The Case of Darlie Routier

There have been over 290 people who have been exonerated in the United States (i.e. their innocence has been proven). We usually hear about these cases after they have been released from prison but what about the people who are currently in prison and claiming to be innocent. Darlie Routier is one such case.

Darlie is currently on death row in Texas for the murder of her two young sons. She has always proclaimed her innocence. She has many supporters who also believe in her innocence. One of those supporters created a video about the case.

Here is an update on her case. She might have a strong case.

2 thoughts on “The Case of Darlie Routier

  1. Very little is new about Darlie Routier despite what her supporters claim. All death penalty cases make their way through the appeals courts, and each court that has reviewed her case so far has already rejected each of these “new” claims. The only thing really new is that the latest court granted her the right to DNA testing, at her expense, since she seeks to exonerate herself by way of the possibility of new evidence. This is a common ruling in death penalty cases these days, because of the advent of DNA testing, but it is not a sign that she has a strong case for overturning her conviction.

    Like Jeffrey MacDonald before her–and all the other copy-cat-the-ninja-intruder-did-it defendants–she’s making the same old allegations: the cops mishandled evidence, they didn’t look for the intruder, they convicted me for not grieving appropriately, my lawyer was ineffective, blah, blah, blah.

    It seems rather odd that she claims she can’t afford the DNA testing. I don’t know how much it costs exactly but I know police departments have said it costs them about $1,000 per test. It’s rather convenient for her to sit on the right granted to her and not have the blood tested so she can complain on the day of execution that she needs a stay to test the blood.

    The evidence that these murders took place by someone inside the home is difficult to rebut. There was not one sign of an intruder coming or going out of the garage as she claimed but plenty of evidence that the garage had been staged to look like someone had cut throw a window screen to climb in. The screen was cut but the sides never separated to make room for a person to climb in or out so that it was impossible that anyone had used that window to enter or leave as she claimed.

    Suspicion turned to her soon after the murders from several separate sources who had not talked to one another: the police officer who asked her to put pressure on her son’s wounds so he could revive him only to have her ignore him and scream that she thought the intruder was still in the garage; the emergency room personnel who prepared for her to have a complete breakdown seeing her dead child on the gurney only to have her take a look and have no reaction; her doctors who noticed the superficiality of her own wounds and how they could have been made by slashing herself; and the crime scene investigator who could not reconcile the evidence with the story she told. While those suspicions turned the focus to her, it was direct evidence rather than circumstantial that got her convicted. Blood splatter evidence, bloody footprints, fingerprints on the knife, items placed over blood that she claimed were placed there by the intruder before there should have been any blood, the lack of evidence of any intruder, no fingerprints, no blood trail outside the house, and much more.

Leave a Comment