Okay, I have been reading a lot of posts from people who support Darlie Routier and from people who do not support Darlie Routier. I wanted to post what I have noticed so far, as a member of this page who is still completely 50/50 concerning her guilt or innocence. Both sides have to believe in something that comes across as highly improbable to the opposing side. The non-supporters do not believe that Darlie could have been attacked and had her throat slashed without her having any recollection of the attack. The supporter’s explanation is that the attack on Darlie started while she was sound asleep and because of the severity and intensity of the attack it warrants being considered as a psychologically traumatic event. It is true that there are doctors and psychologists that can vouch for Darlies claim that occurrences like this can cause the victim to have little or no awareness at all of the event as it occurs . The supporters do not believe that Darlie would or could have staged all of the evidence that suggests that there was an unknown assailant at the crime scene. There are two pieces of evidence that require Darlie having to go outside of the house in order to stage which would be the cutting of the garage screen and the planting/disposing of the sock with small amounts of blood on it 75 yards down an alley behind the house. The non-supporters have two pieces of evidence to bolster this claim that Darlie staged the cutting of the screen and the planting of the sock. The first is that a fiber that was microscopically similar to or consistent with the fibers from the garage screen was found on the bread knife in the knife block on the kitchen counter. The second is that trace amounts of Darlie’s skin cells were found in the sock that was recovered down the back alley from the house. The supporters also point out that the fiber was a fairly common fiber that could have come from numerous sources according to Charles Lynch, who discovered the fiber on the knife. Secondly there were two limb hairs found in the sock and the origins of these hairs will be known via the pending dna test results. In my opinion the results of the two limb hairs being tested will carry a lot of significance for either side. If the hairs are from Darlie it will not be conclusive proof that she is guilty but it will be a strong piece of evidence suggesting her guilt. If the hairs come back as foreign, that alone will not do much for Darlie but if those hairs can produce a dna profile and those profiles can be ran through the C.O.D.I.S. database, a match from someone who would have no innocent explanation for being in the Routier home or in the general area would be a huge piece evidence in favor of Darlie Routiers claim of an intruder. Another very important piece of evidence left at the scene is the questionable finger print left in blood on the glass table in the Roman room of the Routier home. I have heard many rumors about whether or not the print belongs to Darlie or an unknown assailant but the good news is the official results will be made public when the testing is complete. If it is in fact Darlies print it dose not prove her guilt but it would be a major blow in terms of proving her innocence. The best case scenario for Darlie would be if the source of the unknown print matched the source of the unknown limb hair. If this ends up being the case, according to the Texas courts, it would be grounds for exoneration. The results of the testing of the butcher knife are also important. If the entire knife is tested and the blood of Devon Routier is found, it would take away the claim that there was a missing second murder weapon and would in certain respects, make the non-supporters beliefs that there was no intruder seem more plausible. If there is foreign blood found on the knife it would be huge for Ms. Routier. Again a match to another source of unknown D.N.A. would be enough for exoneration, but finding unknown blood on the knife alone would have to weigh heavily in her favor. Additional testing granted by the courts will allow her pillow case and other clothing in the home to be tested for possible foreign dna as well. There was an estimated timeline made by a doctor at trial concerning how long it would take for the wounds inflicted on a person the size of Damon Routier to become fatal. The doctors most optimistic estimate was said to be about 9 minutes from the time the wounds were inflicted. The timeline discrepancy is only an estimate and will not be a factor in the fate of Ms. Routier, but it dose seem to favor the intruder theory because it would not require Ms. Routier to exit the home in order to stage the cut screen and sock and then return to the home where she would inflict the wounds upon herself and then make the call to 911. Tom Bevel testified that the small amount of the boys blood found on Ms. Routier’s night shirt was consistent with that of high velocity or cast off blood stains and the prosecution contest that this could only have been caused by cast off blood coming off of the blade butcher knife as Ms. Routier repeatedly stabbed her two children. The bruising on the body of Ms. Routier is unquestionably severe and the most common explanations from non supporters are that the bruises are the result of the I.V.’s Ms. Routier received while in the hospital, that her husband gave her the bruises or that her 5 and 6 year old children caused the bruises as a result of them defending themselves as Darlie attempted to stab them with the butcher knife. The supporters believe that the bruising is proof of an intruder most likely being on top of Ms. Routier as she struggled to fend him off before having her throat slashed leading the intruder to believe the cut on her throat was fatal. There is blood on the pillowcase and while the blood on the shoulder of Ms. Routier dose appear to show she was lying on her side after being cut, this observation has not been confirmed by any blood expert. There also is a blood trail leading to the utility room but there is no blood splatter which would be expected if the intruder did throw the knife down before exiting. Supporters like to point out that while Darlie did say, “he threw the knife down” while on the phone with the 911 dispatcher, that she was only reacting to what she thought had gone on and that in her testimony and sworn statements she never said that she saw the intruder throw the knife down. It is documented in her trial testimony and affidavit’s that when she turned the kitchen light on she saw the knife lying on the utility room floor causing her to walk toward the utility room and pick the knife up. Okay responses or criticism are welcome and after typing this info. I am still on the fence and would like to have anyone post any additional info. That I may have missed! Thank You for reading!
Posted on: Sat, 09 Aug 2014 05:25:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015