Online Killers by Christopher Barry-Dee;Steven Morris Page A
Authors: Christopher Barry-Dee;Steven Morris
Ads: Link
they examined every entry point to the entire home for other indications of breaking and entering.
They looked for other blood trails and found nothing. Why, the police asked themselves, didn’t the intruder just pull off the screen, as burglars normally do?
Then Charles Linch, Dallas County’s premier trace-evidence analyst, dropped a bombshell: he found a bread knife in the kitchen drawer. On the serrated blade he discovered a nearly invisible fiber, 60 microns long, made of fiberglass coated with rubber. Using a microscope, Linch determined that the fiber found on the bread knife matched in every respect the composition of the fiberglass in the mesh screen cut by the so-called intruder. If this was the knife used to cut the screen, and there is no doubt that it was, common sense tells us that the screen was cut from inside the house, not by the intruder from the outside.
This is not Star Trek . The intruder was not beamed into the house, where he searched for a bread knife, then beamed back outside to cut the screen, to climb through, replace the bread knife, kill the boys, attack the mother and flee. No! Only someone already inside the house, someone who knew where a suitable knife was—one of the parents—could have cut the screen and placed the knife back in the drawer.
The police considered every single other option, but still the window screen seemed an unlikely escape route even though Darlie was insistent that this was the way the killer left the house.
If an intruder had entered and escaped through this slash in the screen, he would have left some trace of his doing so—perhaps a human hair, a fiber from his clothing or a blood
trace—but nothing was found. The dust on the sill was undisturbed, there were no handprints, bloody or otherwise, around the window—odd, since the killer, in forcing his way through the window, would have had to hang on to the walls for balance, and yet not a boot- or shoeprint was found in the soft mulch outside!
All of this led the police to conclude that the trail of blood leading to the window screen was a red herring. Someone was trying to deceive them into believing that the killer was an intruder when no intruder had ever existed. But who would try to deceive them? If the intruder did not exist, and there is not a shred of evidence—apart from Darlie Routier’s statement—that there was one, Darlie Routier was lying. By “arranging” the crime scene and scattering red herrings around, she was trying to divert suspicion away from herself.
In the entertainment room where, according to Darlie, she struggled with her attacker, James Cron found little evidence of a melee having taken place. The lampshade was askew and an expensive flower arrangement lay beside the coffee table. There was nothing more out of place. He found, in fact, the fragile stems of the flowers unbroken, as if the arrangement hadn’t fallen but been placed there. Once again, someone was trying to deceive the eye. But there was even more.
Atop the utility room work surface, close to the sink, sat Darlie’s purse, which appeared in order and undisturbed. Several pieces of jewelry—rings, a bracelet and a watch—were laid out neatly and untouched. If the alleged intruder′s motive had been robbery, he would have seen the jewelry when he washed his hands and stolen it. Therefore, it was obvious that, before cutting her own throat and injuring herself, Darlie had removed her jewelry to protect it from blood contamination or possible
damage. It was a repeat of the staged scene in the murder room: items had been carefully placed to avoid damaging them, and even a bloodstain on the couch had been wiped away.
Darlie Routier had inflicted her own injuries at the sink!
Everything the crime-scene experts saw at the crime scene disturbed them. The lack of a blood trail away from the home, coupled with virtually no signs of a struggle, bothered them most. The entire picture before them had been carefully
They looked for other blood trails and found nothing. Why, the police asked themselves, didn’t the intruder just pull off the screen, as burglars normally do?
Then Charles Linch, Dallas County’s premier trace-evidence analyst, dropped a bombshell: he found a bread knife in the kitchen drawer. On the serrated blade he discovered a nearly invisible fiber, 60 microns long, made of fiberglass coated with rubber. Using a microscope, Linch determined that the fiber found on the bread knife matched in every respect the composition of the fiberglass in the mesh screen cut by the so-called intruder. If this was the knife used to cut the screen, and there is no doubt that it was, common sense tells us that the screen was cut from inside the house, not by the intruder from the outside.
This is not Star Trek . The intruder was not beamed into the house, where he searched for a bread knife, then beamed back outside to cut the screen, to climb through, replace the bread knife, kill the boys, attack the mother and flee. No! Only someone already inside the house, someone who knew where a suitable knife was—one of the parents—could have cut the screen and placed the knife back in the drawer.
The police considered every single other option, but still the window screen seemed an unlikely escape route even though Darlie was insistent that this was the way the killer left the house.
If an intruder had entered and escaped through this slash in the screen, he would have left some trace of his doing so—perhaps a human hair, a fiber from his clothing or a blood
trace—but nothing was found. The dust on the sill was undisturbed, there were no handprints, bloody or otherwise, around the window—odd, since the killer, in forcing his way through the window, would have had to hang on to the walls for balance, and yet not a boot- or shoeprint was found in the soft mulch outside!
All of this led the police to conclude that the trail of blood leading to the window screen was a red herring. Someone was trying to deceive them into believing that the killer was an intruder when no intruder had ever existed. But who would try to deceive them? If the intruder did not exist, and there is not a shred of evidence—apart from Darlie Routier’s statement—that there was one, Darlie Routier was lying. By “arranging” the crime scene and scattering red herrings around, she was trying to divert suspicion away from herself.
In the entertainment room where, according to Darlie, she struggled with her attacker, James Cron found little evidence of a melee having taken place. The lampshade was askew and an expensive flower arrangement lay beside the coffee table. There was nothing more out of place. He found, in fact, the fragile stems of the flowers unbroken, as if the arrangement hadn’t fallen but been placed there. Once again, someone was trying to deceive the eye. But there was even more.
Atop the utility room work surface, close to the sink, sat Darlie’s purse, which appeared in order and undisturbed. Several pieces of jewelry—rings, a bracelet and a watch—were laid out neatly and untouched. If the alleged intruder′s motive had been robbery, he would have seen the jewelry when he washed his hands and stolen it. Therefore, it was obvious that, before cutting her own throat and injuring herself, Darlie had removed her jewelry to protect it from blood contamination or possible
damage. It was a repeat of the staged scene in the murder room: items had been carefully placed to avoid damaging them, and even a bloodstain on the couch had been wiped away.
Darlie Routier had inflicted her own injuries at the sink!
Everything the crime-scene experts saw at the crime scene disturbed them. The lack of a blood trail away from the home, coupled with virtually no signs of a struggle, bothered them most. The entire picture before them had been carefully
Similar Books
