Darlie carried wet towels to Devon as Darin performed CPR. That is how she got Devon’s blood on her t-shirt.
Invariably, the first response to this is, “Why would she put wet towels on knife wounds?” Darlie and her supporters say it was because she wasn’t thinking straight, she was in a panic. However, she had enough presence of mind to immediately apply pressure to her own wound with dry towels. The evidence, detailed below, proves that Darlie was not taking towels, wet or otherwise, to her dying sons.
First, let’s consider the broken wine glass and Darlie’s bare feet. She testified that as she stood up from the couch, the intruder was going into the kitchen and she heard glass breaking. She walked behind (initially she said “chased”) the intruder into the kitchen, backtracked to turn on the lights, then proceeded through the kitchen again to the utility room, where she picked up the knife. Then back through the kitchen again, placing the knife on the counter, then over to Damon near the family room entrance. At this point, she finally screamed for Darin. Darlie claims she then went to the kitchen drawer for towels, wet them in the sink, and took them to her injured boys.
(Darlie Routier, Sec. 4868-4870)
Mulder: How many trips to and from the sink did Darlie make?
Darin: Probably 6 or 7.
(Darin Routier, Sec. 4293, 4306)
Upon hearing Darlie’s first story to the police and seeing a shattered wine glass on the kitchen floor, much of it in a direct path from the sink to the family room (as can be seen in the above photo), Cron dispatched an officer to the hospital to check on Darlie. She didn’t have a single cut on her feet.
Davis: What was the purpose of your actually picking up some glass?
Cron: To see how sharp it was and to see if it was all consistent with being the same type. I wanted to determine if the complainant in this case had cuts on the soles of her feet. It was sharp…I made a mistake and applied too much pressure and cut myself.
(James Cron, Sec. 2212 – 2213)
No Diluted Blood
There was no testimony whatsoever to support diluted blood on the kitchen floor, towels, throw rugs, carpet, or Darlie’s t-shirt. Blood diluted by water would have been readily apparent to the investigators as well as to the forensic analysts. Darlie’s defense didn’t even inquire about diluted blood on those items when they cross-examined Kathryn Long, Judith Floyd, and Carolyn Van Winkle. Why the defense did not is rather obvious. They knew the answer would be “no.”
The only diluted blood was in the kitchen sink and on the faucet handle. This blood typed as Darlie’s, with a fainter type that could be either Devon or Damon’s.
(Carolyn Van Winkle, Sec. 3183)
Davis: When you looked at the kitchen sink, what was its appearance?
Linch: It was unusual. There were some stains that appeared to be watered down, that had run into the stainless steel areas that were positive for blood. The blood stains on the front of the cabinet were such that when that blood was being shed, it would also need to be shed into the sinks, which were now clean. So it was my opinion that the sinks had probably been cleaned of blood. The faucet and handles appeared clean, but were also reactive for the presence of blood. With the chemicals we use, if blood is present it will pop up a green color, kind of a blue-green. If the blood is fresh it will react very quickly and a very bright blue-green. If the blood is old, you’ll get kind of a dull, light green color.
Davis: What kind of reaction did you get for the samples inside the sink?
Linch: Those were quickly and darkly reactive.
(Charles Linch, Sec. 2798-2799)
In addition, a careful reading of Linch’s testimony reveals forensic evidence under the sink that contradicts Darlie’s many stories.
Davis: Did you have an opportunity to look at the cabinet under the sink?
Linch: Yes sir.
Davis: Was the blood on the outside of the cabinet consistent with having been deposited when the doors were closed?
Davis: Was there also blood on the inside that was consistent with having been dropped while the doors to the cabinet were actually open?
Davis: Do you remember what was inside that cabinet?
Linch: As I recall, it was the usual under the sink, kitchen-cleaning materials, cleanser and stuff.
(Charles Linch, Sec. 2799-2800)
Kathryn Long described the blood on the left cabinet handle as a transfer stain. Someone with a bloody hand opened that cabinet door for some reason.
(Kathryn Long, Sec. 2713)
As explained in Myth #8, Darlie’s blood drops in the kitchen were inconsistent with someone running or even moving quickly through the area. They were dropped at approximately a 90 degree angle, almost straight up and down. Had she been running wet towels to her sons, her blood drops would have been elongated and diluted with water.
Barry Dickey was an audio specialist who testified for the prosecution. He enhanced the sounds on the tape of the 911 call.
Davis: Let me ask you too, during that portion of the tape, where we have the female caller going into the kitchen and saying, “Oh my God, what do we do? Oh my God. Oh my God.” While she’s in this very reflective [uncarpeted] portion of the house, sir, do you hear any sound on that tape that you would interpret to be running water?
Dickey: No. It would have been listed. There was–I detected no sound like that.
(Barry Dickey, Sec. 698)
What Barry Dickey did hear, and hear very clearly, was the sound of the Routier’s dog, Domain, barking on the second floor of the house. One must ask how a dog’s bark from that distance was picked up on the 911 call, but running water within a couple of feet from the telephone, was not. On cross exam, Mosty asked about the big-screen television in the family room.
Mosty: Mr. Dickey, why aren’t you able to tell me what was being said on the TV?
Dickey: It obviously wasn’t in close enough proximity to the telephone.
Mosty: So you heard the dog, but not the TV?
Dickey: That’s right.
(Barry Dickey, Sec. 701)
This was smoke and mirrors on Mosty’s part. Several officers acknowledged the TV being on, but they could not hear it. Obviously the sound had been muted or turned down very low.
Huff: Was the TV on or off?
Waddell: It was on.
Huff: You didn’t hear anything on the TV? You just saw the screen?
(David Waddell, Sec. 84)
Incidentally, while it is true that Darlie didn’t know CPR, Darin had taken courses in CPR/First Aid over the last seven years. He knew, and admitted on the stand, that wet towels weren’t a good idea. So why didn’t he tell Darlie, even once during the supposedly 6 or 7 trips she made over to the boys, to stop wetting the towels? After all, he didn’t hesitate to give her other first-aid advice.
Davis: Darlie didn’t move Damon, is that correct?
Darin: No, sir. I told her not to.
(Darin Routier, Sec. 4391)
Darin’s Conflicting Testimony
At the August 26th, 1996 Bond Hearing, Darin knew only that the kitchen sink had been removed from the house.
Davis: How many times have you met with the Rowlett Police Department about this case?
Darin: Four to five times.
Davis: Okay. When is the first time that you told them that your wife went over to that kitchen sink?
Darin: Probably the second or third time.
Davis: Isn’t the truth is that you never have mentioned that to the police, have you?
Darin: Well, I remember seeing it.
Davis: Okay. But you never did tell the police, did you?
Darin: I don’t recall*
(Darin Routier, Sec. 129)
Darin’s trial testimony, five months later, was quite different. By that time, he was aware of the DNA evidence on Darlie’s t-shirt, and he changed his story to conform to the physical evidence.
Davis: As I understand your testimony with Mr. Mulder, you testified that when you were with Devon, that your wife got some towels and brought them over to you, while you were actually blowing into his mouth, is that right?
Darin: Yes, sir.
Davis: Now, Mr. Routier, that is the first time that you’ve told that story to anyone, isn’t it?
Darin: Well, I guess so.
Davis: Sir, you never did, in your testimony of September 12th ever mention your wife coming over there and doing anything with Devon, did you?
Darin: I wasn’t asked.
Davis: Sir, I asked you a lot of times about what your wife was doing; do you remember that?
Darin: A lot of things I don’t remember.
(Darin Routier, Sec. 4381, 4388)
*During cross-examination, Darlie said “I don’t remember” or “I don’t know” 72 times. Darin was a close second with 67.
Note: One particular supporter website states, “Much emphasis was placed on bare footprints which showed a path from the family room to the kitchen and back again.” This statement is incorrect. There were only two of Darlie’s bloody footprints, and both were leading away from the sink toward the family room. None led toward the sink.
(David Mayne, Sec. 1730-1731)
Darlie inflicted her own wounds at the kitchen sink. She then attempted to wash away the blood, because it conflicted with her story of being attacked while sleeping on the couch. This is supported by 1) the washed-out blood in the sink 2) the large amount of her blood staining the inside and outside of the cabinet and throw rug underneath and 3) the lack of any appreciable blood on the couch where her head would have been resting.
In their June 8th statements, neither Darlie nor Darin mentioned her going to the sink, wetting towels, or bringing them to Devon.The wet towel story was born when Darin and Darlie realized that the police had taken the kitchen sink as evidence, and that the boys’ spatter/cast-off blood had been found on the shoulder areas of her nightshirt.