YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Darlie Routier: Is She Innocent? (Part 7)

Darlie Routier: Is She Innocent? (Part 7) — Transcript

by Crime Weekly · 18,264 words · 2,613 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:01[Music]
0:12Hello everybody. Welcome back to Crime
0:13Weekly. I'm Stephanie Harlo and I'm
0:15Dererick Lasser. So today we are diving
0:18into the seventh and final part of the
0:20Darly Routier series. We had a long
0:24conversation y with Darly's halfsister
0:26Denell last week. Uh, we thought it went
0:29very well. Your comments mirrored that.
0:32You also thought it was a good,
0:33respectful, open conversation. Um, some
0:36of you, most of you said it didn't
0:38change your minds. Some of you were
0:39like, "Ah, maybe, you know, I'm willing
0:41to kind of be a little bit more
0:42open-minded about this." But either way,
0:45today we're going to talk about all the
0:47things that that Denell kind of touched
0:48on, which is why Darly may be innocent,
0:51because obviously she says that she is.
0:54Before we dive in though, I know Derek
0:55does have a special announcement. Yeah,
0:57we we know we've been talking about
0:59Crime Con for five years now and it
1:03really is a a great event. We always
1:05look forward to meeting all of you. This
1:06year it's in Denver in September and we
1:09were talking about it and we and we
1:11reached out to Crime Con and we said,
1:12"Hey, we want to hook uh two of our fans
1:14up with some tickets. Can you make that
1:16happen?" And they were nice enough to do
1:17so. So, if you're able to get out to
1:19Denver, we will give you two free
1:22tickets. We want to meet you. We want
1:23you there. Especially if you haven't
1:25been before. It's a great uh a great
1:26experience. So, here's how you can do
1:28it. Very simple. We're not selling you
1:30anything. You don't have to sign up for
1:31anything. All we want you to do is go
1:34over to Apple Podcasts or Spotify,
1:37subscribe,
1:39turn your notifications on, and leave a
1:41review or a comment. And all you have to
1:43do in that review or comment is write
1:45the word Crime Con. That's it. Apple
1:48Podcast, Spotify, subscribe, turn
1:51notifications on, leave a review. Crime
1:54Con or leave a comment. Crime Con.
1:57Stephanie and I are going to go through
1:59them and we're going to pick someone to
2:01give the tickets to and we'll announce
2:03it here on one of the future episodes.
2:04It will be relatively soon. We'll
2:06announce it, let you know who won. We'll
2:08we'll reach out to you. We'll get
2:10verification that it was in fact you.
2:12And then we're going to send you two
2:13free tickets. You're going to get a
2:14digital code. The tickets will be
2:15absolutely free. All you'll be
2:18responsible for is your travel and your
2:19lodging. just getting yourself out there
2:21and you and a friend or a family member
2:23can join us and we will obviously meet
2:25up with you guys, take some pictures,
2:28sign some stuff, whatever you want to
2:29do. We'll make sure that we get you guys
2:30to um to the front of the line so we can
2:33meet you in person and and say hello. So
2:35yeah, Crime Con giveaway, two free
2:37tickets, and we may be doing this again.
2:40You never know. So don't miss out. Go
2:41over to Apple Podcast, Spotify,
2:43subscribe, notifications on, leave a
2:45review. Anything else you'd like to add
2:47on that? No, I I think it's awesome. I
2:49think it's awesome because I know a lot
2:51of people you you were part of the idea.
2:53Yeah. Well, a lot of people said said,
2:55you know, in the comments like, "Oh, I
2:56really I really have been wanting to go
2:57to Crime Con. It's just so expensive."
2:59It's not cheap. It is. It's not cheap,
3:01but it's such a great experience. So, we
3:03we want to extend that to to those of
3:06you who really have been wanting to go
3:08and and haven't had the opportunity. And
3:09so, we're definitely excited. And let's
3:12see what happens. Yeah. So, this one's
3:14going to be geared towards audio. The
3:16next one may be video, but if you're
3:17watching on YouTube and you're someone
3:18who's just a YouTube watcher, this is
3:21definitely for you. Now, if you also if
3:23you're someone who's already subscribed
3:25and already have your notifications on
3:27on audio, you're listening to this, but
3:30you haven't left a review, leave a
3:31review. And if you've already left a
3:32review, just screenshot it. We're going
3:34to be able to see the date, and it's
3:36obviously be prior to this announcement,
3:38that's cool, too. You're in. So, we're
3:40going to go through the reviews. We're
3:41going to be looking at Crime Con ones,
3:42and we're going to be seeing it. But
3:44yes, we're going to do a different
3:45giveaway on the next one, but uh we want
3:48to get some more people out there to see
3:50the event, and we promise you, you will
3:52have a great time. So, that's all we got
3:56for an announcement today. We appreciate
3:57all your love and support. We want to
3:59make sure that we uh show that gratitude
4:02as much as we can. Absolutely. Are you
4:03ready to dive in? Yeah, I'm ready. I'm
4:05ready to get into it. We'll see how it
4:07goes. We'll put a button on it and then
4:08we'll move on to the next one. Yeah,
4:10we'll give our final thoughts, too. So,
4:11yes, absolutely. with all the
4:13information that we have access to. All
4:15right, so kind of give a little recap.
4:17In January of 1997, Darly Routier went
4:20on trial for the murder of her
4:215-year-old son, Damon. She'd also been
4:24charged with the murder of her
4:25six-year-old son, Devon. But prosecutors
4:27decided to focus solely on Damon's case
4:30because his death made Darly eligible
4:32for the death penalty. Now, the
4:34prosecution told the jury that in the
4:36early morning hours of June 6th, 1996,
4:39Darly killed both of her sons and then
4:41staged the scene to make it look like an
4:43intruder had broken in and attacked
4:44them. They said she lied to police, gave
4:47everchanging stories, and tried to make
4:49herself look like a victim. The defense
4:52argued that Darly was innocent and that
4:54an unknown intruder had entered the
4:56home, stabbed her, and murdered her
4:58boys. But in the end, the jury did side
5:00with the prosecution. They found Darly
5:02guilty and she was sentenced to death.
5:05Normally that would be the end of the
5:07story. In many death penalty cases, the
5:10killer heads off to death row and fades
5:12from public view. But Darly is
5:14different. All these years later, people
5:17are still talking about her. And that's
5:19partly because there's a group who's
5:20actively fighting for her release. So,
5:23to end this series, we're going to talk
5:25about their arguments for Darly's
5:26innocence, as well as some of the most
5:29notable developments that happened after
5:30her trial. Yeah. And and and Dell hit on
5:33a lot of these points, and I will say
5:36throughout this episode, I I like the
5:37phrase that she used, which is uh
5:40probability over possibility. Uh and and
5:43I think she was using it as a defense
5:46for Darly. I also think it could be used
5:48as a way of saying that she did do it.
5:51AAM's razor, right? Like, yes, there's a
5:54lot of possibilities of what could have
5:56happened, but what's most probable based
5:59on what we know, based on the evidence
6:00we have? And so, uh, I think there's two
6:04ways of looking at that phrase depending
6:06on where you fall on this particular
6:08case. Yeah, I agree. I think we can use
6:10probability versus possibility in a lot
6:13of a lot of cases, all of them probably.
6:15And this one more specifically. Yes.
6:18because what a lot of what Danella is
6:21saying and like like we said she did
6:23touch on them but it was such a long
6:24conversation we couldn't really
6:25elaborate on all she would have went for
6:265 hours she could have it's her whole
6:28life I mean she's still texting me I
6:30mean she keeps saying I have more to say
6:32and that's why I wanted to give people
6:34an opportunity to contact her because
6:37frankly this isn't the Darly defense
6:39line you know we're we're trying to
6:41cover all bases but yes we we couldn't
6:42do it for six seven hours there's a lot
6:44more she could have said so like we said
6:46today's focusing on
6:48what kind of happened during the trial,
6:50the investigation, and afterwards that
6:52has led a a group of people, including
6:55Denell to continue fighting for Darly
6:58and Darly herself, continue fighting and
7:00saying all these years later from
7:02prison, I am innocent. I did not do this
7:05and we plan to prove it. So, after Darly
7:08was convicted, the court reporter
7:09assigned to the trial, a woman named
7:11Sandra, was supposed to prepare the
7:13official transcript, but she kept
7:15missing her deadlines. When she finally
7:17turned it in, Darly and her attorneys
7:19read through it and found all kinds of
7:21discrepancies. The court agreed that
7:23there were issues, and a second court
7:25reporter named Susan was hired to go
7:27through the materials and determine
7:28whether a certified transcript could be
7:30created. Susan reviewed everything and
7:32found more than 18,000 errors across the
7:356,000page transcript. Now, Darly
7:39supporters say the real number was
7:40closer to 30,000, but appeal documents
7:43put it at 18,000, which I mean is pretty
7:46high. Still pretty high. 18,000 18,000
7:4930,000. Either way, way more errors than
7:52should be there, but 18,000 is what
7:54we're going to go with. That's the
7:55official number. Either way, it was
7:56enough to require a full revision of the
7:59record. After months of work, Susan
8:01completed the revised transcripts.
8:03Darly's attorney said they still found
8:05problems with it, but the Texas Court of
8:07Criminal Appeals reviewed their
8:09objections and rejected them. And to
8:11this day, Darly and her supporters often
8:13claim the transcripts are inaccurate.
8:16Yet, they still do rely on those same
8:18records to highlight points they believe
8:20prove her innocence. So, that's kind of
8:22one of the things here that bothers me
8:24about this case and the the claim of
8:27Darly's innocence is a lot of these
8:29people who are claiming the innocence
8:30will say, "Oh, this is completely
8:31invalid." 30,000 errors in this
8:33transcript and even after it's revised,
8:35there's still errors. But then they will
8:37go to that transcript and use evidence
8:40and information and things said in the
8:42transcript to support Darly's innocence.
8:45But you can't have it both ways. You
8:46can't say that it's flawed, but then
8:48say, "Oh, the parts that I'm using to
8:51support her innocence are not flawed.
8:52It's only the parts that are making her
8:54look guilty that are flawed." You can't
8:55you can't do that. And I understand the
8:57the the the why why people would be
8:59compelled to do that, but you can't. If
9:03it's a if it's a a dirty narrative, then
9:06it's a dirty narrative, and you wouldn't
9:07want to use it in any way, shape, or
9:09form. But they do. Yeah. I mean, listen,
9:12and I'm not faulting for this. part of
9:13the defense's job is to poke holes in
9:15whatever foundation law enforcement has.
9:18And uh the fact that they found this
9:20many errors, I'm sure there's validity
9:22to it. But if you can if you can bring
9:24into doubt the foundation of of the of
9:26the case, well then everything's
9:28questioned after that, right? Because
9:30everything that was built upon that
9:31foundation is could be faulty as well.
9:33And so I have no I have no qualms about
9:36it. This is their job. This is what
9:37they're supposed to do. And they're
9:38trying to say, "Hey, listen. Before we
9:39even get started, we're getting off on
9:41the wrong foot here. this is all wrong.
9:43And so if you do that and it's something
9:45that can be brought up at court,
9:47especially when there's certain things
9:48in the transcript that are
9:49incriminating, like you just said, you
9:51can bring those points up and say, "Hey,
9:52this is inaccurate." However, when
9:54there's things that support her
9:55innocence, you can also point to that
9:57and say, "Hey, see, we told you." So,
9:59you're right. You can't have your cake
10:00and eat it, too. Like, you have to
10:02choose what you want to do here. And you
10:03can't say on one hand, it's no good, and
10:05then on the other use it to support any
10:07part of your defense. Yeah. Right. And
10:08it's Darly's attorneys that are saying,
10:10"Oh, there's still inaccuracies." So,
10:12they're the the arbiters of this point
10:14of what they believe to be inaccurate,
10:16while they are also the arbiters of what
10:17they're saying that they believe to be
10:19correct. And of course, you're going to
10:20see what they believe to be correct is
10:21the stuff that makes her look not
10:23guilty. And the stuff they're going to
10:24say is is a flaw or an error is the
10:26stuff that makes her look very guilty.
10:28So, understandable. Keep in mind, too,
10:31right? Like, reasonable doubt doesn't
10:32have to be one thing. Reasonable doubt
10:35can also be one of my favorite phrases,
10:37totality, right? And it could be
10:39something where it's a lot of little
10:41things that rise to the level of
10:43reasonable doubt. It may not be just one
10:45piece of evidence. So by poking holes in
10:48all of this and bringing into question
10:50different pieces of this case, you can
10:53say overall we believe this rises to the
10:56level of reasonable doubt. So this is
10:58just part of the story right here. Yeah.
11:00And with the transcript finalized in the
11:01eyes of the court, Darly and her
11:03appallet attorney Steven Cooper were
11:04finally able to move forward with an
11:06appeal. and they had help from Texas
11:08millionaire Brian Partardau, who had
11:10been enlisted by Darly's family.
11:13Partardo reportedly spent $100,000 on an
11:16independent investigation into the
11:18murders of Devon and Damon, and he also
11:20convinced Darren to take a lie detector
11:22test administered by a Waco police
11:24officer. According to Partardo, Darren
11:27was shown to be lying when he answered
11:29no to four questions. One question was,
11:31was he involved in any plan to commit a
11:33crime at his house on June 6th, 1996?
11:36Another question was, did he stab Darly?
11:38Another question was, did he know who
11:39planted the sock in the alley? And the
11:42final question was, could he name the
11:44person who stabbed Darly? He said no to
11:45all of these. Partardo is saying,
11:48according to the polygraph, he was
11:50lying. Now, I also want to note that
11:52Darly was additionally given a lie
11:54detector test. However, her attorneys
11:56have refused to comment on the results.
11:59Oh, interesting. Yeah, that is
12:01interesting. Yeah. Um, I think that's
12:03interesting because once again, we're in
12:05a place where you, the attorneys of
12:08Darly and Darly herself, want full
12:10transparency. You want the transcripts
12:12to be accurate. You want all the
12:13information to be out there except what
12:15you deem to not be out there. Now, if
12:18this was a real transparent attempt to,
12:21you know, prove her innocence, you would
12:23put everything on the table and let the
12:26chips lie, you know, fall where they
12:27where they lie or lie where they fall.
12:29Either way, you'd put everything out
12:31there. you would tell us what happened.
12:32If you're going to tell us what happened
12:33with Darren's lie detector, why not with
12:35Darly's? Is it because Darren's lie
12:38detector makes it kind of once again
12:40brings that reasonable doubt where
12:42Darly's might just add to anybody's
12:45suspicions or beliefs or feelings that
12:48she's guilty. If that's the case, you're
12:50not being very fair here. You're
12:52painting a narrative. You're not being
12:54transparent. There's a narrative, no
12:56transparency. And I I this is the first
12:58time I'm hearing about the polygraph
13:00test, but I would ask all of you this
13:01question. If she had passed the
13:04polygraph test with flying colors, do
13:06you think that's something that her
13:08legal team would share? Yes. So, you can
13:11only assume one thing. You can only
13:13assume one thing. That's that's all I'm
13:15going to say here. I mean, I know what
13:16I'm assuming. You come to your own
13:18conclusions, but based on what we know,
13:21if she had passed that test with flying
13:22colors, I think we would have heard
13:25about it. Now, as far as Darren, and I
13:27and we kind of cleared this up a little
13:28bit with with Denell, but not completely
13:31because she still has a very good
13:32relationship with Darren. I think the
13:34whole family does to me, and this is
13:36just my opinion from talking to a couple
13:38people in her camp. I took away from it
13:41that they believe something Darren might
13:44have been involved in, not directly
13:46connected to, but something he might
13:47have one of his business dealings,
13:49something he had going on resulted in
13:52this. what that was. They don't know,
13:54but they're trying to also figure out
13:56the why. Why would they choose this
13:58house specifically and they don't
14:00believe that that Darly had any enemies,
14:02so they're only assuming it could be the
14:04other adult in the house who was dealing
14:06with a lot of money and, you know, had
14:08had some shady stuff go on from what I
14:10was reading where allegedly he had set
14:12up an attempted and maybe we're going to
14:13talk about it tonight, but you see it in
14:15the comments where he set up like a fake
14:17theft of a vehicle or something. He was
14:19he was talk Yeah, he there was Yeah.
14:21Okay, we're gonna get there. Overall,
14:22he's not like this. Nobody's a perfect
14:24angel, but basically what they're saying
14:25is if this house was targeted
14:27specifically, more than likely Darren
14:30was the target, not Darly. Now, I did
14:32find a Texas Monthly article from 2002.
14:37And in it, Darren's asked, you know, did
14:39he take the lie detector test? And he
14:42did not deny it. He said he had taken
14:45it. He had failed it. But he said he was
14:48manipulated by the examiner who spent
14:51two hours upsetting him with a million
14:53questions about the murders before
14:54hooking him up to the polygraph. Darren
14:57also did speculate that he was suffering
14:58from survivors guilt in which he
15:00envisioned himself at the scene trying
15:02to help the kids but was unable to reach
15:04them. That was Darren's kind of So we
15:06have confirmation Darren did take and
15:08fail this polygraph. So it's not being
15:10made up. And by the way, just you said
15:12this was this was funded by someone who
15:14believes Darly is innocent. Correct.
15:16Yes. obviously somebody that Darly's
15:18family recruited to help. Yes. Brian. So
15:21this isn't a prosecution thing. This is
15:23so they're trying to clear her name.
15:25Mhm. So that is interesting. And and so
15:29we have confirmation they took it. Now
15:30we've talked about this a million times.
15:32I don't have a lot of faith in
15:33polygraphs. This is why they're not
15:35admissible in court. It's not a science.
15:37Not a science. It could be anything. He
15:39could have been greatly upset and
15:40stressed out before taking it which
15:42would have elevated his, you know, heart
15:44rate and sweat and stuff like that. He
15:46could have been on medication. It could
15:48have been anything. It's just a little
15:50part of the puzzle and and he could I
15:53mean, this was incredibly
15:55incredibly tragic thing to happen. So,
15:57he's just thinking about the the brutal
15:59murders of his two young sons. I don't
16:01know if I could do that while keeping a
16:03completely cool biochemical signal. You
16:05know, I'd be all over the place. My
16:07anxiety would be up. My heart would be
16:09beating. I would be a mess. So, well,
16:11there definitely there definitely could
16:12be some guilt there. Listen, this we're
16:15going to be taking this a lot in this
16:16episode. If he had passed the polygraph
16:18test, he would have been praising it
16:19about how great polies are, right? But
16:21when you fail it, you're going to you're
16:22going to come up to the reasons why you
16:24failed it. And some of those, like you
16:25just laid out may be accurate. But
16:27here's what I hope we can all agree on.
16:30And I don't have anything to support
16:32this definitively, but it's my belief.
16:34This was a targeted attack. When you
16:36look at that neighborhood, the
16:38offenders, if there were outside
16:39offenders, specifically chose this house
16:43on this day and time. So that means
16:45either Darly or Darren knows something
16:48about this person. It could be very
16:50minor. It could be just a brief
16:52interaction, but there's a reason that
16:55these offenders or this offender chose
16:58this particular house. So if if it
16:59wasn't Darly and maybe even Darren
17:02believes it wasn't Darly, he has to be
17:04thinking internally, who did I cross?
17:07Who did I piss off? Because more than
17:10likely this was an attack on me. They
17:12just didn't get me. So I could see that
17:15guilt if that's what he truly believes.
17:17Well, if Darly's team is trying to sort
17:19of find in, you know, a scapegoat and
17:21they're focused on Darren, Darly didn't
17:24seem to be and doesn't seem to be on
17:25board with that because when Darly was
17:27asked about Darren's failed polygraph,
17:28she said, quote, "It doesn't prove
17:30anything. There's a reason why polygraph
17:32is not used in a court of law." End
17:34quote. And she refused to believe Darren
17:36had anything to do with her attack or
17:38the murder of their children. I also
17:40think it's funny based on maybe she
17:42probably knew what her polygraph said.
17:44just took the words out of my mouth.
17:46Yeah, she's she's probably like that
17:48doesn't mean anything. It's nothing but
17:51hate them. But let me ask you this. If
17:54they're so ridiculous and they're so not
17:56worth your time, why did you take it?
17:58Yes. Exactly. If you don't believe in
18:00them, why did you take it? Because it
18:01wasn't like she was compelled to by a
18:03court of law or a law enforcement body.
18:05This was somebody trying to, you know,
18:07help her out and like like let's give
18:08these people lie detector tests. They
18:10both took them and we know Darren failed
18:14but we haven't heard about what happened
18:15with Darly. But based on the fact that
18:17like you said if she had passed and lied
18:19about nothing I mean that would have
18:21been the first thing they would have led
18:22with. Darren's failed lie detector test
18:24would have been secondary and Darly's
18:27you know passing and allegedly not lying
18:30about anything would have been front and
18:32center. Correct. Completely agree.
18:34Completely agree. So despite Darly
18:36maintaining that Darren was innocent,
18:38her appallet attorney, Steven Cooper,
18:39ended up focusing on Darren. He had his
18:42private investigator, Richard Raina,
18:44look into that angle. And according to
18:46Darly's mother, Raina's questioning of
18:48Darren went on for months. Obviously,
18:50over time, Darren became increasingly
18:53upset. That shift in his demeanor made
18:56her wonder if he might have been
18:57involved after all. And that's when her
19:00husband, Darly's newish stepfather, Bob,
19:03told her something that he had never
19:05shared before. He said that in the
19:06spring of 1996, before the murders,
19:09Darren had come to him in private and
19:11said that business was in trouble. He
19:13was $22,000 in debt and struggling to
19:15stay afloat. According to Bob, Darren
19:18asked whether he knew anyone who might
19:20be willing to break into a house as part
19:22of an insurance scam. He already had a
19:24plan. Once the furniture and the other
19:26items were stolen, he would retrieve
19:28them from the burglar and pay him out of
19:30the insurance money. Now, Bob said he
19:34didn't know anyone who could do that
19:35kind of job. And after the conversation
19:36ended, he didn't think about it again.
19:39Even after the murders, he didn't
19:41believe it was all connected, so he
19:42didn't tell anyone what had been said
19:44until Darly's mother began voicing her
19:46own concerns about Darren. She said she
19:48had never wanted to believe Darren could
19:50have been involved. She loved him like a
19:52son. But when he started getting
19:55increasingly upset about the PI Rea's
19:57questions, she began to reconsider. And
19:59that's when Bob finally told her about
20:00the conversation they'd had before the
20:03murders, and she called Steven Cooper
20:06right away. Now, Cooper passed that
20:08information to Raina, who confronted
20:10Darren again. According to Raina, Darren
20:12denied the story at first, but
20:14eventually admitted that it was true in
20:16an affidavit. Notably, in that same
20:18affidavit, Darren also claimed that
20:20Darly had asked for a separation on the
20:22night of the murders, something that had
20:24conveniently never been made public
20:27before. Now, Skip Hollinssworth with
20:29Texas Monthly did question Darren about
20:31the insurance scam idea, and Darren said
20:33he never went through with it. When Skip
20:35asked if he had discussed the plan with
20:36anyone else, Darren hesitantly replied,
20:39quote, "There is a possibility I said
20:41the same thing in conversation with
20:43people that worked around me. I don't
20:44remember what I said, but there's a
20:46strong possibility that was on my mind
20:48and in conversation, I could have said
20:50that." End quote. Darren said that even
20:52if he did mention the idea in front of
20:54someone who later broke in and killed
20:56his children and attacked his wife, they
20:58did it without his involvement. He
21:00asked, quote, "Why would I do that if I
21:03had my kids and my wife downstairs?
21:05That's the craziest story I have ever
21:07heard." End quote. When Skip pointed out
21:09that the full truth might help get Darly
21:11a new trial, Darren insisted he wanted
21:13to do what he could for her. Then he
21:15added, quote, "But I don't want to end
21:16up with some kind of [ __ ] charges
21:18brought against me either. I don't want
21:20to help her at the expense of my life."
21:23End quote. What do you think about that?
21:26There's so much to unpack there, and we
21:28could do an entire episode just probably
21:30on that, but there's two main points.
21:33Darren even kind of checking the
21:36temperature on a potential scam like
21:38this that is somewhat similar to what
21:41went down? Not really when you think
21:42about it. And then a a fake robbery for
21:44an insurance scam opposed to killing the
21:48two children and potentially killing his
21:50wife is a is a different extreme.
21:54As stupid as this is, and the fact that
21:56Darren even suggested this, if he were
21:59trying to pull off some type of
22:00insurance scam, more than likely he
22:02would have the kids and the wife
22:03upstairs, unless he really wanted to
22:05take them out. The second thing that I
22:08found interesting is that that night
22:11Darly had asked for a separation, had
22:13asked for a divorce. Yes. Allegedly,
22:15according to Darren. According to
22:16Darren, which even though she has never
22:18said that, she has never said that. And
22:19I and I I think we know why or I I have
22:21an opinion as to why because there is
22:24this narrative that's going around that
22:26things were great and Darly was a great
22:28mother. There were no issues between her
22:30and Darren and the kids. Everything was
22:31great. And I wanted to be respectful to
22:34Denell when she was talking about Darly
22:36and her children. But we had already
22:38discussed some of the incidents that had
22:41happened prior to this where there were
22:44some questions about her parenting
22:45skills. We talked about the Yes. the
22:47nanny and the nanny and I didn't we
22:50could have brought it up there but we
22:51were more focused on evidence and I know
22:53if we brought up to Denell she would say
22:54it's [ __ ] right that's what she's
22:56going to say exactly yes but there is
22:57some things here that suggest
23:00life wasn't great for Darly at this
23:02point now how bad it really was Darly's
23:05not going to tell us that because that
23:06would go towards her being in a bad
23:08place mentally and maybe doing something
23:10that she wasn't even completely aware of
23:13because of something that was going on
23:14internally or she was aware of it and
23:17just still decided to do it. But either
23:19way, it's not good for the narrative of
23:22I was in a good place, everything was
23:24going great, me and Darren were fine.
23:26Why would I do this? So, those were the
23:29two things out of that little bit that
23:30you just read that that stands out to
23:32me. Yes. And I also want to point out
23:34that there is a lot of talk about, you
23:38know, the question that Darren did not
23:39fail on his Apr
23:42did you kill your children to which he
23:43said no to and he did not fail that.
23:47Now, I also want to bring up what Darly
23:49supporters say, which is that Darly had
23:51a $200,000 life insurance policy. And uh
23:55the boys, obviously, we've talked about
23:57it, had 5,000 each, and the baby uh who
24:01was upstairs with Darren, no life
24:02insurance policy. So, some people are
24:04saying maybe Darren set this up not for
24:06a an insurance scam of like, oh, someone
24:09broke in and stole my stuff, but an
24:11insurance scam of somebody broke in and
24:13killed three members of my family, which
24:16would give him $210,000
24:19worth of life insurance. Or maybe his
24:21plan was to have Darly killed and the
24:24person who did it took it upon
24:27themselves to attack the boys. That's
24:29what some people wonder and speculate
24:31about. I didn't investigate this case. I
24:34have to assume and I I would imagine
24:36that law enforcement looked into Darren
24:38as well. They probably wanted to bring
24:39down both of them if they thought they
24:41were both involved. And we've talked
24:43about Darren a lot. I know he's probably
24:45listening to this. All due respect, I
24:47don't think he's the type of guy that
24:48would have uh covered his tracks well
24:50enough not to have this come back on
24:51him. And I think that if there was any
24:54paper trail or digital trail that would
24:56suggest he set this up, Darren would be
24:58in handcuffs right now. I don't think
25:00that they were rooting for Darren to be
25:01the victim and Darly to be the bad guy.
25:04If anything, they probably thought
25:06initially they both were somehow
25:08involved and that's why they were
25:09separating them. So again, it's it's
25:12probability verse possibility. Is it
25:14possible, especially with this other
25:16information, if true? Of course, it's
25:18possible, but there's nothing to support
25:21that notion. I mean, this is such such
25:24an extreme. And from what we know,
25:27Darren loved his family. And from what
25:29he's saying, Darly was the one asking
25:31for the divorce. So, yes, possible. I
25:35haven't seen any evidence to support it,
25:37though. All right. I agree. And I think
25:40that there would be some obviously a
25:42money trail of some kind unless as
25:45Darren had mentioned to Darly's
25:48stepfather that he planned to pay the
25:52the intruder from the insurance money he
25:55received which I mean with the murder
25:58trial and things like that and Darly
26:00actually not dying that wouldn't have
26:01been possible but I don't know. I don't
26:04know. It's it's possible but not
26:07probable. One more thing I'll add that
26:09is very difficult to say, but we're
26:11being pragmatic here. If you're going in
26:13there for an insurance scam, Darly is
26:16worth the most money. This goes to the
26:18deviation and the intent of the attack.
26:20There was no doubt that those those two
26:22boys were going to die from their
26:23wounds. You left it open to where Darly
26:26could survive, and she did. If there was
26:29anybody who was going to be murdered
26:31that night for insurance purposes, it
26:34would have been Darly. I mean, I think
26:35Darren's life insurance policy was
26:37higher. So, if any kill himself, yes, if
26:40he was the one who was driving it, then
26:42yes, he would not have done it to
26:44himself. But you're talking $10,000
26:46between the two of them. Again, that
26:48sounds so Oh, god. But that's the truth.
26:52So, it wouldn't have even been enough to
26:53pay off what they funeral expenses. So,
26:56yeah. No, I'm not, but I'm not seeing
26:58it. I reserve the right to change my
27:00opinion if something else came out.
27:01Danell's been texting me saying there's
27:03updates in the case that could change
27:05it. And I told her if there's a huge
27:06break in the case, we'll cover it. But
27:07at this point, I'm not seeing it. So,
27:10let's take a quick break. We'll be right
27:11back.
27:13[Applause]
27:14[Music]
27:16What does feeling safe at home really
27:18mean to you? For a long time, I thought
27:20it just meant a decent lock on the door
27:21and maybe an alarm that would go off if
27:23someone actually made it inside. But
27:25after getting into true crime, seeing
27:27these cases, seeing all the different
27:30varieties of ways that people do
27:34burglarize and and go into people's
27:36houses with ill intent and seeing how
27:39deeply violating that is, I realize that
27:41real security has to be proactive, not
27:43just reactive. And that's why we at
27:45Crime Weekly trust Simply Safe to
27:47protect our homes and our families.
27:49Simply Safe isn't just a loud alarm.
27:51Their new active guard outdoor
27:53protection actually helps stop breakins
27:56before they happen. It uses AI powered
27:58cameras and realtime live monitoring
28:01agents who can spot suspicious activity
28:03around your home, not just inside it. So
28:06if someone's creeping around your
28:07property, the agents can actually talk
28:09to them through the cameras. They can
28:10flip on spotlights. They can even
28:11contact police if necessary. And that
28:14kind of protection, well, that gives me
28:16real peace of mind. I love that Simply
28:18Safe has such great equipment. They have
28:20equipment for everything. The doorbell
28:22camera is amazing. I talk about it all
28:23the time how great the quality is. You
28:25can actually speak to somebody through
28:27the doorbell. So, if you're, you know,
28:28at work, you're not at home and there's
28:30a delivery and and somebody's there or
28:32somebody comes to visit you and you're
28:34not home, you can speak to them through
28:35the doorbell camera. I also love with
28:36Simply Safe that there are no contracts.
28:39Also, no hidden fees, just smart,
28:41powerful security that over 4 million
28:44Americans already trust. And we just
28:46think that Simply Safe is the absolute
28:48best security system out there today. It
28:50is going to give you peace of mind.
28:51Every inch of your home will be covered.
28:54And if you're looking for a new security
28:55system, we do suggest Simply Safe. And
28:57Dererick's going to tell you how you can
28:58check them out for yourself. Yeah, I
28:59actually just bought a new house and put
29:00a Simply Safe system in right away. I'm
29:02not even living there yet. I wanted to
29:03be able to monitor contractors and also
29:05keep an eye on the property. In today's
29:07day and age, I think a a security system
29:09is an absolute necessity. So, make sure
29:12you go out and get one. All you have to
29:13do is visit simplyssafe.com/crimeweekly
29:17to claim 50% off a new system with a
29:19professional monitoring plan and get
29:21your first month free. That's
29:22simply.com/crimeweekly.
29:25There's no safe like Simplysafe.
29:32Okay, we're back. So, we're talking
29:34about this insurance scam that Darren
29:36was allegedly discussing with some
29:38people uh before the murders and the PI,
29:42Raina, he told Skip that he never found
29:44any evidence to suggest Darren had
29:46actually followed through with the scam.
29:48When Skip brought up Darren's admission
29:50to the prosecutor who tried the case,
29:52they reportedly chuckled, noting the
29:55timing. Darly's stepfather, mother, and
29:57Darren had all come forward just as
29:59Darly's appallet attorney was filing his
30:02first brief with the Court of Criminal
30:03Appeals. Meaning, hey, nobody remembered
30:07this in the past four years. And now all
30:09of a sudden, this recollection has just
30:10occurred to everyone. Valid valid,
30:13right? Right. When she's putting
30:14together her appeal because listen, they
30:16don't have to prove Darren did it. It's
30:17all again about reasonable doubt. So,
30:20they're just throwing other ideas out
30:22there. There may not be anything to
30:23substantiate any type of evidence that
30:25would support it, but he made these
30:26comments. So, it's possible. It's just
30:28And you just need one jury member to
30:30believe it. So, I completely agree with
30:32them here. Well, you need the appeal
30:33courts to sort of feel that it's enough.
30:36Yeah. It's enough to get her into trial.
30:38Exactly. And so, if it goes to trial and
30:40they get there, they bring it up. And
30:42listen, I'm not trying to discredit
30:44everything that's been said, but we have
30:47to be honest. I was less pushing back at
30:49during the interview with Denell, but to
30:51me, and I said it in a nicer way,
30:53initially, nobody remembered anything,
30:56including Darly, but as evidence starts
30:58to come out now, everyone has this
31:00recollection of things that are
31:01extremely critical to the case and could
31:03suggest someone else did it. It's pretty
31:05convenient. That's just me being honest.
31:07And I think that um at first I was like,
31:10well, they could just be saying, you
31:12know, like Darly's stepfather could just
31:14be saying, "Oh, hey, Darren came and
31:16said this to me." But then Darren like
31:19did it admit and confirmed it. So now
31:22you know it it makes it more valid but
31:25also does it or is Darren who has never
31:29faltered from being by Darly's side and
31:31and you know saying he believes in her
31:33innocence. Is he saying well if I throw
31:35this out what harm would it do to me?
31:37But it could potentially get her a new
31:39trial. So I'll go along with this. But I
31:41won't go as far as to um you know kind
31:45of say I did it because I don't want
31:47some crazy charges coming my way. Right.
31:49And he he also said listen I I might
31:51have you know put feelers out there but
31:53I never carried through with it. And if
31:54somebody did it it was on their own. It
31:56wasn't because I asked for it. So it's a
31:58it's a lot of just play on words where
32:01maybe he's trying to help her out. I
32:02also think if he was directly involved
32:04he would never admit to this. Yeah. And
32:06it's living in the gray area. So Yep.
32:08which is once again, if she gets a new
32:10trial, that's all they need. That's all
32:11they need. So Raina said despite all
32:13this, he still wondered if Darren might
32:15be holding something back. After
32:16interviewing both Darren and Darly, he
32:18began to suspect that Darren may have
32:20hired someone to kill Darly. He pointed
32:22out that Darly had a life insurance
32:24policy worth 250,000. It said 200,000
32:27some places. 250,000 some places. Either
32:29way, a decent amount of money. Yep. And
32:31she'd been threatening to divorce him.
32:32And apparently this was a common
32:34occurrence Darly making this threat
32:36because Raina said Darren was once so
32:39upset by the divorce threat that he had
32:41put a pistol to his head. So Raina began
32:44to wonder if Darren believed he was
32:45going to lose Darly. Was it possible he
32:48decided no one else should have her
32:49either or if he was like well she's
32:52going to leave me anyways and I'm in
32:54bad, you know, money situation a lot
32:56because of her and her overspending.
32:58Well, let me benefit from from this if
33:00I'm going to lose her either way. let me
33:02benefit from this. But when Skip asked
33:04Darly about this theory, she said she
33:06had never been serious about divorcing
33:08Darren. Darren agreed and added that
33:11Darly had only packed a suitcase and
33:13spent the night at a friend's house
33:14once. As for the pistol incident, Darren
33:16called it dramatic [ __ ] to get her
33:19attention like she does to me all the
33:21time. He said it happened two full years
33:24before the murders. He added, quote, "Me
33:26and Darly, we've had our spats, but it's
33:28never been serious. I've never hit her.
33:29I've never cheated on her." end quote.
33:32When asked about Raina's theory that he
33:34might have wanted Darly dead, Darren
33:35said in a disgusted tone, quote, "That's
33:38completely false and ridiculous." End
33:42quote. You know what I think is
33:43ridiculous? This whole toxic
33:45relationship, saying that putting a gun
33:46to your head is not serious. It's
33:49manipulative. It's toxic. It's a million
33:51things. A gun to your head. Both of
33:53them. Both of them. This, oh, I'm going
33:55to divorce you. I'm going to leave you.
33:56I'm going to pack a bag. Go to a
33:57friend's house. Oh, you're not going to
33:58leave me. I'm going to, you know,
33:59threaten to hurt myself if you do. is
34:01just all childish, dramatic [ __ ]
34:04That's toxic, damaging to them as
34:06people, damaging to them as a couple,
34:08and damaging to the children they
34:10shared, by the way, because you got to
34:12think that that the kids were privy to
34:13some of this nonsense. Listen, everybody
34:15fights. Nobody's marriage is perfect.
34:17But I will say I I think I speak for the
34:20majority of people out there. If it's
34:22getting to the point where one of the
34:23spouses are putting a gun to their head,
34:25that is more than just a spat. That's a
34:27serious thing. Because if they're
34:28putting the gun on themselves, they
34:30could also put it on you. This is not a
34:32normal everyday argument that married
34:34couples have. I I don't It's not like
34:36we're solid. Don't worry. Put a gun to
34:38the head once to kill myself. No big
34:40deal. What? He's admitting to all this,
34:44by the way. This isn't speculation. This
34:46isn't something that he's admitting to
34:48it or he's going along with the story.
34:49Either way. Either way, he's not that
34:52this happened. Yes. So, you know, there
34:53is a lot of uh people out there, Danell
34:55included, who said, you know, all the
34:56information you're hearing, it's not
34:57right. It's, you know, misinformation.
34:59This is coming from Darren confirming
35:01it. Whether it's true or not, he's
35:02confirming it. This is what supporters
35:04of Darly have put out. So, it's supposed
35:07to make her look better, I guess. I
35:10don't know how, but it's supposed to.
35:13So, Darly, on the other hand, she told
35:15Skip that she wasn't sure what to think
35:16about Darren anymore. The only thing she
35:18knew for sure was that she didn't kill
35:21her children. She tried to save them.
35:24She said, quote, "I have been robbed of
35:26so much." End quote. Not just with
35:28Drake, who visited her once in prison,
35:31but with Devon and Damon. Darly said,
35:33quote, "For the rest of my life, I have
35:34to wonder what they would have looked
35:36like, how big they would have been, how
35:37their voices would have been changing. I
35:39didn't do anything, and this has been
35:41taken from me, and it's wrong." End
35:43quote. Well, I mean, it it was taken
35:46from her regardless of whether she did
35:48anything or not, regardless of whether
35:50she was accused of doing anything that
35:52she would have been in in the same boat,
35:54but I think she's trying to say like on
35:56top of having to lose that now I've
35:58been, you know, blamed and and charged
36:00and and everything everything has been
36:03taken from me. Now, the Ruters did later
36:05divorce, and Darren said he still
36:07believed Darly was innocent and that the
36:09divorce was simply a way for both of
36:10them to move on from the limbo that
36:12they'd been in since her arrest. And I
36:14don't find any fault in this. I mean,
36:15she's in prison if if either for life
36:18or, you know, on on death row, what's
36:21he's got to move on and live his life.
36:23Um, and and I don't find that this is a
36:27black mark for either of them. Now, the
36:29search for new evidence to support
36:31Darly's appeal efforts continued. Devon
36:33and Damon's bodies were exumed, which is
36:35so sad, and this was done so that their
36:38fingerprints could be taken, something
36:39the original medical examiner had failed
36:42to do. I don't know why the original
36:44Emmy wouldn't have done that. It feels
36:45like it's kind of customary and part of
36:47the process to to do that, especially in
36:50a crime scene where you've got
36:51fingerprints and blood all over and
36:53you're trying to distinguish whose
36:54fingerprints are these, whose blood is
36:56this. I'm not sure why that was that
36:58didn't happen, but they were exumed so
37:00that it could happen. But unfortunately,
37:01investigators weren't able to get a full
37:03set. However, they did recover a few
37:06usable prints. Cooper later claimed that
37:08forensic testing conducted by one of the
37:10country's most respected forensic
37:12anthropologists indicated one partial
37:14print belonging to an adult and not to
37:16either of Darly's children, supporting
37:19his argument that an intruder had been
37:20in the hallway. Denell did talk about
37:22this. Yes. And we're going to talk more
37:24about this later, but Cooper was
37:26referring to Richard Jance, a professor
37:28of anthropology, who by the way is not a
37:31fingerprint expert. Yep. Brought that up
37:33with the nail. Yep. The defense hired
37:35him to review the evidence in the case.
37:37And according to his own report, he
37:39concluded that the fingerprint in
37:42question had a higher probability of
37:44being from an adult. But he did not say
37:47that the print didn't match either of
37:49the boys or anyone else in the house.
37:51So, the defense was I lying about that.
37:54They're they're definitely being
37:55misleading. Yeah. And if you remember, I
37:57asked Danell about this and she said the
37:58print was too big to be a child, but ch
38:01prince can smear. They can smudge
38:02depending on how they are. So, I didn't
38:04have enough information to push back on
38:07that. This isn't my case, but yeah, this
38:09this aligns with what I I would believe.
38:12And there was a lot of mention about
38:14this print at trial as well, and we're
38:16probably going to get into that. So, it
38:17it seemed like a revelation when Dell
38:19was talking about it, but this is this
38:21this print has been heavily discussed
38:23both in the investigation and at trial
38:26and it wasn't enough to uh acquit Darly.
38:29So, that's something to keep in mind.
38:31And by July of 2001, Steven Cooper was
38:33ready to file Darly's appeal.
38:35Interestingly, the appeal didn't
38:37challenge the legal or factual
38:39sufficiency of the evidence used to
38:40convict her. Instead, it focused heavily
38:42on arguing that Sandra's trial record,
38:44remember, she was the first person who
38:46was who was doing the court transcript,
38:48Sandra's trial record was grossly
38:50inaccurate, which ruined Darly's chances
38:53of a fair trial. I am I missing
38:56something? Cuz that like the transcript
38:59is not what the juryy's the juryy's
39:01sitting there and hearing as the
39:02transcript's being typed. So, would that
39:05really would the transcript being
39:07inaccurate ruin Darly's chances at a
39:09fair trial while the jury is sitting
39:11there and listening to things in real
39:12time as they're happening and the
39:13transcripts being typed up? I mean, if
39:16they asked to see the transcript
39:18afterwards,
39:19but apparently Sandra didn't have this
39:21done in time and it took a while for her
39:23to get it done. So, it wouldn't have
39:24been before the jury made their decision
39:26that the transcript was was typed up and
39:29and had many errors, right? I mean, it
39:32must be a combination of them feeling
39:34like the information wasn't documented
39:37properly and therefore anybody who were
39:39to was to review this information would
39:41be basing their decision off faulty
39:43information. I could see that argument.
39:45Wasn't there some also some uh
39:47allegations about the transcript
39:48regarding the 911 call as well? That was
39:50also something that's part of the not
39:52part of this conversation, but also
39:54where the interpretation of what she was
39:56said and the transcripts provided for
39:58that were allegedly in inaccurate as
40:00well. Well, one of the key issues, I
40:02guess, involved a moment during
40:03deliberations when, you know, the jury's
40:04deliberating, and they sent out a note
40:06asking for clarification on Darren's
40:09testimony, and their question was this.
40:11They said, "Some of us remember hearing
40:13Darren say that he did not lock the door
40:15from the utility room to the garage
40:16before he went to bed. The rest of us
40:18remember that Darren said he locked this
40:20door, which is right." And so, Sandra
40:23prepared an excerpt of Darren's
40:25testimony in response. Copies were
40:27shared with all attorneys. And get this,
40:30no one objected at the time. The defense
40:32did not object at the time. They were
40:34able to see the copy of this excerpt and
40:37the defense was not like, "Oh, this
40:38isn't accurate. They they allowed it to
40:40go through to the jury." So, the
40:42transcript was sent back to the jury.
40:43And Darly explained in the appeal that
40:46at the time no one objected because they
40:48didn't realize Sandra hadn't been
40:50keeping accurate notes. But like if you
40:52had read it, which you should, before
40:54approving it to be sent to the jury,
40:56wouldn't you have noticed at that time
40:57that it wasn't an accurate
40:59representation of what Darren said? And
41:01you're not necessarily saying that this
41:03wasn't accurate. You're just saying that
41:05because Sandra made some mistakes in the
41:10final transcript that she may have made
41:12mistakes in this portion of Darren's
41:14testimony, but you can't say for sure
41:16that she did or didn't. It's kind of
41:18reaching for me. Listen, you want it to
41:21be right. I'm not going to sit here and
41:22say that this is okay. It's not. And I
41:25don't think you're saying that. Well,
41:26they're not saying that this expert
41:27isn't even this excerpt isn't right.
41:29They're just saying, "Oh, Sandra made
41:30mistakes and so nobody objected to it at
41:33the time." But if mistakes have been
41:34made, wouldn't you have objected? Of of
41:36course. And wouldn't you be more liable
41:38to see the mistakes because this has
41:40just happened? Yeah. No, there's a
41:42tactic there. It's like you're going to
41:43go forward with trial and and see how it
41:45plays out. And if it doesn't work out,
41:46this is something you can revisit for an
41:48appeal. But you want it to be right.
41:50There's always going to be things where
41:53mistakes occur during these trials and
41:55it's on the prosecution and the defense
41:58to capitalize on those mistakes to make
42:00them benefit their own side. And so we
42:02talked about at the top of the show
42:04where this is something that's going to
42:05get brought up time and time again uh as
42:07a foundational concern with the whole
42:09trial where you're putting on this case
42:11and as you mentioned they're not
42:12disputing any of the evidence. They're
42:14disputing the transcripts which the jury
42:16used to deter make their decision which
42:18I do think is an is something that needs
42:20to be addressed. The question is how
42:22much weight was put on this transcript
42:24and how much of it was based on witness
42:26testimony and expert testimony. That's
42:29the that's the question here and only
42:30the jury members can answer that. If
42:32they base their entire decision off the
42:34transcripts, I think you got a pretty
42:36good argument. But I would I would go
42:38out on a limb and say that more than
42:39likely what they were hearing with their
42:40own ears and seeing with their own eyes
42:42at trial had a bigger impact on their
42:45decision-making process. Yes, I agree.
42:48So, the appeal also focused on potential
42:50conflicts of interest involving Darly's
42:52trial attorney, Doug Moulder. Cooper
42:54argued that Moulder should have raised
42:56questions about Darren's possible
42:57involvement, but couldn't because for
42:59one day before taking Darly on as a
43:01client, Moulder had briefly represented
43:03both Darren and Darly's mother during a
43:05pre-trial hearing on a gag order. So,
43:07Cooper claimed Moulder may have learned
43:09something from Darren that could have
43:10helped Darly, but he couldn't use it due
43:12to his attorney client privilege. Cooper
43:14said that conflict became especially
43:16important because Darren had both motive
43:18and opportunity. He stood to gain as
43:20much as 250,000 from Darly's life
43:22insurance policy. And since he hadn't
43:24been injured that night, he could have
43:26slashed the screen and carried the sock
43:28out to the alley without leaving a blood
43:30trail. Now, in the end, the appeals
43:32court didn't find merit in any of
43:33Darly's arguments, and her conviction
43:35and sentence were affirmed, but she
43:37didn't stop fighting to prove her
43:38innocence. She eventually filed a motion
43:40for postconviction DNA testing,
43:43identifying nine pieces of evidence she
43:45wanted re-examined, including a stain on
43:48the sock, which had previously yielded
43:50no results, stains on her night shirt,
43:52which she believed newer technology
43:54might detect more DNA from, stains on
43:56the knife, facial and pubic hairs that
43:58had not produced usable DNA, and a swab
44:01from an unidentified fingerprint found
44:03on the coffee table. The Texas Court of
44:05Criminal Appeals granted the motion and
44:07allowed for the testing, but the process
44:09moved slowly and took years to complete.
44:11In the end, most of the results were
44:14inconclusive. The only notable findings
44:16were that Darren could not be excluded
44:18as the source of DNA. The DNA profile
44:21found on a cutting from the sock. Darly
44:24could not be excluded as the source of
44:25DNA on cutings from her night shirt. And
44:28STR testing on the fingerprint swab was
44:31inconclusive. Y STR testing was also
44:34inconclusive. After that initial round
44:36of testing didn't find anything
44:38groundbreaking, additional tests were
44:40approved. This next phase included some
44:42old and new evidence, the sock, Darly
44:45shirt, blankets, and pillowcases from
44:46the scene, the jeans worn by Darren and
44:49the children, fingernail clippings from
44:51both boys, the bloody knife, and hair is
44:53found on the knife. And as far as I can
44:55tell, the results from this round of
44:56testing aren't in yet. This might be
44:58what Danell is talking about where she's
44:59like there's been more, you know,
45:00information coming out, more results. We
45:04might hear about this soon and if we do,
45:06we will update you. So, while Darly
45:08waits, she continues to fight her
45:10conviction from death row. In fact, she
45:12has a status hearing the same week we're
45:14recording this episode. So, her case is
45:17still active once again with Denell
45:19saying new things are happening. It
45:22could be from the testing. It could be
45:24from this status hearing. We don't know.
45:27And even though additional testing
45:28hasn't proved Darly's innocence, there
45:30are still people who believe she did not
45:32kill her sons and are actively working
45:34to free her. That includes her mother,
45:37Darly, and her sister, Denell, but also
45:39plenty of strangers. Some of them are
45:41even listeners of this show. So, to
45:44better understand why so many people
45:45believe Darly is innocent, we did speak
45:48to Denell. Um, she gave us, you know,
45:52documents outlining reasons that she
45:54believes Darly didn't commit the
45:56murders. It was 34 pages long. We're
45:58going to sort of go over um some of the
46:01most important points. Like I said, the
46:04the document is lengthy. It's difficult
46:06to follow. We do want to focus on some
46:08of the main arguments that Denell
46:10raised. Before we do, I want to take our
46:12last break and then we'll be right back.
46:16[Applause]
46:17[Music]
46:19Okay, let's be honest. Summer is for
46:21beach days, long walks, swimming in the
46:25pool, maybe catching up on some of the
46:27true crime books that you've been
46:28meaning to read. But you know what?
46:30Summer is not for spending hours in a
46:32hot kitchen cooking dinner or meal
46:34prepping. And that is where Factor comes
46:36in. And I've been using Factor, I don't
46:38know, since November, I would say. And
46:40I've been genuinely loving it. Factor
46:43meals are chef crafted and dietitian
46:45approved. They show up fresh, not frozen
46:47and ready to eat in just two minutes.
46:49I've had everything from their protein
46:51plus bowls to their calorie smart meals.
46:53And every time I'm shocked at how good
46:55these meals taste, especially for
46:56something that didn't require me to chop
46:58a single thing. They actually have 45
47:01meals to choose from every week,
47:02including breakfast, lunch, dinner, and
47:04even snacks and desserts. So whether
47:07you're trying to hit some summer fitness
47:08goals or just trying to not order
47:10takeout as much or ever again, Factor is
47:13seriously making eating well way too
47:16easy. They also have these like immunity
47:18shots that I've been loving. They've got
47:20uh fresh coldressed juices and things
47:22and these uh turmeric ginger immunity
47:24shots and I have them in my refrigerator
47:26at work because I love just drinking one
47:29around that 3:00 period. I feel like I'm
47:31doing something for, you know, my immune
47:32system, but also it does give me a
47:34little boost. I love the taste of
47:35ginger. It's really good. They're
47:37delicious. My mouth's watering. I want
47:39one now. I'm kind of a little bit like
47:41obsessed with them. Factor meals is
47:42great. I I love it. And for me, what it
47:44does is when I get home late, I'm a
47:45night owl if for anybody who doesn't
47:47know that. So, at night is when I'm my
47:49worst enemy. I go into the fridge and I
47:51order a pizza because that's all that's
47:52available. But having the factor meals
47:54are great because when I think about
47:56ordering that pizza, I'm like, well,
47:57convenience-wise, there's a factor meal
47:59right behind me and they taste great.
48:01So, I'm not really sacrificing something
48:03good just for convenience. And that's
48:06why I always try to keep factor meals in
48:07my fridge and in my freezer just on
48:09backup if I need one at the end of the
48:11night because I know I'm going to get
48:13hungry around that one or 2:00 in the
48:14morning and I'd rather have something
48:17quick and that tastes good and that I
48:19know is not going to be a complete
48:20detriment to what I'm trying to do,
48:21which is always lose weight. Because for
48:23me, especially at my age, the minute I
48:26get off the rails, I blow up like a
48:28tick. Yeah. Eating pizza at 2 a.m. is
48:30not going to help you lose weight. No,
48:31it does not help me. And Stephanie
48:33always fat shames me when you guys
48:34aren't listening. She doesn't tell you
48:36this, but she always says, "Listen, we
48:37love Factor Meals. They've been with us
48:39for years. We absolutely support
48:40everything they're doing. We think their
48:41meals are great." So, you can get
48:43started at factormeals.com/crimeweekly50
48:46off and use our code crimeweekly50 off
48:48to get 50% off plus free shipping on
48:50your first box. That's crimeweekly50
48:53off. That's all one word at
48:55factormeals.com/crimeweekly5050
48:58off for 50% off plus free shipping. One
49:02more time, that's
49:03factormeals.com/crimeweekly50
49:07off.
49:09[Music]
49:12So, let's start with the stab wounds.
49:14And we kind of did start with Denell in
49:16her interview in the same place. We
49:18started with the stab wounds, which I
49:21think has been a main focal point for
49:23Derek because he's very Yeah. You've
49:25been very, you know, vocal about, hey,
49:28the the wounds that are on the boys are
49:32very different from the wounds that
49:34Darly received. So, to put it to put it
49:37bluntly, the injury suggests two
49:39attackers. That's the bottom line. Two
49:42attackers. That simple. or one attacker
49:47who maybe with self-inflicted wounds.
49:49That's my point, right? So, she would be
49:51she would she would be enacting the
49:52wounds on one person and then herself
49:54they would look different because
49:55obviously they're going to look
49:56different when you're cutting yourself.
49:58But if it wasn't her, there's two
50:00attackers and Darly herself said that
50:03she only saw one person. Now, even when
50:04I said that to Danell, she's like,
50:05"Well, she only saw one person." Well,
50:09there could have been another. Yeah,
50:10there could have been another. But
50:11there's no indication of that. There's
50:12no indication of even a second person
50:14there of other than Darly. Possibility
50:16versus probability. Correct. Correct.
50:19So, if you look at those wounds and you
50:21look at the intentionality behind them,
50:24Devon and Damon were stabbed with the
50:27intent on killing them. When you look at
50:29the injuries to Darly, those injuries to
50:32me do not look like someone who was
50:35trying to kill themselves or someone
50:37killed them. Especially if you think,
50:39okay, the first person who stabbed the
50:41boys is also the same person who stabbed
50:44Darly. It doesn't align. That's not from
50:47a cop's perspective. Just look at the
50:48wounds yourself. I'm not saying that
50:50Darly's wounds aren't significant in the
50:52sense that nobody wants to be slashed on
50:54the neck, but when you compare them to
50:56Devon and Damon, they're night and day.
50:58Yeah, I I I agree with you.
51:00Unfortunately, I do. I agree with you.
51:02So, the innocence document that Denell
51:04provided us, it says, quote, "Many
51:07people like to claim Darly's wounds were
51:08different from the boys. However, Dr.
51:10Don definitely calls them stab wounds,
51:13the same verbiage he uses when referring
51:16to Damon's wounds." End quote. So,
51:18obviously, we looked at Dr. Don's
51:20testimony. We talked about we looked at
51:22Dr. Don's testimony, and while he did
51:25refer to Darly's neck wound as a stab
51:27wound, he also used the word slash. And
51:29in his discharge notes, he described it
51:32as a slash, not a stab. Dr. Santos, the
51:35surgeon who operated on Darly, the
51:37person who was up close and personal
51:39with her wounds, he also used the term
51:42slash during his testimony. So, the
51:44innocence document also states that
51:46Darly had lacerations to her shoulder
51:48and right forearm, which were deep, the
51:50exact opposite of superficial in medical
51:53terminology. Now, it's unclear who
51:55they're attributing that quote to, but
51:56once again, Dr. Don was clear in his
51:59testimony that all her injuries were
52:01superficial, meaning in his words, the
52:03stab did not penetrate any of the deeper
52:06structures. So, the document goes on to
52:09say that the autopsy and wound analysis
52:10showed the boys were stabbed by a
52:12right-handed attacker, which supposedly
52:15doesn't match Darley's left-sided
52:17injuries. But, you really don't need
52:20expert testimony to understand the flaw
52:22in that argument. It's entirely possible
52:24for someone to injure themselves using
52:26their non-dominant hand. And if you were
52:28trying to cut but not cut as deep as you
52:31could, you might want to use your
52:33non-dominant hand because it's the less
52:35strong hand and you would know that you
52:37wouldn't have as much strength as you
52:39would in your dominant hand. And so
52:40there would be more of a chance of you
52:41not getting to those deeper structures.
52:43Yeah, I I we can make this really
52:45simple. It doesn't pass the eye test. I
52:48don't care what it's called. Stab slash
52:50I don't care. I even called it a stab
52:52multiple times in our interview with
52:53Denell. Those injuries are not the same.
52:56It's that simple. Just look at them. You
52:58tell me if they're the same. They're
53:00not. And so, you can call Darly's
53:03injuries whatever you want. What I can
53:05see is that Devon and Damon were stabbed
53:07directly in in the vital organs. And
53:10Darly was not. If you were trying to
53:12kill her, you would not slash across her
53:14neck like that. So, can you imagine
53:16someone standing over someone? It would
53:19be harder to slash their neck and not
53:21cut the corateed artery than it would be
53:23to do it. Like you know how precise you
53:26would have to be to slit her throat in
53:27just a way that it wouldn't cut the
53:29corateed artery. You know what the
53:30chances of that are? And when you
53:32consider when you have a comparison of
53:34two actively not trying to cut that
53:36artery, that's how it would look. And
53:37and when you use the two other victims
53:40in that same room who were killed
53:42moments before she was allegedly stabbed
53:44as your as your basis, right? That's
53:46your foundation for how nobody's
53:48disputing that they were they were
53:50stabbed first, right? That's your
53:52pattern of behavior. that's your MO. And
53:54yet this attacker completely deviated
53:56from that in their their third victim.
53:59It doesn't align for me. I'm sorry. It
54:01just doesn't. And this to me is as close
54:04as you're going to get to the smoking
54:05gun and all this because if this person
54:07went in there to kill all three of them,
54:10regardless of the motive behind it,
54:12Darly would not be with us right now
54:14because this person would have stabbed
54:16her in the chest just like he stabbed
54:18Devin and Damon. And that would have
54:20been the end of it. I'm not trying to be
54:21insensitive here, but to me, when we
54:24talk about probability verse
54:26possibility,
54:27it's more probable that Darly stabbed
54:30the two boys and then intentionally cut
54:33herself to make it look bad, but
54:35obviously not kill herself. That's more
54:38probable to me than the other scenario.
54:40So, I I don't I don't think that the
54:43injuries and focusing on those are the
54:45best thing for Darly's camp because I
54:47don't either. I don't either. It just it
54:49doesn't it doesn't look great. Now, when
54:51it comes to James Kron's investigation,
54:53Denell's document claims, quote, "James
54:56Kron was a fingerprint expert, not a
54:58crime scene investigator. He was a
55:00civilian employee of the Dallas
55:01Sheriff's Office and essentially managed
55:03the evidence locker in the inbound and
55:06outbound detaineees when arrested and
55:08released." End quote. And that's
55:10patently false. I brought it up if you
55:12remember. Yeah. Yeah. According to
55:14Kron's trial testimony, you know, in the
55:15beginning when when you first sit down,
55:17they ask your name and then they're
55:18like, "Hey, what do you do and and how
55:20long have you done this and what's your
55:22expertise and what's your education in
55:23this?" According to Kron's own trial
55:25testimony, his credentials were
55:27extensive. He was a consultant in the
55:29fields of crime scene analysis,
55:30fingerprint identification, and physical
55:33evidence. He was a certified latent
55:35print examiner, and a certified senior
55:37crime scene analyst. Crown began working
55:40in law enforcement as a civilian in
55:411958. He later became a sheriff's deputy
55:44and was assigned to the identification
55:46bureau. From there, he was promoted to
55:48lieutenant and spent his career focused
55:49on crime scene investigations. Over the
55:51course of his career, Kron worked more
55:53than 21,000 crime scenes, including over
55:554,000 deaths. He received more than 150
55:58awards and recognitions, and later
56:00became a professor in the field. So,
56:02when we talked about how many crime
56:03scenes he worked, how many deaths he
56:05worked, Danell said something that I
56:07really didn't quite understand at that
56:08moment. I wanted to clarify with you.
56:10She said he was counting some of them
56:11twice or did you understand what that
56:13meant? Listen, I didn't completely
56:15disagree with her there. There's no
56:16doubt based on what she was saying, he
56:19was patting his numbers. There's no
56:20doubt. I mean, a lot of people do it.
56:22Not saying it's okay. Everybody does it
56:23in every profession. But essentially
56:25what she was saying is when someone
56:26would come in to be fingerprinted for
56:29any case, even if he wasn't directly
56:31involved with it, he counted that as a
56:33number for him. And I agree with her. He
56:34shouldn't be doing that. So, let's just
56:36say we cut his number. We know that he
56:38did do that, though. I I would imagine
56:40based on her numbers, he would have to
56:41have done like two crime scenes a day
56:43his entire career to have 21,000. So, I
56:46don't disagree with her her rationale on
56:49that. Do I think it completely
56:50discredits him? No, because technically
56:53he is taking part in those cases. Is an
56:56exaggeration? Sure. But let's just say
56:59for this conversation, we cut his
57:00numbers in half. I was saying to
57:02Shannon, our editor, when she was
57:04putting the episode together, I've maybe
57:06worked at most 500 to a thousand crime
57:10scenes in my entire career. If you cut
57:12his number in half, he's still at
57:1410,000. Yeah, it's still a lot. Cut it
57:17into a third, right? And he's got a lot
57:19of awards, a lot of recognition. And the
57:21awards are subjective, right? Like, how
57:23are they handing them out? But I'm just
57:24saying if you want to cut his number
57:25into thirds or halves, whatever you want
57:27to do, it's still a lot. A lot of it's a
57:29lot. And and I'm by no means the
57:31measuring stick here. I've never claimed
57:33to be, but I think I'm pretty proficient
57:35in what I do. And I can tell you I
57:38haven't worked 20,000 cases. I haven't
57:40worked 10,000 cases. So, it's a lot of
57:43cases. And I think this goes back to
57:46poking holes in a lot of different
57:47things. None of it is just the end all
57:49beall. But just raising questions about
57:52the people who are obtaining the
57:54evidence allows you to question the
57:56evidence itself. When you can't
57:58discredit the actual evidence, you have
58:00to go after the way it was obtained.
58:02This is a common tactic and there's
58:04nothing wrong with it. We should
58:05question how it was was obtained. We
58:07want to make sure that the evidence that
58:09is being reported was obtained properly
58:12because that that's just the basics of
58:15an investigation and a trial. But I
58:17think to say that Kron uh wasn't
58:20equipped to work a case like this by
58:23saying he might have patted his numbers
58:25for certain fingerprints he took, it's
58:28it's it's a wrong approach. Yeah, it's a
58:30once again a little bit of a stretch. He
58:33was clearly very qualified to do this
58:34kind of work. So Dell's document also
58:37claims that Kron didn't find any blood
58:39on the couch or pillow. But according to
58:41the arrest warrant affidavit written by
58:43Detective Patterson after speaking with
58:45Kron, it says, quote, "Although there
58:47are quantities of blood throughout the
58:48room and around the boys, there was no
58:50appreciable blood on the couch where
58:52Darly's head, neck, and shoulders were
58:54located at the time." She says she was
58:56stabbed by her asalent. End quote. I
58:58also find this very weird. There should
58:59be a ton of blood there. A ton of blood
59:02there on that couch on those pillows
59:03where she said her head was laying when
59:05she was stabbed, slashed, whatever.
59:08There should be a ton that she doesn't
59:09remember. I have like five or six points
59:11that I'm going to bring up at the
59:13conclusion of this episode. This will be
59:14one of them, but it's the it's the
59:16reasons why I g came to the conclusion I
59:18came to, but yes, this is one of them
59:20for sure. Should have been more blood.
59:21The document also claims, quote, Kron
59:23also felt that the glass on top of the
59:26bloody footprint was indication of
59:28staging. The blood did not transfer to
59:30the glass, indicating the blood was dry
59:32when the glass ended up there. Also,
59:34proof of contamination of the crime
59:35scene. the glass was likely knocked over
59:38after first responders and family left
59:40the house. Neither Darly nor Darren nor
59:42any police reported seeing broken glass.
59:45End quote. Yes. Kron did testify that
59:48the glass didn't have blood on it, but
59:49the rest of this argument doesn't hold
59:52up. Wedell, the first officer on the
59:53scene, wrote in his report that he saw
59:55broken glass in the kitchen. And even
59:57more notably, in her own written
59:58statement, Darly said, quote, "I walked
1:00:00after the intruder and heard glass
1:00:02breaking." End quote. Then at Darly's
1:00:04bond hearing, Darren testified and he
1:00:06said, quote, "The first thing that woke
1:00:07me up was the sound of glass breaking,"
1:00:09followed by Darly screaming. End quote.
1:00:11So, not only was the glass observed and
1:00:14documented, but both Darly and Darren
1:00:16acknowledged hearing it break that
1:00:17night, directly contradicting the claim
1:00:19that no one saw or mentioned it. It
1:00:22seems like everybody kind of saw and
1:00:23mentioned it. Yeah, she was going after
1:00:24the blood being dried and and not
1:00:28transferring over to the glass. I I I I
1:00:32think again this is another point the
1:00:33glass being broken when it was broken
1:00:36contradictory of being broken before
1:00:39Darly comes back to the room. I I don't
1:00:41see it aligning to me the way the glass
1:00:44uh what Darren hears and what Darly
1:00:47conveys to us through her own statement.
1:00:49The glass was broken after the attacker
1:00:50had already left the apartment or left
1:00:52the house. Why would that happen if it
1:00:55wasn't when the first responders did it
1:00:57and it wasn't when the intruder did it?
1:00:58It was somewhere in between. So, who's
1:01:00the only person that could have broken
1:01:02that glass? Just you do the math. Danell
1:01:06herself admitted that, "Oh, I don't
1:01:08think it was broken when first
1:01:09responders got there." Darren saying he
1:01:11heard it break upstairs. Darly saying
1:01:12that's what woke him up. Yeah. Right.
1:01:14Darly saying that it broke when the
1:01:15intruder was going out of the room.
1:01:16Well, if there was no intruder, who else
1:01:18could have broken it? And why would they
1:01:20break it? To me, Darly would have broken
1:01:22it to wake up Darren. And that's why I
1:01:24said during our episodes, it's more than
1:01:26likely that Darren wasn't involved
1:01:28because that glass breaking to me is an
1:01:30indication of Darly trying to convey a
1:01:33narrative to Darren as well. So that
1:01:35when he comes downstairs, he's now part
1:01:37of this nightmare as well. And we've
1:01:39also talked about Darly's story where
1:01:41she said the glass broke as the intruder
1:01:43was fleeing and that's what woke Darren
1:01:45up. Then she has all these other things
1:01:47happen before Darren even gets down
1:01:49there, which doesn't make any sense if
1:01:50Darren Darren said he heard the glass
1:01:52break, heard her screaming, he threw his
1:01:54pants on, he ran down there. He's down
1:01:56there in 1 to two minutes. But in
1:01:57Darly's version of events, she's walking
1:01:59through the kitchen, she's finding a
1:02:01knife, she's picking it up, she's coming
1:02:03back, she's looking and and this is and
1:02:05then he comes down and that doesn't make
1:02:08any sense in the version of the
1:02:10timeline. It doesn't. So Danell's
1:02:12document claims, quote, "Forensic
1:02:14analysis conclusively proved the
1:02:15fingerprint on the coffee table does not
1:02:17match Darly or either of her sons. Three
1:02:20separate forensic experts, including one
1:02:21from the FBI, all agreed that it was not
1:02:24from anyone from the crime scene." End
1:02:25quote. Like we talked about earlier,
1:02:27Richard Jance, professor of
1:02:28anthropology, not a fingerprint expert,
1:02:31was one of the experts hired by the
1:02:32defense. And Jance concluded the print
1:02:34was more likely to belong to an adult
1:02:36than a child. But that's not the same as
1:02:39excluding Darly or anyone else. Then
1:02:41there's Robert Lonehees who was hired by
1:02:43ABC for a media segment. He reviewed the
1:02:46coffee table fingerprint and said they
1:02:48did not belong to Darly. However, he
1:02:50made no statement about the boys or
1:02:52anyone else involved in the case. And
1:02:55once again, this is somebody who's
1:02:57probably reviewing a photograph of the
1:02:58fingerprint, not an actual slide, not,
1:03:00you know, actually seeing it with your
1:03:02eyes. I I don't know how um accurate
1:03:05that can be when you're looking at a
1:03:07photograph of a fingerprint. It can be
1:03:09enhanced. It might not be exactly what
1:03:10you have there. We do sometimes use
1:03:12photographs as comparisons, you know, to
1:03:14make to make our analysis. So, there's
1:03:16nothing wrong with that, but yeah,
1:03:17there's a lot of the only thing you
1:03:18have. No. Yeah, there's a lot of
1:03:20variables that go into a fingerprint.
1:03:21How would you how would you like kind of
1:03:23figure out what the scale was? I don't
1:03:24know. It would be they do they should
1:03:26put a scale next to it. I talk about
1:03:27this on uh detector perspective. I
1:03:29actually have my little fingerprint uh
1:03:31scale stickers that we if we see a print
1:03:34on the table or on the wall, you peel it
1:03:36off and it's like a little measuring
1:03:38stick right there that you take the
1:03:39photo with. So, they should have done
1:03:40all that. It can be done. Experts use
1:03:43photographs all the time to make
1:03:44comparisons. They'll blow them up.
1:03:45They'll put them next to the actual
1:03:46fingerprint. They'll they'll compare
1:03:48that to the print taken after the fact
1:03:49and show the points of reference. Show
1:03:52the type of fingerprint, show the waves,
1:03:53show the whs, show the arch, whatever
1:03:55you have there. And then they'll make
1:03:57the different markers to say, "Here's a
1:03:59delta. Here's a delta. This print has
1:04:01two deltas. This one had one delta."
1:04:03They find those markings to get up to
1:04:04those 10 to 15 points of making that
1:04:07match. So, it's possible. But this whole
1:04:09this print to me, if there was something
1:04:12here, we would we it would have been
1:04:15more impactful at trial and it wasn't.
1:04:17And a lot of people in our comments who
1:04:19are who who have done a lot of research
1:04:21on this case were writing narratives
1:04:22about this fingerprint and how um it's
1:04:25not necessarily a smoking gun. It may in
1:04:27fact belong to one of the kids or it
1:04:29could belong to Darren or it could
1:04:31belong to Darly or it could belong to
1:04:33one of the first responders who were
1:04:35covered in blood while working on the
1:04:37boys and touch the table to get
1:04:38themselves up off the ground or
1:04:40whatever. And that's how that's how the
1:04:42print got there. There's a lot of
1:04:43explanations for it. Now, the fact that
1:04:46it it's been quote unquote excluded from
1:04:47everyone, that's where I have questions.
1:04:50Was it actually excluded from everybody
1:04:52was there? It's all about chain of
1:04:53custody, documentation of who was at the
1:04:55crime scene. Was everybody printed
1:04:58properly? What were those comparisons
1:05:00made? What's more interesting to me is
1:05:03the blood, right? We know that it wasn't
1:05:05a uh a female. I believe it wasn't a
1:05:08female's DNA based on those results, but
1:05:11that doesn't rule out that it could have
1:05:12been Darren or it could have been one of
1:05:15the boys. So, if I had to guess as I'm
1:05:18sitting here right now, I would lean
1:05:22towards it being one of the boys. Maybe
1:05:24a smudged print or a print that was
1:05:26pressed on that made it look bigger than
1:05:27it was. I know Dell said that wasn't
1:05:30possible. I would like to see an expert
1:05:32tell me that. Mhm. Yeah, I agree. An
1:05:34expert that wasn't hired by the defense.
1:05:35not hired by defense and someone who who
1:05:38could shed more light on it. But I would
1:05:39still lean towards it being one of the
1:05:41boys which may have been a tough
1:05:42comparison because as you said they were
1:05:45exumed. There was probably a lot of
1:05:47decomposition that took place. Maybe
1:05:49they weren't able to get a great print
1:05:51to compare it to and that why that's why
1:05:54they weren't able to definitively say it
1:05:55was one of them. But that's where my gut
1:05:57goes. I agree. I think it's just too
1:06:00much of a reach and it's just like
1:06:01they're just trying to find holes
1:06:03anywhere they could be and this just
1:06:05isn't there's not a lot here. It's not
1:06:07concrete enough. Yeah, there's not a lot
1:06:08here. To make a quick comparison to
1:06:10Karen Reed, think about the differences
1:06:12in what we have. There's a lot there
1:06:15that suggests Karen didn't do it right.
1:06:17There's a lot of evidence you can point
1:06:18to to go, okay, I get it. I get it. This
1:06:22is not that case. This is not that case
1:06:24to me. No. No. There's no it's apples to
1:06:28oranges. Yeah. Now, Pat Woreram, a
1:06:30certified Leighton print examiner hired
1:06:32by the prosecution, reviewed photos of
1:06:34the prince, Jance's reports, and
1:06:36excerpts from Darly's writ of habius
1:06:38corpus. And he testified that the Jance
1:06:40report was misrepresented by the defense
1:06:43and that it drew unreliable conclusions.
1:06:45For instance, the defense claimed Jance
1:06:47concluded the print belonged to an
1:06:48adult, not a child. But Jance never
1:06:50actually said that. He also concluded
1:06:52that Jance was not a fingerprint expert.
1:06:54is an anthropologist and he did not use
1:06:56points of identification to make his
1:06:58determination which at that point I
1:07:00don't even know why we're why we're
1:07:01listening to anything he says. I mean we
1:07:03had a forensic anthropologist tell us
1:07:05Prebble Penny was a woman for 60 years
1:07:08and they were looking for a lost woman
1:07:10for 60 years and come to find out it was
1:07:12a it was Albert Frost a man. So there's
1:07:15just one prime example of someone
1:07:17working in a field that they're not
1:07:18outside yeah of their own by outside
1:07:20their scope. Yeah. And listen, I I give
1:07:23great respect to anthropologists.
1:07:25Smarter than I am. Anthropologists.
1:07:26They're so good at what they do, but not
1:07:30this. Not this. So that would be like a
1:07:31plumber trying to do an electrical job.
1:07:33So Woreram compared the latent prince to
1:07:35those of Darly, Darren, first
1:07:36responders, and others known to be at
1:07:38the scene. Everyone was excluded except
1:07:41Darly, who could be neither conclusively
1:07:43excluded nor definitely matched. And
1:07:46there's more. You brought this up.
1:07:47According to STR testing results, DNA
1:07:49from the fingerprint swab was
1:07:51inconclusive. And why STR testing, which
1:07:54isolates male DNA, was also
1:07:56inconclusive. Lastly, the fingerprint
1:07:58images were run through Aphus, but no
1:08:00match was found. So, Danell's document
1:08:03says Darly couldn't have planted the
1:08:04sock because her Reebok shoes were by
1:08:06the door and she was barefoot. Darly's
1:08:09feet had no debris consistent with
1:08:10running barefoot outside and unknown DNA
1:08:13was found on a sock related to the case.
1:08:16So the DNA on the sock does appear to
1:08:18remain unmatched. In 2015, STR testing
1:08:21was inconclusive, but a partial YSTR
1:08:24profile was obtained. Darren could not
1:08:26be excluded as the contributor to that
1:08:27YSTR profile. And as for being barefoot,
1:08:31I don't I don't I really don't
1:08:32understand the argument here. Like, am I
1:08:34missing something? Cuz she could have
1:08:35had her shoes on and then took them off
1:08:38when she got home. That's Yeah, I didn't
1:08:40understand. I didn't go into this too
1:08:42much because I did see that in there. I
1:08:43thought there was more critical things.
1:08:44The big thing that she corrected me on,
1:08:46which I'm glad she did, was that Damon
1:08:48and Devon's blood was on that sock,
1:08:49which when I give my final thoughts,
1:08:51that's going to be part of my part of
1:08:53what I have to talk about. Yeah. But I I
1:08:55don't think that Darly's shoes being by
1:08:58the door would mean that she hadn't run
1:09:01barefoot. Yeah. I mean, I'm sure she
1:09:02didn't run barefoot down the road. She
1:09:04probably put her shoes on and then when
1:09:06she got home, she took them back off. I
1:09:07think it's I think it's more important
1:09:09to me that there's some DNA on there
1:09:10that's not identified, which could be
1:09:12explained a lot of ways. is not everyone
1:09:14loved my the person who packaged the
1:09:16sock that could have done it. There's a
1:09:17lot of people who could have touched
1:09:18that sock. Cleaners, nannies, you name
1:09:21it. Anybody could have touched it. That
1:09:22DNA could belong to a lot of people. I
1:09:24know it's male DNA, which does raise
1:09:26some more questions, but I I don't know
1:09:28the life. Could have been one of
1:09:29Darren's friends. Apparently, this sock
1:09:31may have been in like a a pile that was
1:09:34used for dusting and stuff. Once again,
1:09:36the cleaning lady could have used it. Uh
1:09:38it could have got mixed up with some
1:09:39cleaning products she had in her kit
1:09:41from a previous home. anything could
1:09:43have happened. We're when we talked
1:09:44about the knife, those
1:09:46crosscontamination things that she
1:09:47talked about as far as the knife uh and
1:09:50the and the having the filings on it
1:09:52from the window screen, she had said
1:09:54that maybe it was crosscontamination.
1:09:56Well, why couldn't the same be applied
1:09:57here? If it works in that scenario, it
1:09:59has to work here as well, even when it
1:10:01doesn't help your case. Kind of the same
1:10:02with the errors in the transcript.
1:10:04Right. Right. Right. So, Denell also
1:10:06wrote, quote, "It is believed the sock
1:10:08was forcibly placed in Darly's mouth,
1:10:10causing the cuts and abrasions inside
1:10:12her mouth." End quote. Well, first of
1:10:14all, I don't know how how rough a sock
1:10:17would have to be to cause cuts and
1:10:18abrasions inside your mouth. But that's
1:10:20also not what Darly said at trial. She
1:10:22testified that she thought the injuries
1:10:23inside her mouth came from the man's
1:10:25hand. And it wasn't until 2008 during a
1:10:28request for new DNA testing that she
1:10:30introduced the idea that the sock may
1:10:32have been shoved into her mouth. and
1:10:34that's when she asked for saliva testing
1:10:35to be done, claiming it hadn't been done
1:10:38before. We've also seen some comments
1:10:40about Darly possibly being chloroformed.
1:10:43We couldn't find any mention of
1:10:44chloroform on the main Darly is innocent
1:10:46sites. We asked didn't seem that high on
1:10:48that either as far as like, oh, this is
1:10:50a thing. Yeah. She was like, I've never
1:10:51really heard that. Like, that's not
1:10:53something that we that we believe or
1:10:54that we didn't seem like she was too
1:10:56convinced of that either. She said it's
1:10:58possible, but again, probable, unlikely.
1:11:00It doesn't even seem like this is
1:11:02something that they're actively working
1:11:03with this thing. She was kind of she
1:11:05didn't really care for it. It's nowhere
1:11:07in court filings, nowhere from Darly's
1:11:09legal team, nothing. And from what we
1:11:10can tell, her team has continued to
1:11:12support the theory that the sock was
1:11:13used to injure or silence her, not to
1:11:16chloroform her. So Danell's document
1:11:19also brings up the memorial service and
1:11:20the silly string incident. If you recall
1:11:22from part three on June 14th, a
1:11:24graveside prayer service was held for
1:11:26Devon and Damon on what would have been
1:11:27Devon's seventh birthday. Unbeknownst to
1:11:30the family, two detectives, Patterson
1:11:32and Froch, had placed a hidden
1:11:33microphone nearby to record what was
1:11:35said. They didn't have a warrant to do
1:11:37this. In addition to the hidden
1:11:38microphone, the media was also there
1:11:40recording everything, which
1:11:44I think it's funny that they would have
1:11:45an issue with the police recording
1:11:48everything without their, you know,
1:11:50consent or knowledge when they invited
1:11:52the media to film everything that
1:11:55happened.
1:11:57Like what's the what's the difference in
1:11:58just having one more microphone there
1:12:00when you've got a ton? Yeah. And we
1:12:03didn't really discuss this with Denell.
1:12:04For me, it's optically it doesn't look
1:12:06great, but I think it's open to the
1:12:08person viewing it. We know the jury want
1:12:11wanted to look at it multiple times.
1:12:12They clearly didn't like it. But for me,
1:12:14with so much to talk about with Denell,
1:12:15I wanted to focus on the evidence. They
1:12:17wanted to look at the silly string
1:12:19video, but not necessarily the audio
1:12:22that was recorded by the police cuz
1:12:25Denell's document claims the full
1:12:27graveside audio was excluded from trial
1:12:29because it was illegally obtained. The
1:12:31document also claimed that Patterson and
1:12:33Froch refused to testify under oath,
1:12:35suggesting possible misconduct or
1:12:37withheld information. Specifically, the
1:12:40document says, quote, "Patterson began
1:12:41testifying but abruptly invoked the
1:12:43Fifth Amendment, halting further
1:12:45questioning." End quote. However, court
1:12:47transcripts show that before the trial,
1:12:49the defense accused the detectives of
1:12:50acting illegally when they placed the
1:12:52microphone at the cemetery. As a result,
1:12:54the detectives hired attorneys, and
1:12:56those attorneys advised them to invoke
1:12:58the fifth when asked about the legality
1:13:00of the recording. The judge reviewed the
1:13:02issue and ruled that the detectives
1:13:03could not be questioned about the
1:13:05graveside monitoring, but only that
1:13:07part. They could still be questioned
1:13:09about other aspects of the
1:13:11investigation. Then the defense brought
1:13:14up that they had video of the memorial.
1:13:15The prosecutor told the judge that they
1:13:18had no objection to the video footage
1:13:19being entered into evidence. But despite
1:13:21that, the defense chose not to introduce
1:13:24it at trial. So, the video wasn't
1:13:26excluded. The defense simply didn't use
1:13:28it. And the claim that Detective
1:13:30Patterson abruptly invoked the fifth
1:13:32isn't accurate either. He gave more than
1:13:3465 pages of testimony before choosing to
1:13:37do so. So, also after Darly's trial, the
1:13:39secret microphone recording was found to
1:13:41be legal. Darly's mother and Darren had
1:13:43filed a civil lawsuit against the city
1:13:45of Rowlette, Patterson Froch, and the
1:13:47assistant district attorney. They
1:13:49claimed the recording was an invasion of
1:13:51privacy and a violation of search and
1:13:53seizure laws, but the court ruled
1:13:54against them, stating there was no
1:13:56reasonable expectation of privacy in a
1:13:59public cemetery. Yeah, I'm not I'm not a
1:14:01lawyer. I'm not a lawyer, but that I
1:14:03knew this one was going to get thrown
1:14:04out. I I as a narcotics detective, we
1:14:06would take the trash from Target's
1:14:09houses when as soon as they put it on
1:14:10the sidewalk and we would take it and
1:14:12once it's on in that public area, it's
1:14:15free rain. You can film anybody or
1:14:17anything in public. You see it all the
1:14:19time online now. All the time, right?
1:14:21You don't need consent. And plus, this
1:14:22was a public ceremony that Darly invited
1:14:25the media to. Yep. Yep. There you got
1:14:28like I wanted And you can't even argue I
1:14:29wanted this to be a private family thing
1:14:31when you invited the media. So, yeah.
1:14:34Now, the final point of innocence I want
1:14:36to bring up from Denell's document is
1:14:38the silly string video. She claims the
1:14:40video was biased and should never have
1:14:42been allowed into evidence. She said it
1:14:44gave the jury a one-sided misleading
1:14:46impression of Darly's behavior and
1:14:48heavily influenced their perception.
1:14:50Denell also states that Darly didn't
1:14:52invite the media to the memorial or
1:14:54party, but according to both media
1:14:57reports and court documents, Darly did
1:14:59invite the press to the June 14th prayer
1:15:02service and birthday celebration. And as
1:15:04we know, she and Darren willingly and
1:15:05openly spoke to the media on camera that
1:15:07day, which did not help their case.
1:15:10Nothing they said that day. Nothing they
1:15:12did that day helped their case. So, it's
1:15:14not surprising that the judge ruled that
1:15:16the Silly String video was admissible.
1:15:18This kind of character evidence is
1:15:20routinely allowed in criminal trials. I
1:15:22mean, we have people's journals and
1:15:23diaries being used, text messages, you
1:15:26know, things that people never expected
1:15:29to be in the public will be used during
1:15:32a trial. Anything and everything. So,
1:15:34it's not something that I think would
1:15:36have really pushed the jury one way or
1:15:39the other. Yes, they did want to see it
1:15:41a lot. Yes, I think we all were
1:15:44disturbed by it. I was more disturbed by
1:15:46Darly and Darren's words during their
1:15:48interview and their demeanor during
1:15:50their interview that they willingly gave
1:15:51the media than I was by the Silly String
1:15:53video. Um, but that's just personally
1:15:56for me. And it is worth noting that the
1:15:58defense had brought up introducing the
1:16:00earlier portion of the video footage
1:16:02which showed a more somber memorial. So,
1:16:04it's hard to argue that one part of the
1:16:06video was fair for the jury to see while
1:16:08the other part was somehow prejuditial.
1:16:11And the thing is, the silly string video
1:16:12wasn't the only no remorse incident that
1:16:16the jury heard about. During the
1:16:17sentencing phase, a neighbor named NDA,
1:16:19who lived across the street from the
1:16:20Ruters, testified about something she
1:16:22witnessed on the morning of June 18th,
1:16:24just 4 days after the cemetery footage.
1:16:27She said the Rudier's front yard had
1:16:29become a memorial filled with wreaths,
1:16:31stuffed animals, and flags arranged
1:16:33around the fountain. Remember the
1:16:35fountain that they had to have in their
1:16:36front yard? And she said that morning
1:16:38she looked outside and saw Darren and
1:16:40Darly playing catch with the stuffed
1:16:42animals. Nlda said, quote, "Darren would
1:16:44take a stuffed animal off one of the
1:16:46wreaths and toss it over to Darly. She
1:16:48would jump up and catch it. Then she
1:16:50would toss it back to him. He would
1:16:52chuck it towards the vehicle. The back
1:16:54end of the vehicle was open and he threw
1:16:55it in. She would jump up and cheer." End
1:16:59quote. H What do you make of that? I
1:17:03don't like it. Uh, I don't focus on this
1:17:05stuff too much because everyone reacts
1:17:07to trauma differently. I've seen
1:17:09shootings in my own city where I worked
1:17:10where a few days after it's more of a
1:17:12celebration than a morning period where
1:17:14they're doing a cookout or whatever to
1:17:16celebrate someone's life, especially
1:17:17with uh gang members. You see this a
1:17:19lot. So, listen, I don't put too much
1:17:21weight on it. For me, it's about the
1:17:23evidence, which we're going to be
1:17:24getting into very soon. Now, Darren was
1:17:27asked about this and he would later
1:17:28testify that it wasn't Darly that was
1:17:30seen doing this with him. He said it was
1:17:32Darly's younger sister, Dana. and they
1:17:34were just cleaning up the items.
1:17:36Um, but I mean I still have an issue
1:17:38with it. Whether it was Darly or Dana,
1:17:41you're why are you cleaning up the items
1:17:43already? You know, it hasn't been that
1:17:44long. There's people bringing stuffed
1:17:46animals to do as a memorial for your
1:17:48children. Like, were you were you just
1:17:50overseeing the stuffed animals around
1:17:51the fountain? And you were like, "Hey,
1:17:52let's go play catch with them and throw
1:17:54them in the truck and then what did you
1:17:55do with them? Throw them out?" I don't
1:17:56know. It just seems a little
1:17:57disrespectful. It seems a little bit
1:17:59like, hey, we really just want to move
1:18:00on from this and forget it ever happened
1:18:02kind of thing. And also, Darren does
1:18:05have a long history of lying to protect
1:18:06Darly. So, I'm not sure we can trust him
1:18:09entirely when he says it's Dana because
1:18:12the neighbor NDA did identify this
1:18:14person as Darly, but let's give our
1:18:16final thoughts and then we'll we'll
1:18:18officially finish up this seven-part
1:18:20series. You go first, ladies first. I
1:18:22usually go first. I'll let you go for it
1:18:24and then we'll wrap it up. I I don't
1:18:26have a lot to say. I mean, I give my
1:18:27opinion often throughout these these
1:18:29videos. I think she did it. I don't
1:18:31think that there's any other scenario.
1:18:34Just her constantly changing stories.
1:18:36The timeline doesn't make sense. The
1:18:38things she said she was doing, picking
1:18:39up the knife, um the knife that cut the
1:18:42screen, being placed back in the the
1:18:44butcher block on the counter, who would
1:18:46cut the screen and then come back and
1:18:48put the knife back before escaping? How
1:18:50did this person leave through the window
1:18:52without disturbing the dust or leaving
1:18:53any fingerprints or leaving any blood or
1:18:55leaving any sign that somebody had gone
1:18:57through the window? It does look like a
1:18:59stage scene. It does seem like a stage
1:19:01scene to me. And why would it be a stage
1:19:04scene if the crime had not been
1:19:07committed by somebody in that house?
1:19:09Now, if you ask me, is it Darly or
1:19:11Darren? I would still say Darly. I'm
1:19:14sorry. I think Darren, you know, I I I
1:19:17would say there's maybe the smallest
1:19:20hint of, you know, could Darren have
1:19:22been involved in my head. I'm not saying
1:19:24he's completely 100% not involved with
1:19:27this, but I think Darly was the main
1:19:30driver. And I, you know, I'm sorry. I'm
1:19:33sorry to say so because I I I liked
1:19:35Dell. I admire her passion. I admire her
1:19:38hard work. I admire her loyalty. I think
1:19:41she's a good person with good
1:19:42intentions. And I don't want to be
1:19:44sitting up here after having a long
1:19:46conversation with her and getting to
1:19:47know her last week and being like, "Yep,
1:19:48I still think your sister is is very
1:19:51guilty, but that is how I feel." And I
1:19:54hope that if Darly's not guilty, that
1:19:57her team and Dell and all the people
1:19:59that are working for her do find that
1:20:01evidence and put it forth. And so we can
1:20:03all lay this to rest once and for all.
1:20:06Yeah. For me, it's uh not one specific
1:20:09thing. It's a variety of things that
1:20:11tell us a story. And I'm not going to
1:20:14elaborate on on these individual points
1:20:16too much because we've beaten them to
1:20:18death over the last seven parts. But
1:20:20here here's where here's where my
1:20:23opinion comes from. These are the big
1:20:24headliners for me. And there may be
1:20:26more, but these are the ones that stand
1:20:27up to me as far as part seven. The
1:20:30inconsistencies with the injuries. Darly
1:20:32compared to Damon and Devin. Talked
1:20:34about it seven or eight times already. I
1:20:36It's not consistent. either it was two
1:20:38different offenders or Darly stabbed her
1:20:41sons and then she stabbed herself. The
1:20:44second would be the no memory lack of
1:20:47blood. So, some people pushed back on me
1:20:49in the comments saying that I didn't
1:20:50understand what Denell was saying. And
1:20:51what Dell was saying was she might have
1:20:54been awake for her being attacked but
1:20:56just not remembered it or blacked it out
1:20:57psychologically.
1:20:59I don't believe that. I know it does
1:21:01happen, but I don't believe that was the
1:21:03case here. She had such a vivid memory
1:21:04afterwards. It usually would take a
1:21:05little. The fact that she remembers
1:21:07everything but that is convenient in my
1:21:10opinion. But let's just say for the sake
1:21:12of this conversation, I do believe her.
1:21:15It still doesn't explain how her throat
1:21:16was slashed and yet there's very to
1:21:19little blood on the couch. So even if
1:21:21she didn't remember it happening, there
1:21:23would still be forensic evidence to
1:21:25support it. So not only do you not have
1:21:26a recollection of it, but you also don't
1:21:29have the evidence. To me, that says she
1:21:31wasn't attacked on the couch. That's my
1:21:33opinion. the fibers on the knife. I know
1:21:35that Denell put forward some doubt with
1:21:37that and how it could be explained as
1:21:38far as crosscontamination.
1:21:40This in it of itself would not be a
1:21:42smoking gun, but on top of everything
1:21:44else, I think it also tells a story that
1:21:46the same knife used to cut the window
1:21:49was the knife used that was found in the
1:21:51butcher block, the broken glass. The
1:21:53broken glass, it aligns with what Darren
1:21:55said. It doesn't align with what Darly
1:21:57said as far as it being broken as she
1:21:59was pursuing the attacker. It was It
1:22:02appears to be broken after the attacker
1:22:04had already left, which means that if it
1:22:06wasn't Darren, it could only be Darly.
1:22:10The knife on the floor, right? There's
1:22:12this impression of a knife on the floor
1:22:14and yet it's back in the butcher block.
1:22:15She said the knife was found near the
1:22:18utility room, the garage, and yet
1:22:19there's, I believe, a mark on the carpet
1:22:21that shows the knife had maybe been put
1:22:23down at one point and then put in the
1:22:24butcher block. That's inconsistent in
1:22:26what she with what Darly has said. I
1:22:29think Denell pushed back and said that
1:22:30the knife impression on the ground
1:22:32wasn't the same as the knife found in
1:22:33the butcher block. I have seen multiple
1:22:35reports that dispute that that it is
1:22:37exactly the exact same impression of the
1:22:39knife that was found in the butcher
1:22:41block. Then we also have the blood from
1:22:43one of her boys found on Darly's shirt.
1:22:45Cast off, not cast off, how it got
1:22:47there. I'm not going to lie to you guys.
1:22:49I can't explain it. But the fact that
1:22:51her son's blood is on the back of her
1:22:52shirt in totality with everything else,
1:22:55not great. And then there's the sock. I
1:22:59concede that the sock is a question mark
1:23:01for me. But I actually think the fact
1:23:03that Devon and Damon's blood is on that
1:23:06sock, but not hers when she was slashed
1:23:09or stabbed just around the same time of
1:23:11them is extremely telling. And what do I
1:23:14mean by that? Well, based on all of
1:23:15those facts, here's what I think
1:23:17happened. I'm not going to get into the
1:23:20why because we can't rationalize the
1:23:22irrational. I'm just going to talk about
1:23:23the evidence, what I think happened. I
1:23:25can't tell you why she did it. Only
1:23:27Darly knows that. Okay. What I think
1:23:29happened is Darly's downstairs. She
1:23:33stabs Damon and Devon. At that point,
1:23:36she takes the sock, she cuts the screen,
1:23:40she runs down the street. Now that the
1:23:41blood from Damon and Devon is on the
1:23:43sock, she throws it down the road to to
1:23:45show a red herring, to to put something
1:23:46out there that may suggest this whole
1:23:49fleeing attacker theory is viable. She
1:23:52comes back to the house, you know, she
1:23:54picks up the knife, she's considering
1:23:55what she's going to do. She realizes she
1:23:57has to have some injuries as well. She's
1:23:59standing over the sink and she cuts
1:24:02herself multiple times. Immediately puts
1:24:04the knife back in the butcher block,
1:24:06then breaks the glass, and at that
1:24:09point, Darren comes downstairs and joins
1:24:11this story. And from there, you have
1:24:13whatever you have. But, um, that's what
1:24:15I think makes the most sense. I
1:24:18challenge everyone who's who's coming
1:24:19from an objective perspective to look at
1:24:21that and compare it to the evidence and
1:24:24say that's not the most probable
1:24:25scenario based on the evidence. That's
1:24:27where I fall on it. I respect the hell
1:24:29out of Denell. I said it to her face
1:24:31when we were recording. I believe she
1:24:33believes what she's saying and I do
1:24:35acknowledge that some of the things she
1:24:36pointed out do raise questions, but not
1:24:40to the level of reasonable doubt. And
1:24:41I'm not even talking about a trial. I'm
1:24:43not even talking about getting to that
1:24:45level. I'm talking about what I
1:24:47personally believe. And what I
1:24:48personally believe is that Darly killed
1:24:50her two sons. It's it's unfortunate.
1:24:52Yeah. But it's it's it's what I believe.
1:24:54And I listen to everything you said. I
1:24:56did my own research. I listened to you
1:24:58guys in the comments as well. And to me,
1:25:02this case is is pretty clear-cut if
1:25:04we're being honest. This isn't something
1:25:06that I'm I'm on the fence about. I'm not
1:25:08on the fence about it either. I mean, I
1:25:11I want to give everyone the benefit of
1:25:12the doubt. I just can't see a motive
1:25:15that anybody would have to do this. I
1:25:17don't think that the defense and Darly's
1:25:21arguments are strong enough to even sort
1:25:24of
1:25:26kind of pull me in that direction and
1:25:28the the prosecution and the state and
1:25:31law enforcement's case were so strong.
1:25:33Yeah. The only final thing I'll say, and
1:25:36I I stand by this with Scott Peterson as
1:25:38well, although I believe this, and I
1:25:41think it's pretty the evidence is pretty
1:25:43overwhelming,
1:25:44because there's just that little bit of
1:25:46doubt. I can't say with 100% certainty,
1:25:50I don't think the death penalty should
1:25:51be in play here. I know that she's Is
1:25:53she still currently on death row? I
1:25:56don't know. But either way, probably
1:25:59not. There's so many appeals. I I hope
1:26:02she isn't because any case, and I firmly
1:26:04believe this, I'm not against the death
1:26:05penalty, but unless we know with 100%
1:26:08certainty, i.e. a video, a confession,
1:26:11whatever it might be, you can't be
1:26:13killing people. You can't do it. You
1:26:15have to know with 100% certainty. So,
1:26:17the fact that I'm saying I'm not 100%
1:26:20certain, to me, that would be enough to
1:26:22take the death penalty off the table. I
1:26:24believe she is still on death row, and I
1:26:27and I I don't agree with that. But I
1:26:29mean, they wouldn't do anything because
1:26:31she's got so many appeals, right? And I
1:26:33and I I hope she serves the rest of her
1:26:35time, her life in prison, but I I don't
1:26:37think she should be killed. Now, they
1:26:39did say that if I believe that they said
1:26:41it would be her her her death penalty
1:26:43sentence would be commuted to life in
1:26:45prison if she confessed Yeah. that she
1:26:48had had killed her her two sons. But she
1:26:51refuses to do that every single time. I
1:26:54mean, no matter where you land after
1:26:55hearing the story, I think we can
1:26:57obviously all agree on one thing. The
1:27:00murders of Damon and Devon Routier were
1:27:01a devastating tragedy. Those two little
1:27:04boys did not deserve to be brutally
1:27:06attacked in the one place they should
1:27:07have been safest, their own home, laying
1:27:09next to their own mother. And no matter
1:27:10who you believe is responsible, the fact
1:27:12remains that two families have spent
1:27:14nearly 30 years without Devon and Damon.
1:27:16They've missed birthdays and
1:27:18graduations, holidays, and everyday
1:27:19moments. Their absence has been felt in
1:27:21every corner of the lives they left
1:27:23behind. And everyone involved in this
1:27:25case has been changed forever. All
1:27:27because someone brutally stabbed two
1:27:30sleeping children. And we also have a a
1:27:34young man now who was a baby at the
1:27:36time. And yeah, he never got to even,
1:27:39you know, he met his two older brothers,
1:27:41but he was a baby. He would have no
1:27:42memory. He never got to know who they
1:27:44were. And really, he never even got to
1:27:46know his mother. Positive news. He's
1:27:47apparently doing great. Yeah, I I hope
1:27:49so. And I've been talking to Dell and by
1:27:51the way with Dell, we're we're still
1:27:53texting and she said there's been some
1:27:54developments and I I told her right in
1:27:56the text message she has it to screen
1:27:58save. Uh I said listen, if there's
1:28:00something that happens in that case
1:28:01where it's critical to this
1:28:03investigation and it changes people's
1:28:05minds, we'll absolutely cover it. We're
1:28:07not the prosecution. We have no skin in
1:28:10the game. So if that if that comes to
1:28:11fruition, we'll be the first ones
1:28:13letting you guys know about it. Yeah,
1:28:15absolutely. and we will keep you updated
1:28:17and we'll keep, you know, we'll any
1:28:19anything that pops up in here, we will
1:28:21keep an eye out. Listen, this was a a
1:28:23great series. Great job with it. I
1:28:25thought the story was told well. I think
1:28:27we all the comments that we've been
1:28:29getting on this video and also on the
1:28:31audio. Thank you so much. We we really
1:28:33try to step it up each and every time we
1:28:35cover a case like this. This was
1:28:37something different for us. We we hope
1:28:39we can do it again in the future. We
1:28:40love the feedback, both the positive and
1:28:42the negative. And we're always trying to
1:28:44do the best we can for you guys. And
1:28:46we're trying to be different, and we're
1:28:47trying to be innovative in a way where
1:28:50we're telling this these stories from an
1:28:52investigative perspective, but also from
1:28:54a storytelling perspective, so you're
1:28:56getting both sides of it. And I think
1:28:57Dell was critical to that and and we
1:29:00appreciate her so much for coming on.
1:29:02Um, but yeah, we we're going to wrap
1:29:03this series up, seven parts, more than
1:29:05we expected. Uh, and we appreciate you
1:29:08guys coming along for the ride. We'll be
1:29:10back next week with a new series. We're
1:29:12still talking about it. We have some
1:29:14ideas. We're going to change it up.
1:29:15Maybe something a little bit more, I
1:29:17guess I would use this word carefully,
1:29:19but light. It's not light at all. To me,
1:29:23it's not light at all. Yeah. Based on
1:29:25what you're considering, it's not light.
1:29:27So, it's probably the wrong choice of
1:29:29words. But the children in this one, the
1:29:32way it happened, I think, is what's the
1:29:34worst part for me because you you think
1:29:36about it. They were awake and aware of
1:29:38what was going on.
1:29:39which is um just something I never want
1:29:41to think about again if I don't have to.
1:29:42But um yeah, seriously, as always, we
1:29:45appreciate you guys being with us from
1:29:47the beginning to the end for the whole
1:29:49almost 14 hours of coverage we've done
1:29:52on this case. We can't thank you guys
1:29:54enough, everyone. Stay safe out there.
1:29:56We'll see you next week. Bye.
1:29:59[Music]

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Darlie Routier: Is She Innocent? (Part 7) by Crime Weekly, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 18,264 words across 2,613 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.