Started by ScoopD (aka: Pam), November 18, 2008, 04:17:22 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Here is what I don't understand. I watched 20/20 or a Dateline special regarding this case. Sorry can't remember which one. The showed injuries, pretty bad ones, that she could not have self inflicted on her back. These were never shown in court. Anyone have any theories on this? I am not saying she is innocent just wondering.
I have seen a few investigative documentaries on Darlie also and I know what pd..sorry cant recall the full nick at the moment...is speaking of. They did each show photos of Darlie with very dark black & bruises up and down her forearms which they stated could not have been self inflicted and then they followed up stating there were over a 100 photos submitted and those of her forearms were not presented to the jury. I did not get a clear answer from any show on why her lawyer did not use them & what was the reason the jury did not see them either but it was made clear that they were not withheld by the courts in any way...the jury just did not see them. Seems like a big ball to drop in such a case but I am very interested to see what happens with the DNA tests that were granted awhile back & I do find this case interesting. I just get a feeling there is more going on here then is being disclosed either by Darlie or her husband, who slept thru everything upstairs??? (parents of small kids just do not sleep that hard) Only time will tell perhaps...
I saw the pictures on the tv show and yes there were pics of injuries to her back, bruising, bad cuts etc.