Routier asks judge to retest evidence - Convicted baby killer tries to weasel out of death penalty

Associated Press ^ | July 3, 2002 | Associated Press Staff

[Illbay]

I don't know why you have to bring gender into it. I don't believe Darren was involved because he is a man or because I don't believe Darlie was capable of pulling the murders off by herself.

Actually, I wasn't confining my comments to this case alone. And you make a really good case for why Darin Routier may have been responsible--except that I do have to question why, then, the authorities declined to indict him.

But I have noticed these kinds of arguments on other threads. One could not have a discussion about the Yates case without having three or four people--always women from what I could tell--declare that HE was to blame for it, that Andrea Yates was a victim of the Svengali, Russell Yates, etc.

And the funny thing was, the only thing I could see about R. Yates was that he was mentally incapacitated for supporting his wife no matter what.

I see the same thing with Darin R. His wife killed his kids, and all he can think about is HER story.

Finally, whether the woman gets a new trial or not, I don't think the "evidence" that these people claim is exculpatory amounts to much. The evidence against her was overwhelming, and her bizarre behavior was incriminating as well (I don't mean just the celebrated "Silly String" incident; I'm talking about ALL of her behavior, which nearly everyone around her commented upon).

IMO, they got the murderer. But time will tell.

[Greg Weston]

they got the murderer

Perhaps. But I would say the evidence against her was very underwhelming IMO.

[Illbay]

Greg, the only thing that was underwhelming, IMO, was Darlie Routier's upset at the death of her children.

The evidence against her was impressive. The only reason they MIGHT go back to court is if an appellate court rules that OTHER evidence wasn't heard that MIGHT have had an impact on the verdict.

That's a FAR CRY from finding that the original evidence was "underwhelming."

[leilani]

Yeah.People think that because guys were hard-core-pitbulls as prosecutors, that they are then gonna be good defense attorneys. NOT! It requires a whole different set of talents to be a good defense advocate. Having a proseutor's mindset will work great as a member of a defense team, but it's a whole new ball-game on the other side of the bench. That Doug Mulder completely misunderstood how the "silly-string" video would play in front of the jury is a classic example. It destroyed their case, & he never knew what hit 'em.