15 Years Later–Did Darlie Routier Kill Her Sons? (Part 9)
Part 9: Darlie Routier on Death Row–Guilty or Innocent? The People Speak
A lot of time has passed since the conviction of Darlie Routier. But people still talk about her case. I’ve received a lot of email and comments and I’ve found many others on other sites. So here is a sampling of what people are thinking.
Thanks for highlighting this story. I do believe she needs another trial with ALL of the evidence presented, not just a part of it.
I have followed Darlie and this case since the beginning. I did not believe that she was guilty then, and I still believe in her innocence. This is a very bizarre case, I have to agree. To me the evidence has always pointed to an intruder, and I have my suspicions about the police involved. I pray for Darlie and her husband to this day.
I think that Darlie Router is guilty. I also think her husband but bruises on her & may have stabbed her in order to make it look like an intruder & I think her husband is covering up for her. Why would he still support his wife despite the evidence against her? When it is obvious she murdered them. The screen cut was inconsistent with most cuts by any burglar. According to investigators it was a T-shaped cut which made your opening to step through the narrow part. Also a forensic expert testified @ trial that fragments from that garage window screen which had been cut were found on a 2nd knife in the Router kitchen. The murder weapon was an 8-inch butcher knife, which came from their kitchen. Why would an intruder go through the trouble of looking for a murder weapon, wouldn’t they bring their own murder weapon? Also the 911 call was very damning, her sons were dying & she was concerned about having touched the knife. She was very defensive; she was concerned about them thinking it was her, when her children were dying. She also changed her story & said she had amnesia. If she had amnesia how could she know that she struggled with the intruder? She was also sleeping on the couch when she was, according to her attacked by an intruder. But no blood was on the couch. There was also blood in the sink, someone had washed up. So if you believe there was an intruder that means that he/she came in stabbed Darlie killed the kids & then washed his hands in the sink? Darlie said she had struggled with him & he left. She didn’t say he washed his hands. There was a ton of evidence against her. Not to mention the fact she danced on the graves of her son.
I am very familiar with this case. I never thought she did it. We all grieve different. What caught most ppl as odd….was the bday party she had @ her son’s grave. She was spraying silly string. To me that was a mother who was celebrating her son’s bday.
Plus the crime scene was trampled by cops going in and out……and they put so much blame on her and trying to convict her…….that the real killer is still out there.
I too believe Darlie is innocent. There was evidence that pointed to a neighbor man as an intruder. The gate between his yard and Darlie’s yard was found unhooked the next day, and the man’s sock with blood from all the victims was found in the yard between the two properties. I do not understand why the police did not determine the neighbor man as the intruder and the murderer, and I believe the hysteria over the Susan Smith case did taint people’s minds.
I’m starting to remember this ‘story’ when it happened, though merely a teenager at the time…I remember thinking some things weren’t right, but defending other things. Seems that most people seem to follow the ‘defense’ side…I’m not sure where I fall really, but at the moment, I guess I believe more in her guilt. But anyway, one confusion to me is the two stories of ‘waking to find the man standing over her’ and fighting with him. the other is Damon coming over and touching her. I find it hard to believe that if an intruder was in the home, that Damon would have casually and soft-spoken wandered over to his mom and touched her. Another thing I don’t “get” is purpose…why would an intruder kill those two young boys? What were they after? Nothing was stole, correct? Obviously the implication is attempted rape, at least that’s my assumption b/c of the panty talk…but even in the ‘criminal mind’ for lack of better words, that just doesn’t seem ‘right’.
This case has gotten to be ridiculous and I can see no way that justice can be done with this woman. It has been screwed up right from the beginning. There is DEFINITELY room for reasonable doubt.
LET HER GO FREE.
I think she is guilty and should remain where she is until her date with the needle.
The police, as they often do, make up their minds immediately instead of doing their job and truly investigating a crime. The fact that over 200 people have been exonerated and set free due to the efforts of “The Innocence Project” is proof enough of this. And several of those set free were proven innocent, some on death row as well. All having spent many years behind bars for a crime they never committed!
The D.A.’s motive for the killings is absolutely bogus. If it was as he said, then she would have killed the baby too. Lots of young couples find themselves broke and overwhelmed at some point with parenthood, that does not make it a motive for murdering their children.
I too have followed this case from the beginning. In the beginning I believed she was guilty. Now, I am leaning more towards innocent, and here is why: Number one: the police failed to investigate the evidence of a sock that was found outside of the home, several feet away. Number two: there was a “fingerprint” found in the home that was definitely not Darlie’s , her husband’s or the children, yet again, the police never identified whose fingerprint that was. Third: a portion of a video was used against her at the trial showing her putting on a birthday party in honor of her sons. She was shown smiling and laughing in that portion. However they failed to show a video of the entire day, even the times when she was somber. Darlie explained she was just trying to remain cheerful on that day. The prosecution deliberately showed on the “cheerful” portion to inflame the jury. Fourth: never was any motive every found for her to murder her two sons. This conviction is very suspect.
My question is: Why would an intruder need to get a SECOND knife from the kitchen to kill them? Supposedly, he CUT the screen to enter the home, so wouldn’t he already HAVE a knife in his possession upon entry? If he was there intent on murder and rape, why would he need a SECOND knife to do the deeds? Why would he waste time and the possibility of getting caught by stopping to grab another knife before he killed them? It doesn’t make sense.
A very close friend of mine sat through her whole trial. His family was close friends with hers. He swears she is innocent and the cops incompetence is what led to her conviction.
In Part 10, a book published by a crime writer agrees with Darlie’s verdict. Below is a summary of “Precious Angels,” but what does the author think today?
Here, for the first time, is the complete inside story of the sensational murder case that rocked a community and a nation. Through exclusive interviews with the Routier family, friend, neighbors, and police, and by including facts that were never revealed in court, acclaimed author Barbara Davis weaves a terrifyingly true story that delves with chilling insight into an unspeakable crime – and the heartless woman who was finally brought to justice.