Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Cranberry

20/20

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, partofme said:

I've always thought Darlie was innocent.  She almost died, it makes no sense that she would have cut her neck like that.     Also the sock found down the road points to an intruder.   All of the prosecutions claims can be easily explained away.  Her lawyer was cocky and put on a bad defense.   Darin could be guilty but I think this is one of the rare cases where their actually was an intruder.   

It seemed like her lawyer was arrogant enough to think that he didn't have to do much to win the case, and that his reputation would win it for him. If he had put on experts to refute the prosecution's claims, it may have given the jury reasonable doubt. 

Mind you the juror that they interviewed - wow. Apparently having breast implants is enough for her to believe you can kill your children. That woman was way scarier than Darlie. 

I remember this case from before, and think I also recently saw an rerun of Forensic Files where it was covered. Even then it never made sense to me that she would kill her children for no reason. And if, as the prosecution claims, she didn't want the responsibility of being a mother any longer, why would she not kill all of her kids? Also makes no sense that she would kill her kids with her hubby sleeping right upstairs. Add in the fingerprint, the sock, and the refuted "evidence", and I don't understand why she has never gotten a new trial. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I am shocked so many here think she is innocent! I have always believed in her innocence but was hesitant to voice my opinion because I always got shot down. I sure wish someone would help her. My heart goes out to her and her family. I think the jury got hung up on that birthday silly string tape as they played it several times during their deliberation. IMO it should never have been admitted in the first place. It was inflammatory and had nothing to do with the crime.

Edited by hoosiermom
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, hoosiermom said:

I am shocked so many here think she is innocent! I have always believed in her innocence but but was hesitant to voice my opinion because I always got shot down. I sure wish someone would help her. My heart goes out to her and her family. I think the jury got hung up on that birthday silly string tape as they played it several times during their deliberation. IMO it should never have been admitted in the first place. It was inflammatory and had nothing to do with the crime.

It was only recently that I saw the whole context of the silly string incident; immediately prior the whole family was weeping and obviously distraught. Then it appeared they pulled themselves together to honor the little guy by having the little “party.” I had only ever seen the silly-string part and judged them all harshly. Now I see it differently. Also, I seem to recall that she was (understandably) sedated at this time, which no doubt had an effect on the face she presented. 

I spent years thinking she was guilty until I saw a lot of additional info like the above. At the very least I feel there is obvious reasonable doubt but personally, I think she is likely innocent. 

Edited by Tabbygirl521
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, the police pulling out the fifth amendment was enough for me to say something wasn’t right in that investigation, but hey, she has breast implants so she must have murdered her children.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Tabbygirl521 said:

It was only recently that I saw the whole context of the silly string incident; immediately prior the whole family was weeping and obviously distraught. Then it appeared they pulled themselves together to honor the little guy by having the little “party.” I had only ever seen the silly-string part and judged them all harshly. Now I see it differently. Also, I seem to recall that she was (understandably) sedated at this time, which no doubt had an effect on the face she presented. 

I spent years thinking she was guilty until I saw a lot of additional info like the above. At the very least I feel there is obvious reasonable doubt but personally, I think she is likely innocent. 

At the very least she deserves a new trial if not a complete pardon. For sure after the police pleading the fifth. What kind of horse shit is that?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I think it was just a repeat of the episode of The Last Defense series that aired last year, since it seems that the newest footage was from 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/12/2019 at 1:25 AM, UsernameFatigue said:

Mind you the juror that they interviewed - wow. Apparently having breast implants is enough for her to believe you can kill your children. That woman was way scarier than Darlie. 

I remember this case from before, and think I also recently saw an rerun of Forensic Files where it was covered. Even then it never made sense to me that she would kill her children for no reason. And if, as the prosecution claims, she didn't want the responsibility of being a mother any longer, why would she not kill all of her kids? Also makes no sense that she would kill her kids with her hubby sleeping right upstairs. Add in the fingerprint, the sock, and the refuted "evidence", and I don't understand why she has never gotten a new trial. 

Yes I was thinking if that one juror is indicative of the rest of the jury, there was no way darlie had a chance of being found innocent. If you don’t live your life like she does (the juror), something is wrong with you. Closed minded and old fashioned. She prob would’ve fit in well with the Scopes jury. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I’ve always thought she was guilty af. I never seen any evidence that anyone else was in that house. I do agree that the silly string video was not indicative of anything and shouldn’t have been shown to the jury. I’m not sure she deserves a new trial though.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

For those of you who were following the discussion on Elizabeth Holmes, the former CEO of Theranos, under federal indictment and newly engaged to wealthy heir (No surprise to me.) whose family is worried over him.  I just saw this piece with photos on where the couple had been living.  Very nice indeed.  Man,, 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7037625/San-Francisco-apartment-disgraced-Theranos-founder-Elizabeth-Holmes-lived-fianc.html

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I'm confused on the Joe Guica episode. Is he getting a new hearing, trial, or just waiting on a decision? It seemed like the episode came to an abrupt end without a conclusion. 

I agree Mom seems a little out there (to put it kindly). While the juror she was "investigating" seemed odd to say the least and was clearly lying about his statements of racism, wasn't she basically stalking him? How is that legal?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×