Jump to content

General True Crime Shows

On ‎6‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 10:25 AM, SunnyBeBe said:

Of all the crime shows that I watch, the most disturbing and often the ones that I must turn off, are those with cult leader/family involvement, where the children are abused, tortured, and subjected to brainwashing.  Sometimes they are brought into the abuse and instructed to harm others.....it's difficult for me to watch and lately, I've been skipping it. 

What amazing me is that often they record themselves for posterity, and it often provides the evidence of wrongdoings (and the disgusting maniacal, egotistical, narcissism of the leader).

On ‎6‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 2:53 AM, nokat said:

Is watching the latest Fear Thy Neighbor. Apparently having a shared driveway is deadly. Have seen past season episodes with escalating problems over shared driveways

Two new houses were just built in my neighborhood (old neighborhood where one small house on a big plot is torn down for two McMansions hugging each other) with a shared driveway.  First words out of my mouth to Mr. GW when I saw them pouring the new shared driveway was, "oh, that's a Fear Thy Neighbor episode waiting to happen."

15

Share Post


Link to post

So I watched the latest episode of the Wonderland Murders last night - and, although I totally get that they suspected that the husband was the murderer (aren't they always??), I was REALLY uncomfortable with the detectives proudly talking about how they went around to his neighbors (no arrest warrant, no body at the time) telling them about how Brian was a murderer and how did they feel living next to a murderer, etc.  I had to change the channel.  I mean, his kid was living with him - what if the neighbors starting harassing the kid?!?  As I have seen many times on ID and other crime shows, sometimes the cops are wrong and it just felt so disgusting for them to do that to someone with no actual evidence that he killed his wife.  It was gross.

14

Share Post


Link to post

I had to give up on The Last Defense about Darlie Router.  That so-called documentary is a sham, imo.  It's obviously, a biased, heavily opinionated, propaganda piece, with a certain agenda.  What a disappointment.  I really enjoy an investigative documentary where the producers are on a truth mission, not finding random people, reporters, unknown speakers from England who have no involvement in the case, to chime in about how things were, when they were not involved in the case, have no basis for their opinion and are just spewing conjecture as fact.  I had to give up on it last night. 

The things they were saying about the nurse testimony was so bogus. I won't go into all that here, because, it doesn't seem that many are watching, but, I don't even consider whether Darlie cried in the hospital as a factor.  Killers, criminals, liars, etc. can fake cry if they need to.  So, I don't base guilt on that.  Nor the silly string.  Not proof of anything to me.  What Darlie nor her camp can't explain away is the physical evidence at the scene and the 911 tape.  

I do hate it that some of the public will be mislead by this unfortunate piece of fiction, I mean, documentary.  Hopefully, the courts won't be easily fooled.  

9

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, TheGreenWave said:

I was REALLY uncomfortable with the detectives proudly talking about how they went around to his neighbors (no arrest warrant, no body at the time) telling them about how Brian was a murderer and how did they feel living next to a murderer, etc.  I had to change the channel.  I mean, his kid was living with him - what if the neighbors starting harassing the kid?!?  As I have seen many times on ID and other crime shows, sometimes the cops are wrong and it just felt so disgusting for them to do that to someone with no actual evidence that he killed his wife.  It was gross.

Me, too.  I am pretty sure that is farther than the law allows police to talk to witnesses.  Saying outright that he is a murderer is beyond the pale.  VERY unprofessional and gossipy.

 

34 minutes ago, SunnyBeBe said:

I had to give up on The Last Defense about Darlie Router.  That so-called documentary is a sham, imo.  It's obviously, a biased, heavily opinionated, propaganda piece, with a certain agenda.  What a disappointment.  I really enjoy an investigative documentary where the producers are on a truth mission, not finding random people, reporters, unknown speakers from England who have no involvement in the case, to chime in about how things were, when they were not involved in the case, have no basis for their opinion and are just spewing conjecture as fact.  I had to give up on it last night. 

The things they were saying about the nurse testimony was so bogus. I won't go into all that here, because, it doesn't seem that many are watching, but, I don't even consider whether Darlie cried in the hospital as a factor.  Killers, criminals, liars, etc. can fake cry if they need to.  So, I don't base guilt on that.  Nor the silly string.  Not proof of anything to me.  What Darlie nor her camp can't explain away is the physical evidence at the scene and the 911 tape.  

I do hate it that some of the public will be mislead by this unfortunate piece of fiction, I mean, documentary.  Hopefully, the courts won't be easily fooled.  

I knew what this show would be about when I saw the first commercial for it.  It is all bullshit conjecture hoping that the viewers who DO believe it will force another trial.  It is disgusting.

10

Share Post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

Me, too.  I am pretty sure that is farther than the law allows police to talk to witnesses.  Saying outright that he is a murderer is beyond the pale.  VERY unprofessional and gossipy.

 

I knew what this show would be about when I saw the first commercial for it.  It is all bullshit conjecture hoping that the viewers who DO believe it will force another trial.  It is disgusting.

Are there family members or anyone outside of law enforcement who represent those murdered boys? It seems that the family supports Darlie's innocence, including her ex-husband. They just believe what they believe based on emotion, with no explanation for the physical evidence against her.   It's a shame if no one is there to stand up for the victims now. 

And, it's disgusting that ABC has chosen to air this propaganda that supports a convicted child killer.  Poor choice, imo. 

8

Share Post


Link to post

I know I am probably the only person in the country who has doubts about Darlie's guilt, but I always have. When the prosecution gave their evidence this time, I thought the defense side gave some interesting comebacks, especially about how footprints could have come to be under the glass, and how the testimony of the first police officer about her not helping was somewhat questionable. I did hear him tell her to lay down or sit down. She said she'd already gotten towels. She was on the phone with the 911 operator answering questions at the same time, and it also made sense that she said she'd touched the knife in response to the operator telling her not to touch anything, which I heard on the tape.

Also, the "evidence" claiming the windowsill was not disturbed and neither was the mulch, was blown out of the water by the fact the sill was only a few inches high and there was concrete, not mulch, under it.

What doesn't make sense to me is why someone who is supposedly all about her appearance would slash herself so deeply across her throat. In addition, the prosecution kept calling her injuries "superficial" but they most certainly weren't. Superficial injuries do not leave scars like she has and don't require emergency surgery. Doctors don't question whether someone will live through the night with superficial injuries.

My biggest question of all is that if her motive was to live a free and unencumbered selfish lifestyle, why did she leave the youngest and most dependent alive?

I'm not completely convinced of her innocence either, but to me, she is no Casey Anthony.

Commence the brickbats, lol.

7

Share Post


Link to post

I had heard something a few years about Darlie having postpartum depression and that is why she murdered the two older sons.  I don't know if they've mentioned that yet because this show is like a sleeping pill for me.  I turn it on and in a few minutes I'm asleep (even Sunday afternoon watching it on the DVR).  I don't want to believe she killed her sons, but so far nothing has changed my mind.  I don't care if she cried in the hospital or at the grave before the Silly String incident.  To me, the evidence seems to prove her guilt. 

5

Share Post


Link to post

I have no issue with someone else's views on any case, including Darlie's. We all see things from our own perspective.  I mistrust so much of what that show presented, that I won't comment on anything that they presented as fact, because, there's such doubt in my mind from what I did see.   I would like a real documentary, without people presenting things as true, that aren't true. That goes for both sides.   And it shouldn't have a predetermined agenda. Sadly, I can't properly evaluate the facts as they presented them on The Last Defense, because the producers of the show chose to obscure them with their biased, non-expert actors, or whatever they were. 

Did the treating doctor speak?  I've never seen anyone, except for Darlie's camp say that her injuries were life threatening or that she came close to dying.  I'd like to hear some actual information about that. Maybe, someone will do a more balanced and accurate presentation. 

What I did view were the boy's autopsies. The young children's injuries were pretty brutal.  Devon sustained 4 stab wounds, including two to his chest, that penetrated through into his lungs. One of stab wounds 5 inches deep.  He had an incision on his arm and another stab would to his leg. He also had contusions to his hand, elbow, neck, arm and hip.  I wonder if those contusions came from him fighting the attacker and that the attacker might have sustained some bruises of her own from the fight he gave for his life. 

Damon also sustained 4 stab wounds, cutting through subcutaneous tissue, muscle and deep enough to strike his lungs. He had abrasions as well, it appears that he may have been attacked from behind and not able to fight back.  

If anyone wants a link for the autopsies, I'll PM them. It's just a link that I'm not allowed to post here, I don't think. 

I do think that Darlie's injuries are telling and that her small incision that didn't really harm her is shockingly insignificant when compared to the injuries of the children.  

7

Share Post


Link to post

No matter what propaganda they spew, it will never convince me of her innocence.  She needs to fry ASAP.

5

Share Post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, SunnyBeBe said:

I do think that Darlie's injuries are telling and that her small incision that didn't really harm her is shockingly insignificant when compared to the injuries of the children

i didn't watch this particular show, but i do remember it featured on like a Dateline or 20/20 back in the day (who can forget the silly string on the graves video!?!?).  Was there any testimony about injuries to her hands?  If the stabbing was that brutal to those poor boys, doesn't the murderer usually have deep cuts on his/her hands?  Also, wasn't there some speculation that it was the husband at one point?

2

Share Post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, TheGreenWave said:

i didn't watch this particular show, but i do remember it featured on like a Dateline or 20/20 back in the day (who can forget the silly string on the graves video!?!?).  Was there any testimony about injuries to her hands?  If the stabbing was that brutal to those poor boys, doesn't the murderer usually have deep cuts on his/her hands?  Also, wasn't there some speculation that it was the husband at one point?

Yes.  The only defensive wounds she had were bruises on her outer forearm, likely caused by the boys kicking the knife away.  I resent the HELL out of this monstrous attempt to portray her as innocent. And the ONLY people who say "she almost died" are the SAME people who produced this charade.  I would suggest most strongly to those who have never seen the FACTS of this case, please watch a real documentary.  http://starlocalmedia.com/rowlettlakeshoretimes/proven-guilty-twenty-years-later-darlie-routier-awaits-execution-for/article_fd097bc8-3330-11e6-89b4-d7bc324ef601.html

11

Share Post


Link to post

I don't recall if Darlie sustained any cut injuries to her hands, as it sometimes happens with people who are stabbing someone, but, it doesn't always happen.  She could have worn gloves.  I don't know.  I do think it's amusing that the killer made deep, penetrating, multiple blows for the kids, but, with Darlie, it's a restrained, delicate incision, neatly placed in a spot that you could see and navigate,  if you were doing it yourself.  And, it wasn't deep enough to sever anything major or penetrate an organ.  

8

Share Post


Link to post

I don’t know if she is guilty or not but many things were not done in a proper way in her trial. The prosecutor had no business meeting with the nurses in a group and showing them photos of the boys. The nurses had no business saying a woman crying for her children was whining or saying things which were the opposite of her medical records. 

I also don’t believe the court has any business asking if she attended church or suggesting that blond hair is indicative of being a bad mother. They also left things out of the 911 call and the officer verifying she was trying to help her kids. Does any of this mean she is innocent? No, but I don’t believe in an atmosphere where a person doesn’t get a fair trial.

4

Share Post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Madding crowd said:

I don’t know if she is guilty or not but many things were not done in a proper way in her trial. The prosecutor had no business meeting with the nurses in a group and showing them photos of the boys. The nurses had no business saying a woman crying for her children was whining or saying things which were the opposite of her medical records. 

I also don’t believe the court has any business asking if she attended church or suggesting that blond hair is indicative of being a bad mother. They also left things out of the 911 call and the officer verifying she was trying to help her kids. Does any of this mean she is innocent? No, but I don’t believe in an atmosphere where a person doesn’t get a fair trial.

These are all proper things in American Jurisprudence. 

1

Share Post


Link to post

I haven't had the chance to read about her appeals and/or motions for new trials. Hopefully, they will continue to be handled appropriately.  And, I consider anything presented in The Last Defense as suspect.   I now put nothing past these people who are trying to get her relief, regardless.   I'm no appeals expert, but, I think that there has to be new evidence or some reversible error.  Apparently, none has been found.  Or, there is a Habeas Corpus proceeding, which she may have more luck with. She's got plenty of help on her case, that's for sure. 

6

Share Post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

These are all proper things in American Jurisprudence. 

Not really-it’s not proper to speak to witnesses as a group instead of individuals, not proper to show damaging photos prior to testimony, not proper to have witnesses lie about testimony. Does it happen, yes, but not proper. Also I don’t know if any law that states a mother must attend church services. 

4

Share Post


Link to post

Is this documentary the only exposure you have had to this case?

4

Share Post


Link to post
On ‎6‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 11:23 AM, TheGreenWave said:

What amazing me is that often they record themselves for posterity, and it often provides the evidence of wrongdoings (and the disgusting maniacal, egotistical, narcissism of the leader).

Jim Jones was a prolific recorder of everything.  That's how they figured out rather quickly what happened at Jonestown.  So creepy.

7

Share Post


Link to post

I thought the show last night of Murder Comes to Town was horrendous.  A 28 year-old mother and her 18 month old baby are murdered in their home in a small town in VA.  They got the killer thank goodness and it turns out that he was a child sexual predator.  For some reason, this wonderful young mother, who reaped so many praises, was married to a man with a strong criminal element (he was in prison at the time of the murders), but, the mother allowed a steady stream of men, who were violent, drug involved and unstable, into her home. This was according to friends and family  Her FIL lived across the street and was worried about it.  They don't believe that the young mother knew the killer was a child sexual predator, but, she likely knew that he was an unemployed, drug dealer.  Such a heartbreaking story.  The guy eventually admitting to doing it, but, never offered an explanation of why he killed the baby. There was no sign of sexual assault on either victim

9

Share Post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, SunnyBeBe said:

I thought the show last night of Murder Comes to Town was horrendous.  A 28 year-old mother and her 18 month old baby are murdered in their home in a small town in VA.  They got the killer thank goodness and it turns out that he was a child sexual predator.  For some reason, this wonderful young mother, who reaped so many praises, was married to a man with a strong criminal element (he was in prison at the time of the murders), but, the mother allowed a steady stream of men, who were violent, drug involved and unstable, into her home. This was according to friends and family  Her FIL lived across the street and was worried about it.  They don't believe that the young mother knew the killer was a child sexual predator, but, she likely knew that he was an unemployed, drug dealer.  Such a heartbreaking story.  The guy eventually admitting to doing it, but, never offered an explanation of why he killed the baby. There was no sign of sexual assault on either victim

Such a terrible story!  He was making kiddie porn, at least 8 of them.  With the baby.  He was on camera with her many times. 

http://fox59.com/2016/05/31/man-accused-of-killing-mother-daughter-faces-rape-and-child-porn-charges/

2

Share Post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

Such a terrible story!  He was making kiddie porn, at least 8 of them.  With the baby.  He was on camera with her many times. 

http://fox59.com/2016/05/31/man-accused-of-killing-mother-daughter-faces-rape-and-child-porn-charges/

Oh, okay.  First time I saw that.  What I read earlier and from the show, it appeared that the child porn in his possession was of other children, not the murdered baby girl.  Thanks. 

1

Share Post


Link to post
1 minute ago, SunnyBeBe said:

Oh, okay.  First time I saw that.  What I read earlier and from the show, it appeared that the child porn in his possession was of other children, not the murdered baby girl.  Thanks. 

I am truly sorry for being the bearer of bad news. :(  I think the TV show was trying to spare people's feelings.

2

Share Post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

I am truly sorry for being the bearer of bad news. :(  I think the TV show was trying to spare people's feelings.

Oh, yeah.  I agree. They did have some kind of a disclaimer about them using different facts, names, or dates, or something like that.  I thought that was odd.  The defendant's name was right though.  I looked it up before it aired, because, I wanted to figure out who in the hell would murder a little baby. 

2

Share Post


Link to post
5 hours ago, renatae said:

I know I am probably the only person in the country who has doubts about Darlie's guilt, but I always have. When the prosecution gave their evidence this time, I thought the defense side gave some interesting comebacks, especially about how footprints could have come to be under the glass, and how the testimony of the first police officer about her not helping was somewhat questionable. I did hear him tell her to lay down or sit down. She said she'd already gotten towels. She was on the phone with the 911 operator answering questions at the same time, and it also made sense that she said she'd touched the knife in response to the operator telling her not to touch anything, which I heard on the tape.

Also, the "evidence" claiming the windowsill was not disturbed and neither was the mulch, was blown out of the water by the fact the sill was only a few inches high and there was concrete, not mulch, under it.

What doesn't make sense to me is why someone who is supposedly all about her appearance would slash herself so deeply across her throat. In addition, the prosecution kept calling her injuries "superficial" but they most certainly weren't. Superficial injuries do not leave scars like she has and don't require emergency surgery. Doctors don't question whether someone will live through the night with superficial injuries.

My biggest question of all is that if her motive was to live a free and unencumbered selfish lifestyle, why did she leave the youngest and most dependent alive?

I'm not completely convinced of her innocence either, but to me, she is no Casey Anthony.

Commence the brickbats, lol.

I've always questioned her innocence. I'll sit with you. ?

2 hours ago, Brattinella said:

These are all proper things in American Jurisprudence. 

This is true... Framing innocent people and killing them via the death penalty are proper things done in American jurisprudence. Just as using the police as a weapon is the American way, and could be called proper American jurisprudence. 

 

 

Oh and the police killing Black (and poor people in general) men. 

 

????? I'm sick of proper American jurisprudence. 

Edited by Queena.
2

Share Post


Link to post
4 hours ago, SunnyBeBe said:

I don't recall if Darlie sustained any cut injuries to her hands, as it sometimes happens with people who are stabbing someone, but, it doesn't always happen.  She could have worn gloves.  I don't know.  I do think it's amusing that the killer made deep, penetrating, multiple blows for the kids, but, with Darlie, it's a restrained, delicate incision, neatly placed in a spot that you could see and navigate,  if you were doing it yourself.  And, it wasn't deep enough to sever anything major or penetrate an organ.  

She didn't have any cuts on her hands that I saw in this 1999 episode of Forensic Files:

 

A week later during the silly string episode, her neck wound is healed without scabs. The doctor testified it was superficial, but admits it came close to her carotid artery. I think this might have been inadvertent on her part. The bloody knife had no cast-off or drips from being dropped, but there was a lot of blood near the tip, as if the stabber was dripping blood down their right arm when the knife was placed on the carpet. They found a bread knife returned to the knife rack that had evidence it was used to cut the window screen. That makes NO sense from an outside intruder. She said the intruder knocked down and broke a wine glass while she was chasing him, but the glass was on top of her blood and she had no cuts on her feet.

Using luminol, police found she'd stood bleeding at the sink for a long time, and cleaned up some of the blood before the police got there. They also found cast-off blood on the back of her shirt consistent with repeated stabs with the right arm splashing blood backwards. 

The only thing that puzzles me is the sock, and I have to admit, my first thought was that the husband was in on it, too.

 

ETA: Police speculated bruises on her forearm were likely caused by one or both victims fighting back, or trying to kick the knife away. And how does THAT happen, yet the husband doesn't wake up until he hears the wine glass break? Did they just decide to keep the youngest and kill the other two? 

Edited by riley702. Reason: they, not the
6

Share Post


Link to post

Thanks for the summary.  Do you recall if they  addressed the sealed motion to allow Darlie to have a polygraph taken before her trial, she did, and yet no mention has ever been made of it since then?  Just curious.  It's not 100% reliable, but, I still like to know when someone does well on it or fails.  If the results are not good, the defense just keeps it quiet.  And, it can't be used in court, so, if one fails there's no benefit to letting the public know about it. 

Edited by SunnyBeBe.
2

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Brattinella said:

Is this documentary the only exposure you have had to this case?

No, And I think she probably is guilty, just don’t think she got a fair trial. To be fair, I’m a reporter and look at a lot of stuff including legalities. Of course, attorneys can ask what they want, but they can’t flaunt the law and the jury can’t consider evidence like “doesn’t go to church”.

3

Share Post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, SunnyBeBe said:

Thanks for the summary.  Do you recall if they  addressed the sealed motion to allow Darlie to have a polygraph taken before her trial, she did, and yet no mention has ever been made of it since then?  Just curious.  It's not 100% reliable, but, I still like to know when someone does well on it or fails.  If the results are not good, the defense just keeps it quiet.  And, it can't be used in court, so, if one fails there's no benefit to letting the public know about it. 

They didn't, but some other source I read said that the results weren't used.

0

Share Post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, riley702 said:

They didn't, but some other source I read said that the results weren't used.

Okay. That's what I thought. If she passed, we'd certainly know about it.  It's not admissible in court, unless the parties stipulate in advance, but, if she had passed, I would imagine her team would be making sure the media knows, so, it could help her out. 

Edited by SunnyBeBe.
2

Share Post


Link to post
9 hours ago, TheGreenWave said:

So I watched the latest episode of the Wonderland Murders last night - and, although I totally get that they suspected that the husband was the murderer (aren't they always??), I was REALLY uncomfortable with the detectives proudly talking about how they went around to his neighbors (no arrest warrant, no body at the time) telling them about how Brian was a murderer and how did they feel living next to a murderer, etc.  I had to change the channel.  I mean, his kid was living with him - what if the neighbors starting harassing the kid?!?  As I have seen many times on ID and other crime shows, sometimes the cops are wrong and it just felt so disgusting for them to do that to someone with no actual evidence that he killed his wife.  It was gross.

I felt the same way.  So much for innocent until proven guilty.  If they had been wrong, they had just cast a shadow over this man’s life and reputation.  Even more galling was the fact that they were so giddy and pleased with themselves.  Small wonder a lot of people don’t trust police and won’t talk to them without lawyering up immediately. 

3

Share Post


Link to post

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/27/science/dna-family-trees-cold-cases.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront

Interesting article...Apparently the same DNA sleuthing that was successfully used to track down the Golden State Killer is now being used to help solve other cold cases:

"In the last seven days, genealogical sleuthing techniques that are old to a handful of genealogists but new to most law enforcement have led to arrests in Washington State and Pennsylvania and unearthed a lead in a 37-year-old murder in Texas. All three cases were only revived when crime scene DNA was uploaded to GEDMatch, the same open-source ancestry site used in the Golden State killer case."

And thanks for the heads-up. I now know to erase "The Last Defense" and the latest episode of Murder Comes to Town.

Edited by Mannahatta.
6

Share Post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Fable said:

I felt the same way.  So much for innocent until proven guilty.  If they had been wrong, they had just cast a shadow over this man’s life and reputation.  Even more galling was the fact that they were so giddy and pleased with themselves.  Small wonder a lot of people don’t trust police and won’t talk to them without lawyering up immediately. 

I thought the same thing.  I kept wondering why they were proud to arrest the guy in front of his kid. Regardless, the kid was likely scared and confused.  I think they were just so wrapped up in this guy being guilty that they could not even consider that they were wrong.  Of course, they weren't wrong.  That's a relief. 

Not victim blaming, but, is this the week where the theme involves women choosing to stay with men who end up killing them? Sure seems a lot of that going on lately.  It must be hard on the family who keep warning the women to escape, get away, get protection order, hide, etc., but, they refuse to listen and then end up dead.  

1

Share Post


Link to post

I am sorry that some of you misunderstood my sarcasm at American Jurisprudence.

6

Share Post


Link to post

I will say that I don't think the prosecution proved that Darlie did it.   I have a problem with the cut on her neck, I don't think she would have done that to herself, she almost died.   Her ex is on her side.    I feel like the prosecution wanted the jury to think she had to be guilty because she was young and shallow and had a boob job, which isn't a crime.

2

Share Post


Link to post

Have you seen any factual documentaries on Darlie Routier?

2

Share Post


Link to post

I did see a lot of the original coverage and read all the news stories and one of the Datelines. I’m sorry if I misunderstood you but you still seem to be asking everyone how much they know, so I don’t really get your take on this.

Also I lived in Texas for awhile and think their brand of Justice is unfair at best. (Partially a joke)

3

Share Post


Link to post

I'm only questioning those who got all their info from that 4-part fakery called "The Last Defense".  It was heavily slanted for the defense, and I do not think she was unfairly sentenced. 

Sorry, I did not mean to offend.

Edited by Brattinella.
5

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Brattinella said:

I'm only questioning those who got all their info from that 4-part fakery called "The Last Defense".  It was heavily slanted for the defense, and I do not think she was unfairly sentenced. 

"waves hand"

As I said somewhere above, I am one of those people who never heard of this case until this show.  For you, Brattinella, and the others who feel strongly that Darlie was guilty - what was her motive in killing her kids?  Because that's where I'm really confused.  

1

Share Post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Brattinella said:

I'm only questioning those who got all their info from that 4-part fakery called "The Last Defense".  It was heavily slanted for the defense, and I do not think she was unfairly sentenced. 

Sorry, I did not mean to offend.

I've been watching this case since it happened. I've read a lot of things against Darlie and I'm still not convinced. I think that most of us are true crime aficionados. Most of the big one's, we've read about and have formed opinions. 

5

Share Post


Link to post
10 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

"waves hand"

As I said somewhere above, I am one of those people who never heard of this case until this show.  For you, Brattinella, and the others who feel strongly that Darlie was guilty - what was her motive in killing her kids?  Because that's where I'm really confused.  

I think Darlie was tired of having the boys take up so much of her time and energy.  She had (I have read)  post-partum depression following the birth of her last son. I think she missed the early days of her marriage when she was child-free. 

3 hours ago, Queena said:

I've been watching this case since it happened. I've read a lot of things against Darlie and I'm still not convinced. I think that most of us are true crime aficionados. Most of the big one's, we've read about and have formed opinions. 

Very true.  I read all I can about every case that comes along, especially those involving women and children. I'm glad you do, too.

0

Share Post


Link to post

Oh yes.  The Last Defense was a poor and pitiful attempt to acquaint the viewer with the case.  If it was my first exposure, I'm not sure what I would think.  I will be open to seeing more down the road though, if something credible comes along. I have actually changed my mind about cases when more facts come to light.  There's hard evidence in this one though, that would be difficult to overcome. 

I'm not sure if they really know the true motive.  Others may have more input on that issue.  I know that there were money troubles and even to the point that there was talk of insurance fraud. But, I have no details on that.  She did suffer from depression as well, not that that was the cause.   But, motive does not have to be proved. It's not required and sometimes we know that people kill for reasons that aren't apparent and that we just can't wrap our brain around it.

3

Share Post


Link to post

If she was tired of being a mom, why would she not kill the baby too? It’s harder to take care of a baby because they need you all the time. She was still a mom.  I really can’t see a motive unless she has a undiagnosed mental illness. I think she is probably guilty because there is no evidence to the contrary but stranger things have happened and I didn’t like the way the case was handled. I feel the same way about the Making of a Murderer case. I think the guy is guilty but I can’t get behind falsifying evidence and telling witnesses how to testify. Because the next person they do it too might be innocent.

5

Share Post


Link to post

Something that runs through my mind with the Darlie case is why would anyone break into her house, brutally murder the two young sons , and cut her neck?  I don't know if the neck wound was close to killing her or superficial, but all the had was a neck wound and the bruises on her arms.  The person killed the boys and then left the house. There was no robbery, Darlie wasn't raped, nothing else happened, except the murders.  For everyone asking why would Darlie do this, my question is who would break in and not do anything else?  Like I said earlier, I don't want to believe she had anything to do with it, but so far I'm not seeing anything that proves she's innocent. 

5

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Lisa418722 said:

, but so far I'm not seeing anything that proves she's innocent. 

The defense doesn't have to prove innocence.  The prosecution has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and I fail to see how they did this especially when the death penalty(which I hate) is at stake.  She had a life threatening throat injury that came close to killing her.  Why would she do that to herself?  Why would she kill two kids but not the third?  Why would she not kill the husband?  Her ex supports her, why would he do that if she killed his kids?  How did the sock get up the road?  Some of the jurors said they were convinced of her guilt by the cemetery video, which is creepy in theory, but who wouldn't have a birthday party for their child, they were probably planning the birthday party before the murders and how do you just not then celebrate the kid's birthday.  There are way too many questions to convict, especially when it's a death case.

4

Share Post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Madding crowd said:

If she was tired of being a mom, why would she not kill the baby too? It’s harder to take care of a baby because they need you all the time. She was still a mom.  I really can’t see a motive unless she has a undiagnosed mental illness.

This Texas Monthly  article from 2002  (which is linked from the Blotter article on the PTV front page) suggests that Darin might be guilty himself or involved in some way.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/maybe-darlie-didnt-do-it/

If it was postpartum depression it would have made more sense to kill the baby too.  If it was for insurance money she should have killed Darin and gotten his  $800,000 policy as opposed to five grand apiece from the two boys.  If it was a Munchausen's by proxy kind of thing I'd think she would have grieved in a more conventionally acceptable way.  She didn't have some odd religious belief that the boys were so bad they had to be sent to hell or so good they had to be sent to heaven.  She wasn't trying to punish her husband by killing his sons.

If she did this I agree about the undiagnosed mental illness, because otherwise I'm not seeing it.  I can't see what material/money advantage these murders would have provided for her. 

5

Share Post


Link to post

I've always thought her husband was complicit in the murders. I believe he stopped her from killing the baby and then helped set the cover story up.

4

Share Post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Court said:

I've always thought her husband was complicit in the murders. I believe he stopped her from killing the baby and then helped set the cover story up.

Agreed.  I always thought she had a psychotic break and he stopped it, and then covered it up.

3

Share Post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Lisa418722 said:

Something that runs through my mind with the Darlie case is why would anyone break into her house, brutally murder the two young sons , and cut her neck?  I don't know if the neck wound was close to killing her or superficial, but all the had was a neck wound and the bruises on her arms.  The person killed the boys and then left the house. There was no robbery, Darlie wasn't raped, nothing else happened, except the murders.  For everyone asking why would Darlie do this, my question is who would break in and not do anything else?  Like I said earlier, I don't want to believe she had anything to do with it, but so far I'm not seeing anything that proves she's innocent. 

A sadistic killer would. People often kill once and then stop. 

3

Share Post


Link to post

I just finished watching her story on Grave Secrets.

Edited by smittykins.
3

Share Post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now