|
Post by legallybrunette on Aug 30, 2006 8:05:43 GMT -5
Watched a 'real CSI' documentary last night on tv here in the UK about Mrs Routier(now on Texas DR). The programme gave an account of the prosecution's case against Darli (hope I have her name spelt right!!) and then highlighted inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence. Turns out the real suspect might well be a third party and Mr Routier. Does anyone have any further information about how her appeal is going and any new evidence thrown up in the process? I think this is another case (at best from the prosecution's point of view) of a woman suffering from post natal depression, not coping and doing something terribly drastic when losing control. Over here, a woman has just been convicted of deliberately burning her 4 month old baby to death whilst suffering from post natal depression. I bet the courts are going to treat her with far more dignity than Ms Routier was treated. I know Routier did some bizarre things shortly after her sons' death but that doesn't automatically make her a killer. There are some striking similarities between the way this woman was rubbished and SP was rubbished to sway public opinion against her.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Aug 30, 2006 8:24:22 GMT -5
Hi LB, There has been a lot of discussion about this case.... you might find this site interesting: www.fordarlieroutier.org/To be honest, I've always wondered about the husband.... what did the show you watched say about him?
|
|
|
Post by gemma20 on Aug 30, 2006 8:52:46 GMT -5
I watched this documentray last night and i believe it was her husband that done it
It says he failed lie detectors and some of the evidence pointed to him and that he had someone there to help him
I hope she gets her appeal and they find out the truth soon
|
|
|
Post by legallybrunette on Sept 4, 2006 4:52:23 GMT -5
The show said that he had taken out an insurance policy against Darlie shortly before the murders and that he was experiencing financial troubles. Furthermore, as Gemma states, he failed a series of lie detector tests when questioned about the crimes. I shall look up that site you suggest - it would be interesting to learn what steps Mr R took firstly to support his wife's defence and post-conviction, what his actions have been. I would write to her to lend support but I expect she already has a whole lot of people doing that. Do you think Maggie in your experience, that the high profile convictions invariably attract a greater volume of penpal mail?? I would kind of like to think that my correspondence really makes a significant difference to an inmate rather than merely lending further bulk to an already bulging mail bag!!
|
|