ABC’s The Last Defense - The Darlie Routier Case

Forensic Files did a episode on her explaining the blood evidence. Guilty!

I have followed the case religiously since the beginning. I was 100% certain of her guilt up through the verdict, but I find myself less certain now.

I have seen cops and prosecutors run amok with confirmation bias in so many cases in the past 25 years, I feel there is a chance that the first investigator who Rowlett brought in simply made his mind up quickly and that was that,

I am taken by Darren's continued support all these years...surely he would not do that strictly out of marital loyalty? Anyway, I have not watched the third episode yet...I hope something will jump out and convince me one way or the other.

Thank OP, I was planning to search for this. I've never heard of the case (I'm not in the US) but I saw it linked on The Staircase subreddit.

Does any body has a link of the 2 episode? I’m outside US and I can’t watch the episode on the abc website :(

I have also followed the case, and I also do not believe that she's innocent.

I am not watching the documentary series on ABC, but have watched some documentaries on her that were previously shown.

She claims a serial killer Tommy Lynn Sells killed her sons but he was in prison when she murdered her sons.

I always thought she was guilty too. thanks for the post, OP. Have not seen this documentary.

Watch the forensics file episode, the evidence is very clear. Her walking around the house as she was on the 911 call staging the scene, the optic fibers of the window screen found in a bread knife of her kitchen. The blood evidence, Darlie saying that the intruder broke a wine glass but the evidence showed that her blood was under the glass not on top of it. Cero dna or evidence of a intruder.

I love true crime docus, I’ve never heard about this case, I’m going to watch the docus, thanks OP!

the part two episode on the abc website isn't working for me, anyone else?

Remenber Darlie's infamous silly string party at her sons graves 8 days after they were murdered. How nice of her to invite down a local news crew......

Thanks for the heads-up, OP. I've always believed the forensic evidence was pretty cast iron on this case, and those defending her just don't want to believe that mummy did it. I'm interested to see what this new show has to offer as evidence.

There was a Texas Monthly article that made a pretty compelling case in her favor.

Interesting. Do you have a link R12?

Texas Monthly article

Thank you R14

Thanks R12/R14, but the forensics evidence found basically does prove she did murder her sons.

Also, why would the hypothetical person who does not exist, who was supposedly hired to put a hit on her and her children murder the children, but then wound her but not kill her?

^Exactly! What motive there is for a stranger to kill the boys like that. It was not a sexual motive ( in case of a pedo) and usually in pedophile style they are kidnapped or abuse before the killing. There was no robbery, she was not raped, so why overkill some poor defenseless small kids. The intruder doesn’t make sense, not only because of the lack of evidence of one, but also a lack of motive for an intruder to kill the kids.

I read a couple of books about her, and my theory is that she and Darrin got in a huge fight and to retaliate against him she killed the boys.

Does the author Aphrodite Jones still think she's innocent (after she wrote the book saying she was guilty)?

In a show they said that Darin didn’t help her with the kids. I think she was tired of the responsibility and wanted to live a carefree life and also I bet she was imagining the attention she would receive as a mother that lost her kids. She wanted to be the center of attention, she wanted to enjoy life without the responsibility of 3 kids, maybe she had postpartum depression ( she just had a baby) and her solution was to get rid of the older kids.

She reminds me of Susan Smith, but sans the lover.

The abc link for the 2 episode doesn’t work for me. Is there other link for EP 2?

She seems like a textbook sociapath. The fact that her own mother asked her if she'd killed them speaks volumes to me. Saying that, I don't believe in the death penalty, even for the worst of the worst.

They had a pretty nice house too.

She seems like an attention seeking egotistical person.

The youngest son Drake has cancer. Life has not been kind to those kids.

R19 what was the book called?

That's really sad to hear, R26

Oh so sad to hear that the young son has cancer.

Well, R2, of course Darren still supports her after all these years. He knows he ought to.

Darin probably does not want to believe that he married a sociopath/psychopath that murdered their children, and who was probably planning to kill him had she not been arrested.

I found episode 3 of The last defense. Still not the episode 2, but here is 3 on YouTube!

^ yay! Thank you!

I'm old enough to remember when this happened. I've always believed she is 100% guilty. She's a sociopath.

What was her motive? I never understood what she gained from it if she was guilty.

I just watched episode 3, although the docu is biased toward her innocence. The juror statement was really narrow minded and sexist, she was judging her on her breast implants and how flashy she dressed ( typical of Small town judgy behavior, keep in mind the trial was moved from Dallas to a small town) . Also some of the prosecutors questions and opinions, very sexist and conservative statements: for example she was asked on trial if she went to church with the kids? I mean wtf? I’ve seen and read some of the forensics evidence and think she is guilty, but those sexist opinions make me mad and are out of place. But hey it was in 1996 in Texas, what can you expect!

Episode 2 at the link.

The sock makes me doubt her guilt. There's just no explanation for it that makes sense if she did it and was acting alone.

To me she has always seemed so obviously guilty that I'm surprised this is one of those widely debated cases in the "true crime community."

^ in terms of tv series, I’m guessing that because true crimes docus series ( and podcasts) are so popular now ( Netflix style, not just Dateline or tv court like before) producers are looking for scandalous and popular- nostalgic cases to make new series. I can’t complain because I’m addicted to true crimen series.

I found episode 2 ( other link besides abc’s) for people outside US that requested it.

^thanks!!

The last defense makes you have doubt of her guilt. But I’m not convinced yet, but def the defense made a mistake not calling their forensics witness experts.

I remember the case, so weird in the 90-80s there were a lot of this type of mediatic kids murders. Jonbenet Ramsey, Susan Smith, Darlie Routier, Diane Downs, etc

I started watching it today! Thanks for the links, I love True Crime docus. Never heard of this case.

Is the 4th episode out?

Your baby boys die, YOUR BABY BOYS, and you're their mom and you act like that at their grave site? Guilty your honor.

It’s Texas. Who cares?!?

In this link is episode 4!!

Bump

Interesting article to read, where the author points all the facts for her guilty veredict. The show made me think of her innocence but after reading this article I think she is def guilty.

^thanks for the link. The docu was biased but reading the article there is no doubt of her guilt. I wonder what was her motive for killing them.

Does anyone have any theories on why she did it? And what her issues were/are?

Guilty. Forensics blood spatter doesn't lie. She also doesn't sound innocent when telling 911 she wiped off blood and hopes it doesn't cause a problem for crime scene evidence gathering (or some nonsense).

And why would a murderer break in the house and proceed to murder two children and then go after the adult? Especially if they've fallen asleep in the living room together? She butchered those kids.

There is no reason for her killing two of her children and leaving one unharmed. Unless she had a boyfriend who said she had too many kids like the Susan Smith boyfriend.

R54, are you that little retarded girl who always rambles in her post? I don't think you're supposed to be on here.

It's only interesting and debatable because she's a woman and the TV producers have to frame it in a way that she might not have done it.

Her son, Drake has cancer.

She has dead eyes.

She's so fucking guilty. The biggest reason is no trail of blood. I won't post them but there are very graphic crime scene photos you can search for online. Any killer attacking the mom, stabbing two kids, following one down the hall as he's doing the "crawl of death", then go out the patio and through the garage, would have left a bloody shoe print trail a mile long. The only footprint found was hers and one boot print from a cop. But the whole down stairs was a pool of blood.

Her bruises on her arms were made days after the attack. The necklace didn't have to be surgically removed. She was in ICU to protect her from the press. If her wound was an accident they would have sent her home as an out patient. I haven't even started on what the luminol revealed in the kitchen. The list goes on and on If there ever was an open and shut case this is it. We just want to believe that gash won't slash.

That being said the husband was in on it. He was a shady character for years. Can you imagine the wails children would have let out with a knife going into them? She made one cut put some blood on the sock. He went and dropped it off. He came back, went upstairs, and she finished the kids off.

If you have any doubts Google her cross examination. Read the transcripts. How anyone can belief she's not guilty is beyond me.

Excellent article, [R50]; great find! Thank you for sharing it!

My gut said she did it—just something “off” about her during that 3 part “The Last Defense” special on ABC last month (which was edited to make Darlie look innocent and like a victim of the system).

I did feel a bit confused after watching the show, despite the gut feeling I had that something was deeply wrong with her and that the crime scene didn’t make sense for an intruder theory.

The article at [R50] is great in that it *completely* focuses on the blood evidence and is all about the forensics—removing the emotion and “he said/she said” elements from the debate.

I’ve never heard so much detail about the blood evidence at the scene (or those great details about the testimony of the FBI crime scene expert from Quantico who analyzed all the forensic evidence and testified on the stand).

This is pure forensics. The blood tells a story: she did it. Why is anyone’s guess, but she did it.

Those poor kids. Did any profiler look into Darlie analyze her for personality disorders? Is it possible she’s a sociopath or narcissist? Or did she just “snap” one night?

Yeah she totally did it. I don't know that Aphrodite Jones wrote a book on her but Barbara Davis did and then said she changed her mind and will donate the proceeds to her defense. I don't know why she gets all this press either except she's a big titted blonde. Her hubby even knew she did it or suspected she did because you can hear her on the 911 call saying something like "I didn't do it Darrin!" but he obviously can't say anything about it now. All you need to know is the DNA they have been begging money to test points only to her, there was no one else in the house that night. Asshole Susan Sarandon jumped on this case to and propagated the whole "necklace embedded in her neck thing" too. I didn't think the silly string was that telling but the evidence was. I've followed this forever too.

R34 I'm also old enough to remember this, and I agree that she is a sociopath/psychopath and guilty.

I'm not an SJW at all, but if she were black or hispanic, or maybe even a dark skinned Asian, she would NOT be getting all of this media attention, appeals, etc.

Of course you have true crime kids on reddit, most of whom were not even alive or even born yet, who are totally convinced she's completely innocent because of conspiracy theorists and copy/paste BS that people like TurdFather claim on there.

Forensic files episode about Darlie Routier.

Wow, never heard about this case but now have to go back and watch everything.

Listen to Dwyer too r64. I love this guy, he does one about Jeff Macdonald too.

The one problem I have with this case is the husband. I have wondered if he was actually the one who did it but managed to gaslight Darlie into thinking it was an "intruder" in the house that did it. His behavior after the murders was bizarre and at times inappropriate. There is no raw emotion when he speaks of his butchered sons. Was he a master manipulator that managed to throw Darlie under the bus? As for the differing wounds on Darlie and the boys, Darren coveted those gigantic breasts that he paid for, I can imagine him not wanting to stab into those, as crazy as that sounds. Maybe he thought he cut her throat deep enough? And Darlie was so vain, it's hard to imagine her scarring herself in such a conspicuous place. There are so many weird things in this case, the sock especially, someone had to have put it there, it couldn't have been Darlie if you calculate the time that she was on the phone to the time that the boys died she just didn't have time to do it. And even if Darren or Darlie threw the sock down the alley, why bother going that far and risk being seen by a neighbor or something? Why not just throw it out in the yard? So many questions, this is one of those cases that makes my head spin.

R66 I don't think he mainpulated or gas lighted Darlie into believing she did it, anyway if he was involved or had tried to murder his kids like Darlie did the forensic evidence would have pointed to him and not directly to her like it did.