Darlie Routier’s Son Lives the Crucible
(“Invisible Intruder,” Forensic Files, and “Darlie Routier,” The Last Defense)
After last week’s post about the persecution of Darlie Routier, many readers searched for information about her youngest son, who was 7 months old when a knife attack left his brothers dead on June 6, 1996, in Rowlett, Texas.
Despite the upheaval of the murders of brothers Damon and Devon Routier and the imprisonment of his mother for homicide, Drake Routier grew into “the most adaptable kid I’ve ever seen,” his father, Darin, told reporter Liz Stevens, who wrote about the Routiers in a Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
The article, published when Drake was 2 years old, described him as normal, lively, and resembling his mother with “startled blue eyes” and a “delicate mouth.”
Now in his early 20s, Drake has beaten the odds in a number of ways. In an on-camera CNN interview, he doesn’t act like a young man who’s consumed with bitterness or anger. And he apparently has stayed out of trouble with the law. (No small accomplishment in an age when the children of politicians and celebrities tend to pop up on mugshots.com.)
Drake has said he believes in his mother’s innocence, and he has visited Darlie, 48, regularly in the Mountain View Unit, where she’s one of six women on death row in a state with the most active execution chamber in the U.S.
or online!
Here are 5 realities, drawn from internet research, about his life:
Reality #1. Drake’s father, Darin Routier, didn’t take custody of him right away after the murders, because he wanted to get his finances in order, Liz Stevens reported. After putting Darlie in jail with bail set at $1 million, the state of Texas placed baby Drake in a foster home in 1996. A court later gave custody to his father’s parents, Sarilda and Leonard Routier. Meanwhile, Darin, once a successful computer hardware entrepreneur, lost the family’s huge Georgian-style house, cabin cruiser, and 1986 Jaguar. He started over in Lubbock and eventually had Drake move in with him.
Reality #2. Drake found out in 2013 he had acute lymphocytic leukemia, which is “the most common type of cancer in children, and treatments result in a good chance for a cure,” according to the Mayo Clinic. He allowed CNN to show photos of him during the time he was undergoing chemotherapy. On October 13, 2016, Drake finished his last cancer treatment at the Children’s Medical Hospital in Dallas, according to a message his maternal grandmother posted online. An AP story dated June 18, 2018, reported that Drake was in remission, according to Richard A. Smith, a defense lawyer for his mother.
Reality #3. Drake told CNN he’s had to accept his identity as the kid whose mother is on death row. Darlie and other family members have been denigrated in the media ever since her arrest 11 days after the murders. During the trial, “prosecuting attorneys labeled Routier’s relatives ‘trailer trash’ and portrayed the Rowlett couple as tacky nouveau riche with twisted priorities,” according to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. The public chimed in, too. A pawn shop clerk “noted that Darlie often came to her store braless and used foul language,” the newspaper reported.
Reality #4. Drake’s visits to his mother, who’s been on death row for 21 years, take place with a sheet of glass between them. In addition to denying friends and family members physical contact with death row inmates, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice limits visits to two hours in duration and encourages “conservative dressing.” For example, visitors past the age of adolescence cannot wear shorts or skirts shorter than three inches above the knee.
Reality #5. Although deprived of his mother’s embrace, Drake has grown up with many other people who love him. For instance, Jerry Dale Jackson, the father of Darin Routier’s girlfriend, Cindy, considered Drake to be his own. Jackson’s obituary in the Weatherford Democrat in 2017 listed Drake as one of his grandchildren.
That’s all for this post. Until next week, cheers. — RR
Read Part 3: Greg Davis: Darlie Routier’s No. 1 Antagonist
Watch the Forensic Files episode about Darlie Routier on YouTube or Amazon Prime
Amazon
Barnes & Noble
Books-a-Million
Target
Walmart
Indie Bound
Thanks for this update, RR. He’s experienced awful tragedy in his life, whilst perhaps being shielded somewhat by his youth when he lost his brothers. Glad that his cancer appears gone and hoping he and his dad have as happy a life as possible in the awful circumstances. I don’ think, though, he’ll be seeing his mother other than behind that glass…
PS Having worked in a prison, that ‘modesty’ requirement of visitors is necessary… ‘cos you wouldn’t believe how some ‘ladies’ attire themselves when visiting their men to give them a visual thrill – never mind the intercom phone sex!
You may be right…maybe I should spend some time in prisons before criticizing them, lol.
I think he will. She’s innocent and the blood evidence will FINALLY be analyzed. Something that should have been done 22 YEARS ago. Interesting how Darrin just happened to sleep through the whole ordeal and only came downstairs AFTER the carnage.
The Five Realities. Great book title!
Thanks — right next to The Seven Samurai!
As of now Routier has lost two state appeals and is in the middle of a federal appeal. If she loses the latter that’s likely it for any chance of release, though her capital sentence could be reduced to life without parole on petition.
Please please please tell me this poor woman is out! Where are the wrongfully accused lawyer groups? Secondly, as a mother that had boys that young “shock and maternal instinct” would have made me grab that knife and place it up high and away from kids. My kids are in their mid-twenties now and I still find myself “moving their glass” when they are talking with their hands being animated or the glass is too close to the edge! This is just horrific for her and her family. And…..was she supposed to spray silly string while crying at the grave? Thirdly, she was in “shock and SCARED” — check physical symptoms and “dry mouth” is one of them….that explains the gum! Her wounds are TOTALLY defensive wounds!
Good point about the knife —it’s a natural instinct to get it away from the kids.
Thx for your comment very much appreciated. I, like Darlie, got breast augmentation, wore A LOT of jewelry and LOVED looking good in the late 90’s when my boys were small, heck why not? I had four kids..all boys..I was the only feminine person in the household, this should have no bearing on anything. Also what’s with the detective’s pleading the 5th? I would argue that their testimony is part of their job and if not met, then it should be automatic dismissal! The Police need to be investigated!!!
Finally, anyone who “drops” a bloody sock with both victims’ blood a “football field and a half” away from the house MEANT to do this for “proof” that this PLANNED attack took place.
You are doing amazing investigative work! Awesome!
She’s a psychopath killer, and “tacky nouveau riche with twisted priorities” is really a well-put wording.
Andrea: You appear to contradict the point you seemingly wish to make (she’s innocent) – for if a planned attack, who but she or the husband had anything to gain – any motive – in wanting the children dead? When one ‘plans’ a murder/attack it’s invariably motive-related. The only plausible alternative to DR’s guilt is the ‘madman’ theory: the household was randomly attacked by a lunatic – and they precisely *don’t* plan; they are spontaneous. There’s no evidence whatsoever that the Routiers had enemies that might wish them – let alone the children – harm.
So unless it was Darlie (or much less likely, the husband) who ‘planned’ your supposition is implausible.
As for the so-called ‘slut-shaming,’ who could disagree: it’s probative of nothing.
I 100% agree about detectives taking the 5th, should be immediate aquital!
She failed several polygraphs with flying colors! And when told about one failure, she looked like she didn’t care and shrugged her shoulders. Would you do that? Her husband even got a divorce from her because he knew he did it…or he would have stayed married to her and fought for her freedom.
Meant to say he knew SHE did it or he would have remained married to her. When he came the stairs and saw the carnage she looked at him, while on the phone, and said “I didn’t do it, honest.” Who says that? She didn’t want to be burdened by those boys. She was too self-centered…what you call a malignant narcissist. Where is her psychological write-up?
I don’t have a horse in this race. I don’t know if Darlie Routier is guilty or innocent, and to be honest, I don’t care. What I do care about is the all too prevalent belief that lie detector tests can tell if a person is lying or not. They cannot and they do not. They are garbage. The guilty have tested “No Deception” and the innocent have tested “Deception Detected.” There is a very good reason that they are not admissible in court, but unfortunately far too much faith is put into them by law enforcement. Just last night I saw former prosecutor Charles Sebesta say that when he was a prosecutor, if a person “passed” a lie detector test, he would not prosecute him or her. That’s idiotic. Oh yes, and this was on a TV show about Anthony Graves, who Sebesta prosecuted and who “failed” a lie detector test, spent years on Death Row, and then was exonerated and released. Granted, Sebesta has been shown to have been completely unethical and has been disbarred, but I’m sure that his faith in bogus lie detector tests is shared by countless ethical prosecutors who have not been disbarred.
I watched over 15 different episodes…..never saw anything about polygraphs…please link info…and her husband also stated he still believes in her innocence….your post is BS.
And she lied in her letters from jail naming two different men.
Most marriages don’t survive prison…they have no grasp on the inside or outside world.
Project for the Innocence will prove a doubt that the woman is innocent!
She guilty and hope she executed very soon
he did stay married to her. they got a divorce 15yrs after she went to jail. he had to go on with life at some point.
That’s not why he divorced her! And when and where are these lie detector test and results??? I’ve followed this case from day 1 never seen them
Her knife used to cut screen, jewelry wasn’t taken at sink where clean up occurred, she named 2 men in her jail letters & freaked out on the stand when asked about it, blood under the glass & vacuum, no cuts on her feet, wine glass was latched wouldn’t have been knocked down, Domain didn’t bark, motion lites not on, she called media herself to film that grave scene. Her mother had the opportunity a few years ago to go on Dr. Phil? Worldwide attn and any dna testing? She refused. Why? She knows her daughter did this. Her fans say necklace was embedded, had to be surgically removed but it simply fell off when bandage removed. Bruising on her arms prob caused by boys kicking her off. Her wounds were superficial & she didn’t know what/where carotid was. She was lucky she didn’t kill herself. She was such a light sleeper that she would wake up when Drake turned over in his crib yet she slept through all that? She’s guilty. http://www.darlieroutierfactandfiction.com/
All good points. But if she really did it, why wasn’t her husband angry? He has defended her from the start.
Her knife used to cut screen, jewelry wasn’t taken at sink where clean up occurred, she named 2 men in her jail letters & freaked out on the stand when asked about it, blood under the glass & vacuum, no cuts on her feet, wine glass was latched wouldn’t have been knocked down, Domain didn’t bark, motion lites not on, she called media herself to film that grave scene. Her mother had the opportunity a few years ago to go on Dr. Phil? Worldwide attn and any dna testing? She refused. Why? She knows her daughter did this. Her fans say necklace was embedded, had to be surgically removed but it simply fell off when bandage removed. Bruising on her arms prob caused by boys kicking her off. Her wounds were superficial & she didn’t know what/where carotid was. She was lucky she didn’t kill herself. She was such a light sleeper that she would wake up when Drake turned over in his crib yet she slept through all that? She’s guilty. http://www.darlieroutierfactandfiction.com/
Life without parole? Naw, I’d pull the switch on her myself.
Her knife used to cut screen, jewelry wasn’t taken at sink where clean up occurred, she named 2 men in her jail letters & freaked out on the stand when asked about it, blood under the glass & vacuum, no cuts on her feet, wine glass was latched wouldn’t have been knocked down, Domain didn’t bark, motion lites not on, she called media herself to film that grave scene. Her mother had the opportunity a few years ago to go on Dr. Phil? Worldwide attn and any dna testing? She refused. Why? She knows her daughter did this. Her fans say necklace was embedded, had to be surgically removed but it simply fell off when bandage removed. Bruising on her arms prob caused by boys kicking her off. Her wounds were superficial & she didn’t know what/where carotid was. She was lucky she didn’t kill herself. She was such a light sleeper that she would wake up when Drake turned over in his crib yet she slept through all that? She’s guilty. http://www.darlieroutierfactandfiction.com/
Boys? no. 1 at least didn’t have a chance. Stabbed 4 times on his back. And the other received a terrible stab on an area that kills you in seconds. You go check the “facts and fictions”
I have ALWAYS BELIEVED IN Darlie’s INNOCENCE, BUT Living in TX 56yrs Myself, She WILL NEVER BE RELEASED. The PROSECUTORS RUSHED to JUDGMENT — their REMARKS about them being Trailer Trash (VERY UNCALLED FOR). People in TX today live in RV Tiny Houses, You Name It! BUT the STATE of TEXAS is too PROUD to ADMIT THEY WERE WRONG & SET AN INNOCENT PERSON FREE. THEY WOULD RATHER EXECUTE AN INNOCENT PERSON TO SAVE FACE! SET DARLIE FREE!
Darlie’s mom blew off Dr. Phil & his offer for help, testing & worldwide attention. She knows her daughter slaughtered poor Damon & Devon. Darlie said Damon woke her up by patting her arm & saying Mama. With his wounds? No way. The clean up at the sink, the wine glass broken on the floor UNDER the blood yet no cuts on her feet, and she claimed to be such a light sleeper. And Domain, their barky barky dog never barked at all, the motion lights never came on. The boys were viciously stabbed and Darlie was merely cut. Guilty. My dog could have done better staging than that airhead did.
I think she is guilty too!! They said the screen was cut on the inside of the house. She told different stories about what happened that night. She cared more about herself than her children lying there slaughtered. I don’t remember now if it was the paramedic or the policeman who first came to the house said, when he told her to get a towel to help one of her sons she just stood there holding her arm.
One of the jurors changed their minds because they showed bruising under her arm after the trial. Well I have news for you, when she cut herself, it causes you to bleed inside under your skin. That was not bruising. She planned all of this and needs to go. I don’t see how anyone would think she is innocent.
Merely cut? Seriously??? Have you read anything about her injuries?
Yes, all those bruises on her arms from her sons trying to kick her off of them.
I too have believed for all these years..that Darlie is innocent. That was a bad time in history. She was rushed right into jail because a prosecuter wanted to make Dallas proud. Because many crucial facts were passed over and Darlie was convicted on her looks not on ANYTHING real about the actual crime…she needs to be freed and be able to enjoy the rest of what’s left of her life. They’ve stolen enough of it from her with no remorse. It’s disgraceful. SHAME ON DALLAS.
Laura: Exonerations reached a record level in the US in 2016, with Texas leading the way for miscarriages of justice. Not only does Texas execute the most people in the county, but it has the most exonerations – so if Routier is innocent there’s some chance that’ll be recognised. The largest contributor to false convictions for homicide is perjury, often by someone who claims to have witnessed the crime or participated in it, and false confessions. Neither applies to Routier, so the ‘best’ hope for exoneration is removed.
What an awful legacy left for this kid Drake. First his mother murdered his brothers, then his father lies for her. If I were this kid I’d change my name and move as far away as possible. Both of those families are crazy. Darlie Routier robbed Drake of his big brothers. They would all be best friends. At least this kid will have the chance to read all the transcripts. His father belongs behind bars as well.
Agreed 100%
There were a few pieces of evidence the jury didn’t see. There is at least one photo of Darlie in which she is all bruised and banged up. The bruising is all up and down her arms. These are what are known as “defensive wounds.” Also, the video at the cemetery wasn’t shown in its entirety. Prior to the gum-chewing Silly String video, there was a very tearful gathering of family members, including Darlie, praying at the graves of these little boys. Darlie’s trial took place in Kerrville, Tx, an extremely conservative town in an extremely conservative state. The significance of that is that they put Darlie’s character on trial, mentioning her breast augmentation, bleach-blond hair and mani/pedis. Let’s not lose sight of the fact that Darlie was wounded, too, and one of the wounds came within mere millimeters of slicing open a major artery.
I’ve also heard mention of the solemn farewell that was ignored as evidence by the prosecutors — one more reason the trial was a witch hunt.
One juror said he did see the photos of the bruising. There were so many photos, he had forgotten.
It’s been proven these photos were not introduced at the trial
Quote your source that the photos weren’t introduced at the trial.
When I broke my arm I bled on the inside of my arm too, it was not bruising. When she cut herself (and she knew right where to do it) she bled on the inside and it looks like bruising but it isn’t. Defence of what?? No one was there. She had different stories every time she opened her mouth. The screen was cut on the inside. Everything she did shows she was guilty.
Yes, but they should have taken notes at the hospital. She did it after. Bruises that were made after the hospital visit. The stupid face she made on that photo is cringe.
I have studied this case for many years and I totally agree with you. And what about the bloody sock found down the street in back of house. I have prayed for years that somehow, she could get a new trial because I truly feel that if this were to happen, she would certainly be acquitted. This is such a miscarriage of justice and so many people have been affected by it. And continue to be.
Police went there with dogs and they stopped sniffing at the sock. Perpetrator either: had wings and flew, or came back where he/she came, and that is, the house.
Kathleen: “Let’s not lose sight of the fact that Darlie was wounded, too, and one of the wounds came within mere millimeters of slicing open a major artery.” We haven’t, and the jury didn’t. It was determined that the major wound was self-inflicted – incompetently, because, as you say, it could ‘ve been fatal. Routier, it’s alleged, had to cut herself up somewhat ‘cos that’s what she’d done to the children and it would have seemed inconsistent had she not had knife wounds. The other wounds were minor and easy to do oneself.
That the jury may have been more than averagely ‘conservative’ (your presumption, not fact) is neither here nor there. Are you suggesting that the socio-cultural background of jurors trumps their intelligence, such that they cannot render a reasonable judgement? If so, ALL jury trials on that logic are suspect because ALL jurors carry socio-cultural prejudice, whether conservative, liberal or whatever.
You’re clutching at straws, I’m afraid… If Routier was ‘railroaded’, stronger counter-argument for the trial result than this needs offering (and the probative status of the ‘silly string’ observation – which is endlessly repeated – has been well-discussed in this blog AND AT HER APPEALS, TO NO AVAIL).
Set Darlie FREE….. I do not believe she is the murderer of her children.
Darlie’s injuries, including the bruises, were not only shown to the jury–only one juror claims he didn’t see them, while the others have confirmed they did–but were discussed extensively during her trial, with at least five witnesses (I never counted, but I can think of at least five offhand). The idea that information on her injuries was withheld from the jury is simply untrue.
As for this tearful memorial service, first of all, that was NOT part of the same tape as the “Silly String” video. The graveside party was filmed by the local news crew the Routiers invited to the cemetery and granted an interview in exchange for airfare for their relatives. The tape of the memorial service was made by Rowlett P.D., who had permission from the cemetery owner to place surveillance equipment there (Routier and her family have tried to claim this was illegal; a judge ruled that it was completely legal). The prosecution did not show this tape; instead they invited the defense to show it. The defense declined. Now the tape is in the possession of Darlie’s “team,” and they have never shown more than a few two-second clips of it; despite claiming that it shows a crying Darlie, none of the clips they chose to share with the public show her crying. Personally, I think that if the tape truly showed Darlie sobbing and wailing, her team would show it; there is no reason for them not to and every reason why they would–it would make a huge difference to those whose only exposure to Darlie is her glee as she sprays Silly String on her sons’s graves, wouldn’t it? Wouldn’t video of her actually mourning affect people? But they still refuse to show it. My belief is they do not show it because it does not show a crying Darlie. As long as they keep it secret, they can claim it shows whatever they like.
Darlie is guilty. The evidence against her was and is overwhelming.
And no one “denigrates” Drake. I have never seen anyone display anything but sympathy for that child. It’s not his fault his mother is a murderer and a liar. He is another victim in this case.
Wow.
You’re not a douche bag now, are you?
Well good news. The Innocence Project is taking her case on because they believe she’s been railroaded and is innocent. So stfu.
Like your name, I suggest that you STFU and go away.
I hope she’s exonerated for a terrible crime – but if she’s innocent much needs explaining, including why she said she knew the perp’s identity but refused to say who…
Does the IP take on cases where they’re ‘agnostic’ as to the convict’s guilt but think they should not have been found guilty on the evidence, or are they committed to thinking that the person is innocent (ie, the evidence indicates another perp or that possibility at least)? The organisation’s name would indicate the latter. However, ‘miscarriage of justice’ is sometimes used to describe any wrongful conviction, even when the defendant may be guilty – for example viz a conviction reached as the result of an unfair or disputed trial. Aspects of Routier’s trial were considered unfair by some… but that doesn’t entail innocence (even if, had the unfairness not occured, the convict would’ve been acquitted).
All potential clients of the Innocence Project go through extensive screening to determine whether or not they’re likely to be innocent. If they pass it takes up their case. In roughly half the cases the clients’ guilt is reconfirmed by DNA testing. Of all the cases taken on, about 43% were proved innocent, 42% guilty, and DNA evidence was inconclusive and not probative in 15% of cases.
Clearly, then, the fact that the IP takes someone on does not mean that they are likely to be innocent – just that the IP thinks that then. Regrettably, at least 40% of the applicants successfully deceived the Project initially and were guilty (but presumably hoped to continue their hitherto successful deceit to the end…) But equally and oppositely, a similar number are shown innocent.
In sum, if the IP takes you on, you have a 40% chance, statistically, of being proved innocent and a 60% chance of being proved guilty or not being helped (and possibly being in a worse position if guilty since the guilt if more likely than not to be proved such and further innocence claims are hopeless). Routier’s submission to the Project cannot be construed in itself as indication of innocence since many guilty do the same, and she has nothing to lose…
Let’s hope it goes one way or the other and not the ‘inconclusive’ – but statistically it’s unlikely to go her way…
You are a child… or are the murderer in prison ¡or maybe Drake himself!
Anion: I certainly agree, as I think you imply, that far too much has been made of the ‘silly string’ by Routier’s defenders, as though it’s central to the case rather than a sideshow. If the jury convicted on it or even if it tipped the balance against Routier, I’d despair of the competence of juries. To me it’s a clutched straw by those unpersuaded of her guilt. On saying that, the case against her appears not to be a slam-dunk. Nonetheless, one has to have very sound reason to disparage the competence of the convicting court and the outcome of appeals – and I don’t think that’s been offered, the silly string being ‘desperate.’ One would have to think that the jury, defence and appeal judges were all wrong – ie, stupied, biased, corrupt. They could be – but much more than the silly string episode’s needed to show it, and it hasn’t been. As for those who declare her unequivocal innocence as though they were there: fantasists. Interrogating the evidence is one thing to raise reasonable question, and what the likes of this site are for; some stating they know better than courts: rubbish.
It seems that the result of DNA testing is pending, so we’ll see what that suggests.
Why would someone just break in her house and kill two children and try to kill her when they let her husband and baby sleep away untouched?? She killed them like it or not.They have never found one person ever who fits the ID she gave to police of who did this. Not to mention when she stabbed herself she had no clue what so ever how close she was to a main artery. She is getting attacked yet her husband hears nothing amazing. Sorry folks she is guilty.
Why would someone just break in her house and kill two children and try to kill her when they let her husband and baby sleep away untouched??
R: a psycho burglar / someone drugged-up, who stayed downstairs (where she and the two boys where), then fled?
They have never found one person ever who fits the ID she gave to police of who did this.
R: Hardly probative: they were never looking ‘cos they thought it was her!
Not to mention when she stabbed herself she had no clue what so ever how close she was to a main artery.
R: Or she didn’t attack herself so had no need to know…
She is getting attacked yet her husband hears nothing amazing.
R: This is odd whether she was the attacker OR attacked (depending at what stage of the events the husband was roused). In either case I’d expect him to hear, as whether the victim or perp, in either case she should/would have been screaming about what had been done to her/her family or about what the fictional perp had done. So this may not be probative either.
—
I think she’s probably guilty, but the above are not the strongest basis for that guilt…
Darin admitted he wanted someone to break into the home & steal everything, store it some place until after he collected the money & then get the stuff back. If the person who got into the home was high as a kite on meth, then it’s possible that he freaked out & tried to kill Darlie after he killed her children. She fought someone off with her injuries & nobody will cut themselves on the neck like that because they can kill themselves too easily that way. Darin also wanted to have his Jaguar car stolen & chopped up so he could get insurance money. Darin played a role in this & could have easily “faked” being asleep upstairs with the baby. Or he could have been the one to kill his boys while the other man tried to break in & kill Darlie, so Darin could be free of them & start over with no debts to speak of. She is an innocent victim. There is a bloody fingerprint that was never processed & did not match anyone living in the home, so how do you dismiss that? You can’t.
One fingerprint is all it takes, just like “one bloody glove.” There was NOTHING to gain financially for her and check “cross contamination.” It may change your views xoxo
Oh and…..they just got granted a DNA order for her appellate lawyer.
Do you know how to get a copy of her last dna results? Amazing how hard it is to get the truth or any facts about her case.
I hope and pray that the Innocence Project gets Darlie the justice she deserves. An excellent compensation for Darlie would be to send Greg Davis to prison for “murdering” her character and suppressing evidence. I do not know how he sleeps at night knowing in another case he sent an innocent man to his death as well. May he get all he deserves by the Main Judge.
I have gone back and forth over the years on the fact I felt She was guilty or innocent. A few things really resonate with me.
#1 The sock found down the alley with the boy’s blood on it. The prosecution said Darlie took it there herself to plant evidence that someone else killed her boys. This makes no sense, she could of dropped it in the backyard. The sock was a football length down the alley!!!! That is a long way to run then come back and injure yourself then call 911.
#2. I believe if the birthday party tape was never shown….she’d of been acquitted. Nobody knows how people cope when they have lost someone close to them. I lost my husband to cancer and refused to wear black to his funeral, he would of hated it. I wore one of his favorite jackets on me….it was bright red. I am an extrovert but when he died, I couldn’t make any decisions. When someone said eat, sleep, whatever I just did it. I was not myself at all and I could see if Darlie thought in her mind celebrating her son’s birthday that day with silly string, laughing whatever thinking her son was watching and he’d be happy, smiling, laughing about it in heaven…….that’s what she did…she was not herself either. You’re in a fog, just doing everything you can to get through the day. Grief is something you don`t know how you’ll act till you experience it yourself. If she was the cold killer the prosecution portrayed her to be she would of realized how that would of looked and never done it.
#3 what was her motive to even kill her boys???? They never came up with one. No other man in her life, no life insurance policies, nobody said she was anything but a loving mother. The death of her sons wouldn’t of made a positive impact in any way….not even childless as she had a new baby right upstairs.
#4. Her husband to this day says she`s innocent. He would of been one of the first people to turn on her if the evidence proved anything. He knew her better then anyone when it came to how she was as a loving mother and wife.
I continue to watch as technology proves others wrongly convicted go free. Time will tell here, I pray as well…….or if it proves without a shadow of doubt she did it…then she should receive her punishment as decided by her peers.
1. That something doesn’t make ‘best’ sense doesn’t mean it makes no sense. That she took the sock further than necessary may show just that…
2. Yes: that ‘evidence’ was non-evidence. But we can’t say whether the jury thought it was irrelevant or not, and how it influenced them (unless they’ve disclosed that).
3. Third-party view it irrelevant – it doesn’t matter what people who knew her thought: they don’t necessarily know anything. She may simply not have wanted them any longer; she may have had a mental aberration (post-natal depression?) She said some odd things that raise a question about her mental state – inc that she knows the perp but can’t say!
4. Irrelevant: what he says he thinks and what he actually thinks may be different. It’s easier to believe a monster did it; he may think it reflects badly on him that he was in relationship with a monster, so disavows her guilt publically. We CANNOT judge his outlook by what we think ours would be in that situation – a common error. ‘If I were him’ is worthless.
Throughout all this you never here “postpartum depression.” I’m 100% positive the story goes like this, she wanted to kill them and herself but since she was last didn’t have the courage to finish the job and came back from insanity. In Europe if a mother kills her child within the 1st year of life they can’t be charged. This country doesn’t recognize that. At trial from the beginning she should have told the truth. She would be free today. I say this because look at her up-and-down erratic behavior even during interviews.
“…she wanted to kill them and herself but since she was last didn’t have the courage to finish the job and came back from insanity.”
I’ve long suspected the same thing. However, I don’t think it excuses her for murdering her sons. Rather, it explains why she did it.
“In Europe if a mother kills her child within the 1st year of life they can’t be charged.”
Surely, that can’t be true. If so, it’s an awful injustice to the babies murdered by their mothers.
Not quite true, but England does have the Infanticide Act of 1922, which established that if a mother kills her child within the first twelve months of the child’s life, the charge is automatically reduced from murder to involuntary manslaughter. Should a woman be found guilty of infanticide under this Act, sentencing is placed at the judge’s discretion, which usually results in probation or hospitalization. It’s a recognition of postpartum depression/psychosis.
What???seriously
No – it’s bull.
“In Europe if a mother kills her child within the 1st year of life they can’t be charged.” Nonsense.
‘Defensive’ wounds (references to trial transcript):
NECK was approximately 3 1/2” in length, angled toward the midline, and was considered superficial by all medical personnel. A possible hesitation cut, frequently found accompanying self-inflicted wounds, was at one end of the longer cut.
(Dr. Santos, Sec. 725)
Dr. Janice Townsend-Parchman: The neck wound was…possibly less than half an inch deep, but it’s hard to say. It is relatively superficial. It didn’t go very deep into her body, and didn’t strike any vital structures.
Dr. Janice Townsend-Parchman, Sec. 132)
Dr. Santos: This wound cut through the skin and fat, but didn’t penetrate the muscle below. That’s a superficial wound.
(Alejandro Santos, Sec. 726)
Dr. Dillawn: I usually don’t measure the depth. We don’t think in those terms. I would call it a superficial wound.
(Patrick Dillawn, Sec. 856)
Another claim made on a supporter website is that the injury on Darlie’s front left shoulder was 1 1/4” deep. The fact is, there was no testimony from any witness regarding the depth of that wound.
Dr. Santos: The shoulder wound went through the skin and into the fat. We just washed it out and closed it. That is a superficial wound as well. It was probably about an inch and a half in length.
(Alejandro Santos, Sec. 728, 732)
R FOREARM were NOT stab wounds. One was a nick, probably a hesitation wound. The other was an incised wound, commonly called a cut. An incised wound is longer on the surface of the skin than it is deep into the body. Darlie’s own attorney, Doug Mulder, said, “I measure the length of the arm wound on the surface at an inch and three quarters.” Supporters and non-supporters have disagreed for years regarding the depth of that arm wound, but the fact remains that it was considerably longer on the surface than it was deep. Why is this distinction important? Because it’s more indicative of a self-inflicted cut rather than a defensive stab wound.
Dr. Janice Townsend-Parchman: The larger wound on Ms. Routier’s right forearm went to the bone. If you examine that portion of your right forearm, you’re virtually over bone. You don’t have to go very far in terms of portion of an inch to get to the bone.
(Janice Townsend-Parchman, Sec. 152)
Dr. Santos: The right arm wound did not injure the bone, it went through the muscle.
(Alejandro Santos, Sec. 788)
Another false claim that has hung around for years states, “The larger of the two [arm wounds] caused splintering of the bone in the forearm. According to medical reports, marrow was leaking from the bone.” That is simply not true. No such medical report was admitted into evidence, nor is there any testimony to support such a claim.
Dr Dillawn: The wound on her right arm was to the bone, but the bone at that point is very superficial in the arm. It went through the muscle but there was no fracture.
(Patrick Dillawn, Sec. 858, 860)
—
THERE IS EMPHATICALLY NOTHING FORENSICALLY OR MEDICALLY REQUIRING THAT THESE WOUNDS WERE NOT SELF-INFLICTED BUT ARE DEFENSIVE. To be sure, they are ‘nasty’ – but she was desperate. NOTE THE MEDICAL TESTIMONY THAT THEY WERE NOWHERE NEAR LIFE-THREATENING (not that being dumb and desperate she mightn’t have inadvertently threatened important neck structures).
Whatever else might be deemed favourable to her, her injuries are NOT.
I read where dogs lead police to bloody sock, then lost trail. That’s easy — killer had a vehicle he left in.
I grew up living nextdoor to Darin’s parents in Lubbock. Very nice people. My brother and I use to play with Devon and Damon when they’d come to town. I remember it always kind of annoyed us cuz they were younger than us and, well u know how kids are. After the murders Drake moved in nextdoor and became an honorary part of our family. We always had “Baby Drake” with us whether it be to babysit him or just go nextdoor and get him for awhile because we loved him and wanted to see him. I was 12 or so when the murders happened. Obviously because I lived nextdoor to the Routiers my thoughts on the case have always been heavily influenced on the side of her being not guilty, and due to personal involvement with the family certainly hope that she isn’t guilty. But here it is well over 20 years later and I find myself on the fence. I think in my heart of hearts if I’m completely honest with myself, I believe she’s probably guilty. But because of all the circumstances and the way I grew up so personally close to the family of this case, I can’t seem to stop being on team Darlie. But it’s probably due to hope. Anyways. I know this comment probably isn’t very helpful or insightful on any facts pertaining to the case. Just wanted to share. Haven’t seen Drake in years and he no doubt doesn’t even remember me. But if he ever reads this, know that at one time in ur life we saw each other almost everyday and I loved u like a baby brother. Keep kicking ur cancers ass bubba and hope and pray that life brings u as much happiness that is absolutely possible. And just for some assurance that I’m not making this up, tell “Grandmommy” who lived nextdoor in the red brick two story house with a guest house in the backyard, that Robert says hi and wishes her and all of u my best.
Thank you for writing in! It’s good to know that Darlie Routier’s surviving son was so loved. Although I’m only about 50 percent sure, I’m on team Darlie. The character assassination used to convict her was wrong.
Thank u for ur response. This is and always has been a case with a different kind of vibe about it. Honestly? There’s as few as 3 people, counting the two victims, to as many as 5 that will probably ever truly 100% know what happened that awful night. Regardless of whatever outcome has happened or will happen. Due to my personal connection, along with basic good human moral fiber, I just hope that those two babies get the justice they deserve. Even if in the end nobody knows but them. But no matter how many years have passed or will continue to pass, I will always vividly remember *knock knock*….
Then opening the door to freckle faced, mullet rockin Devin asking with his quiet kid brother standing shyly behind him, “wanna play?”
It was the EXACT SAME SCENE every single time they came to town. ❤️❤️
Anyways, now that I’m wiping tears off my face. Lol. Thank u for caring. Not about me, but the victims of this tragedy throughout their entire family.
That’s a really sweet memory of Darlie’s older sons. And you gotta love a child with a mullet.
He definitely rocked it
The window sills in the garage had untouched layers of dust, including the window that had been cut, implying that no one had actually climbed through it, and the mulch in the flower beds between the garage and the backyard gate was undisturbed. However, an unknown fingerprint was found on the windowsill that did not belong to anyone in the family. Routier later commented on the video, saying, “He wanted to be seven. I did the only thing I knew to do to honor him and give him all his wishes because he wasn’t here anymore. But how do you know what you’re going to do when you lose two children? How do you know how you’re going to act?”
Sure, you don’t want to think a mother is capable, but that mother was capable. The evidence was dissected, and it all pointed to one person, the one convicted. This trying of new evidence reminds me of Jeff MacDonald, the Army doctor who killed his pregnant wife and two little girls. I didn’t do it! There is new evidence! He finally quit with the new evidence about ten or fifteen years ago. The murders were in 1970 or so, a very long time ago. Darlie Routier is where she should be and so is Jeff MacDonald.
I want to believe she’s innocent, but she doesn’t come across as very liable and she seems to be very self centered. I don’t suppose we will ever know the truth.
Darlie’s demeanor at the gravesite in June 1996 still irks me to this day…and that’s been nearly 30 years now. What kind of mother would shoot Silly String at their child’s grave?