alley.

      There is too much evidence against Darlie, fibre and blood evidence and a decided lack of evidence that any intruder entered that home. Darlie is guilty and she's paying for her crime.

    • profile image

      anonymous 3 years ago

      Bottom line,all death penalty cases should be appealed.it makes me sick that casey anthony is walking around a free women when she admitted to dumping her beautiful daughter in the woods.nobody would do that if their child accidentally died,come on.yet darlie is sitting on death row.and what about disclosure?shouldn't her lawyers have access to all evidence?It's very easy for the court to manipulate a case.just the fact that the nurses were coached is grounds for appeal.and cops pleading the 5th?what are they hiding?and it's very disturbing to know the jury convicted darlie because of the silly strinf video.who is anybody to say how you're supposed to act when your children are murdered.she was celebrating their life and so were the other members of the family.convicting someone on how they should act is wrong and disturbing.not to mention,if she didn't do it,some child murderer is walking around free to do it again.yet the state of texas is more worried about making sure they're not proven wrong.at the very least she should be granted a new trial.so sad,her poor living child missed out on having a mom.let's attempt to find the truth,people have been granted a new trial who doesn't have a fractionofthe discrepancies of this case.

    • profile image

      Mrsdoubt 3 years ago

      once again Anonymous, learn the case first before you judge. Her lawyers absolutely had access to all the evidence, nothing is hidden. The jury did not convict her on the stupid silly string party, the jury got to see her and hear her testify at her trial Obviously they didn't believe what she had to say. the jury got to hear about all the blood and fiber evidence, the real evidence that proves there was no intruder in her home. Much of what is written here is based on what Darlie's family has spread around and not anything to do with her trial and the evidence.. BTW, Casey Anthony has never ever admitted to dumping her child in the woods, dont' know where you got that from.

      The truth has already been found, Darlie Routier murdered two of her three children. She has appealed and appealed and appealed and to date all these appeals have upheld her conviction.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      Bobby Brolin, I agree with you that some people have slanted views and opinions about this case, as well as other cases. However... I had never before heard the term "Darlie-ites".

      I still stand firm in my belief that the investigation of this case was slip-shod, and I would still like to finally here the truth. There are just still too many "loose ends" that need to be tied up.

      I will look up Pamela Collins, since I am always interested in the research and opinions of others concerning this case. Thank you for the heads up.

      I do feel compelled to scold you for using the comments section here, on my Hub, to dress down another Hubber. That's poor form. Shouldn't you take you point of view directly to that person?

      All this being said, thank you for reading.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      Pollyannalana, I don't presume to know what could have gone through Darlie or Darin's mind that terrible night. By the same token, I can't imagine what was going through the investigator's minds either! I understand the Rowlette Police Department was involved in a crime scene they had little experience to handle, and question why the state police or other law enforcement agencies weren't called in or consulted from the jump start.

      I also doubt the prosecution's motives at finding the truth.

      Again I say, the truth... the victims, those poor children... deserve nothing less.

      Then let the chips fall where they may. But to execute a woman who was never granted access to important DNA evidence, is nothing less than insane.

      Thank you for reading!

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      MrsDoubt... Maybe you didn't notice I wrote this Hub over 3 years ago, at which time the DNA evidence was, in fact, being withheld from Darlie's defense team.

      What was that you were saying about facts?

      Thanks for dropping by.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      anonymous, I agree that Darlie deserves an appeal, and access to all the evidence. The truth, all of it needs to be heard.

      Thanks so much for reading!

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      MrsDoubt, thanks for dropping by again...

    • profile image

      Bobby Brolin 3 years ago

      Hi RunAbstract. :-)

      Most of the Darlie-ites (here and elsewhere) seem to think the recent DNA results favor Darlie and are going to lead to a new trial. They are misreading the most recent DNA results and getting their hopes up over nothing.

      What you fail to understand is that the latest DNA results don't show anything remarkable and that's precisely why Darlie is going to be doing new DNA tests hoping for a miracle.

      What you fail to realize is that even if future DNA testing reveals that a hair is linked to an unknown person, that won't be enough to throw out her conviction and get a new trial. Not sure you realize how it works.

      Generating 'reasonable doubt' isn't enough anymore, she needs to show that no rational trier of fact could possibly convict her based on this new DNA evidence. It's basically equivalent to proving "innocence".

      That's a HIGH BAR to get over. It's much higher than "reasonable doubt". Not sure you realize that.

      Most of the time DNA can be used to prove a person "100% innocent" but this case is different from typical DNA cases (e.g. DNA can't positively 'exclude' her from being party to the murder -- it could only potentially include another person and/or cast doubt on the police theory of how it happened).

      She's LOST her presumption of innocence at this stage due to her conviction. It's not enough to cast 'doubt' anymore.

      ...and a 'hair' belonging to an unknown person isn't enough to 'prove' innocence because, at best, it only casts 'doubt' on when it fell into the home (or) if a 2nd party was involved along with Darlie. It would not 'exclude' Darlie as a participant since her own blood and activity around the kitchen (and her lies told on the witness stand) are still a part of the evidence.

      BTW: I don't believe Darlie had help. I'm simply making a LOGICAL point about how DNA evidence can be interpreted.

      The fingerprint evidence also likely won't lead to anything more than casting 'doubt' (e.g. create the potential that somebody else was involved along with Darlie; it can't 100% 'exclude' her).

      She'll need a miracle to get a new trial.

      Ideally she'll need multiple DNA matches (from multiple items) which all lead to the exact same unknown person. ...and even then, she'll still need a sympathetic judge to believe she wasn't party to the murder also.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      Bobby, I'm sure anyone reading my Hub or my comments realize I am not in the legal profession. But I am not stupid.

      Don't you find it strange that Darlie wasn't allowed access to the DNA evidence for over a decade?

      Why didn't the police process the fingerprint at the time of their investigation? Why has it STILL not been processed at this late date?

      Since Darlie's lawyer had a conflict of interest, considering his previous arrangements with Darin, why is that not grounds for an appeal or new trial?

      Since certain nurses have spoken out since the trial that they were coached by the prosecution before their testimony, why does that not imply purgery?

      Why did the police place items containing blood evidence TOGETHER in the same (sometimes paper) bags? Does this sound like "good" police work to you?

      Since the Rowelett Police were "babes in the woods" under the circumstances, why didn't they seek help from the state police or other more experienced agencies? And by the same token, considering their inexperience, how were they able to determine Darlie was the only suspect within 20 minuets of arriving at the scene?

      Why did the police not retain the bloody towels Darlie used to try and help her sons? Couldn't there have been useful evidence on those towels? Like DNA. Possibly from the alleged intruder.

      Why were objects at the crime scene moved around by police before the crime scene was released?

      Why would a paramedic go into the kitchen and leave a bloody boot print, as the police and prosecution assert ? Wouldn't paramedics have what they needed with them upon arrival, and keep themselves involved strictly with the victims? Hence, why was the bloody boot print not processed?

      Why was Darlie never tried for the murder of her other dead son? And why was the murder weapon in the second death never presented?

      As I have said all along, the investigation was botched.

      In a death penalty trial where the defendant is found guilty, shouldn't there always be an appeal?

      Thank you for commenting.

    • profile image

      Bobby Brolin 3 years ago

      Hello again. :-)

      Just wanted to clarify my previous DNA comments -- since I have no doubt that others will misinterpret them.

      All hair DNA linked to an 'unknown person' is VIRTUALLY USELESS all by itself.

      Why? Because it wouldn't even prove that an intruder was in the home period -- because there's no way to 'prove' when the hair was first dropped in the home.

      e.g. Every visitor to a home will drop microscopic strands of hair which can stick to clothing or other items in the home. These microscopic strands of hair will then get picked up on other people's clothing when people come into contact with them -- they'll also get transferred to other items around the house via this same process.

      Even a strand of hair collected from a 'bloody' item of clothing wouldn't prove 'innocence' since there's no way to prove that the strand of hair was left there by the supposed 'intruder' (i.e. it could have been left earlier by a visitor to the home but then stuck to an item of clothing which LATER became bloody).

      There's just no way for Darlie to 'eliminate' EVERY visitor to her home as being the source of 'hair' 20 years later -- since Darlie can't prove a negative to a court of law (i.e. she can't 'prove' that a particular source of UNKNOWN hair wasn't a visitor to her home since she can't 'prove' a negative; not unless the DNA is linked to a specific person).

      **Clarification: When I said that hair DNA might 'potentially' prove that Darlie had help in the murders I was simply playing devil's advocate and giving every 'possibility'. I was merely saying it's a "possibility" and it's not 'impossible'. However, it certainly wouldn't be a "probability" due to the other simpler explanation -- that it was left by a legit visitor before the murders. That just ruins her argument.

      Unfortunately for Darlie proving a mere "possibility' isn't enough to prove 'innocence' -- because the criteria for getting a new trial at this stage is far higher than "reasonable doubt".

      The blood evidence will be better for Darlie -- but only IF she gets a miracle and it comes back favorable to her story.

      However, even that won't necessarily be enough to prove 'innocence' and get her a new trial -- because her own blood left near the kitchen/sink/counter area contradicts her own 'story' badly and shows she tried to cover things up and lied about it. Innocent people don't do that.

      Not to mention the other blood evidence from the shirts and living room (and blood spatter) which also contradicts her own 'story' badly. All that evidence doesn't go away. It's still there.

      Darlie's own story is still a lie and was proven so in a court of law.

      Like I said, her chances for a new trial are slim unless the presiding judge ignores common sense and shows sympathy for her. Not likely.

      Her best chance is to have everything (all hairs, all blood, etc) link back to the exact same unknown person. That's the kind of evidence that might convince a soft judge to show her sympathy.

      ...But that's not likely to happen so the Darlie-ites are really hoping for a miracle.

      She's likely to spend the rest of her life in a Texas Prison.

      She has a debt to pay to society and her tab is not paid yet.

    • profile image

      Magpie 3 years ago

      To answer some of your questions:

      "Since Darlie's lawyer had a conflict of interest, considering his previous arrangements with Darin, why is that not grounds for an appeal or new trial?"

      There was no conflict of interest. This was dealt with before the trial, during the trial, during the direct appeal and during the habeas corpus rulings--there was no conflict of interest, period.

      "Since certain nurses have spoken out since the trial that they were coached by the prosecution before their testimony, why does that not imply purgery?"

      Preparing witnesses is neither uncommon nor forbidden.. No witness is EVER put on the stand unless the lawyer has a fairly good idea of what they are going to say.

      “Why did the police place items containing blood evidence TOGETHER in the same (sometimes paper) bags? Does this sound like "good" police work to you?”

      Again, dealt with during the trial—items that are found together are bagged together. That’s exactly what happened here—two towels that were lying together were placed in the same bag. And the bags are ALWAYS paper.

      “Since the Rowelett Police were "babes in the woods" under the circumstances, why didn't they seek help from the state police or other more experienced agencies? And by the same token, considering their inexperience, how were they able to determine Darlie was the only suspect within 20 minuets of arriving at the scene?”

      The Rowlett Police didn’t determine Darlie was the only suspect within 20 minutes of arriving at the scene. The Crime Scene experts who the Rowlett Police called in (babes in the woods that they were) determined within 20 minutes that there was no intruder—that was hours after the first arrival at the scene. Even then, for several days after the murder the police continued to investigate Darlie’s intruder story.

      “Why did the police not retain the bloody towels Darlie used to try and help her sons? Couldn't there have been useful evidence on those towels? Like DNA. Possibly from the alleged intruder.”

      The police collected all the Routier’s towels from the scene. Only a few of them were bloody and none of them were proven to have been used to try and help the boys—by Darlie or anyone else. The only bloody towels anywhere near the boys were ones used and discarded by the paramedics.

      “Why were objects at the crime scene moved around by police before the crime scene was released?”

      This was dealt with at trial. Items are routinely moved at a crime scene in order to inspect under, behind or around them. This is not uncommon, and the crime scene expert testified as much.

      “Why would a paramedic go into the kitchen and leave a bloody boot print, as the police and prosecution assert ? Wouldn't paramedics have what they needed with them upon arrival, and keep themselves involved strictly with the victims? Hence, why was the bloody boot print not processed?”

      No paramedic ever went near the kitchen and the boot print in the kitchen was from a police officer.

      “Why was Darlie never tried for the murder of her other dead son? And why was the murder weapon in the second death never presented?”

      There was no need to try her for the other murder when the age of the younger son provided adequate grounds for a capital murder charge. The kitchen knife was not excluded as being the murder weapon in both cases—if the defense wants to claim that there was a second weapon, it’s up to them to provide evidence for the claim. They haven’t.

      “In a death penalty trial where the defendant is found guilty, shouldn't there always be an appeal?”

      There is an automatic appeal for all death penalty cases. Darlie’s conviction and sentence were upheld on appeal.

    • profile image

      Magpie 3 years ago

      "Dr. Richard Jantz, a fingerprint expert, indicated that the unidentified bloody fingerprint left at the crime scene is "consistent with an adult" rather than a child. This testimony supports Darlie Routier's claim that an intruder was present in the house at the time of the murders."

      Dr Janz is NOT a fingerprint expert. He is an anthropologist who was basing his conclusions on a self-invented method that was not recognized by any association of forensic sciences and has never been tested in any any court: and was indeed rejected by this court. You also forgot to mention that he said it was more likely an adult FEMALE who left the print--which does nothing to support Darlie's story of an unknown intruder

    • profile image

      Magpie 3 years ago

      Sorry, didn't mean to repeat myself re: Jantz. Feel free to delete the post :)

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      Magpie, I guess we can live with a little redundance, if it makes you feel good.

    • profile image

      Klaudia 3 years ago

      I read the book on this story and I know she failed the lie detector it looks like she is guilty as charge

    • profile image

      Dawn 3 years ago

      No way did Darlie do this. There is no motive. Sad

    • profile image

      Jen 3 years ago

      Tommy Sells does perfectly fit that Routier murders - and they mirror the Julie Rae Harper case - and the Del Rio murder of Harris and injuring Surles. Unfortunately he was in prison in West Virginia during the Routier murders. Julie Rae Harper was convicted on one point - that no one would break into a house to kill someone - and not bring their own weapon. Yet Tommy Sells did exactly that. But think about it - if you were planning on killing someone - and you don't have a weapon handy - doesn't everyone have knives in their homes? And aren't they all in about the same place? Darin Routier already admitted that he tried to arrange for someone to break in - what if that is exactly what it was supposed to be? What if someone broke in - planning on robbery. They found some of Darlie's jewelry there - Maybe Darin arranged it - thought instead of making it when no one was home - maybe we should do it at night - or maybe he just ran out of time - the house payment was coming due. What if there just wasn't a time when he thought he could get everyone out - or maybe the "burglar" didn't want to risk being seen during the day. So he breaks in - Maybe Darin cut the screen for him (there were claims there was screen fiber on the knife) or even left the knife for him so he could cut the screen as part of the plan. Darlie doesn't know about it - the guy gets in - Darin has jewelry waiting to be "stolen" and things get out of control - one of the kids wake up? Or maybe the reason Darin wanted to commit fraud was because he owed the money to someone bad - someone who wouldn't hurt Darin - because he was the one with the money - but would hurt the kids - to prove a point.

      My point is - beware the rabbit hole folks. There are a whole bunch of cases where people are convicted because cops force confessions, or lose evidence or prosecutors are convinced they have the right person - and maybe cut a couple of corners to ensure they get the conviction. Julie Rae Harper's prosecutor still swears today that Julie killed Joel - even after he's been proven wrong. There are things we are told - and there are ways to tell it - that make you believe. They tell you the person is bad - to lull you into a sense of security - they put blinders on you and feed you a story that makes everyone feel better - feel safer - the bad person is put away...but what if they aren't. What if you look at the evidence another way - what if you consider what would have happened if Darin Routier and his family hadn't tied Darlie's lawyers hands with the refusal to allow any suspicion to be cast on Darin? What if there was more - more that didn't get told...look at the injuries - the stab wounds to Darlie - the slice to her neck so deep that her necklace was embedded and had to be removed during surgery. Can you stand there and do that to yourself? In the dark? With no mirror?

      Look at the cover ups that have been proven - Julie Rea Harper, Rolando Cruz, Kevin Fox. Look at the science. There were blood splatters all over that area of the house - why didn't they test them all - or at least a better sampling? Maybe because they didn't want to know.

      I'm not saying Darlie Routier is innocent - I'm not saying she's guilty. But what I do strongly believe is that she ought to be able to test the evidence. There are methods of retrieving DNA now that weren't available then. Test the fingerprint - test the blood - and at least get the full picture before we take someone's life. 4.1% of all people on death row are innocent. Not less guilty - not guilty but someone else is as well - they are INNOCENT people. So every 25 executions - stop - look back - and decide, which one of those people - was the innocent one.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      Thanks to all for commenting.

      Jen... couldn't agree more!

      Magpie... I am soooooo tired of you! You repeat yourself over and over. Until you have something new to say, I will delete all your future comments.

    • RunAbstract profile image
      Author

      RunAbstract 3 years ago from USA

      Magpie... Yes I am deleting your comments unless you find something new to say.

      With that in mind, how about you start your own HubPages account and write to your heart's content?

    • profile image

      Todd K 3 years ago

      The defensive wounds on her arms couldnt have been self inflicted. This alone would have convinced a jury to vote not guilty. Unfortunately for Darlie the jury never got to see those photos and they were told by many

      different prosecution witnesses that Darlie had no defensive wounds. What a horrible miscarriage of justice. This happens more often then people think, over zealous prosecution relentlessly pursuing someone with absolutely no physical evidence or motive. She deserves a new trial 100 percent. Texas is notorious for not overturning guilty verdicts or granting new trials. Its a shame someone may die because the Texas justice system will not admit to possibly being wrong.

    • profile image

      Jenny 2 years ago

      I remember this case from long ago and have just recently gotten interested again. This probably sounds silly, but this is my biggest hangup: on the 911 call, she vacillates between referring to the perpetrator as "he" and "they". I like to call it the Pronoun Game and I think it's hard to explain away. If you saw someone in your home and either fought with "him", "them", whatever, or chased "him" "them", wouldn't it be automatic to use the correct pronoun? There was either 1 person or more. I mean, think of a time you tried to describe any person to someone else.......you automatically use the appropriate pronoun. Her repeated use of "they" bothers me alot, although I realize it's not DNA or any kind of science; it's just something that sticks out to me.

    Click to Rate This Article