Rodney Reed denied DNA testing

[TwiceHorn 31510]

While I disagree with making this guy any kind of poster child for the death penalty or conviction integrity, I also vehemently disagree with using his other alleged crimes as justification for his punishment, whether death or life without parole.

Until and unless he's convicted of those crimes, we just need to STFU about them.

[Helobious 9463]

It’s amazing to see how polarizing this case is. Idiots on one side actually advocating for his release, idiots on the other side acting like his execution will bring the victim back to life. 

[SquishMitten 10419]

While I disagree with making this guy any kind of poster child for the death penalty or conviction integrity, I also vehemently disagree with using his other alleged crimes as justification for his punishment, whether death or life without parole.
Until and unless he's convicted of those crimes, we just need to STFU about them.

You know I agree with you on this topic 99.9% of the time. But my inner animal is out on his one.

I don’t support the death penalty for someone who has committed murder. But, like legit serial killers, if there’s any other justification for capital punishment, I’d say it’s for serial rapists. When those rapes include children I just can’t find the moral grounds to defend my general opposition to execution.

[4th and 5 4914]

1 hour ago, SquishMitten said:

Fuck it. I’ve been thinking about saying it all day, but now I’ve had a few drinks (and emotional after the Willie and Kacey Musgraves duet on the CMAs).

 

As someone who is generally against the death penalty ... execute the vile piece of shit. He deserves far worse than a “humane” execution for what he has done to numerous women and children, and there’s no amount of reform a prison sentence could accomplish. Not saying this is the case here, but sometimes a broken system still works out in the end. The world will be better off without him.

 

Then test the belt afterwards to see if there needs to be further investigation.

 

* I’ll probably regret this post in the morning, but I’m now watching a news segment on the case. It’s really disturbing how this guy is being made out to be some sort of saint when he’s, at a minimum, a violent rapist and pedophile.

 

Edit to add: For anybody questioning the end result or my comment about a broken system occasionally working... if you walked in on someone raping your 12 year old daughter and you killed them, do you think you’re guilty of murder and/or do you think you would be successfully prosecuted and imprisoned for murder?

Yes I would be guilty of murder, and my attorney would prove by a preponderance of the evidence that I acted in sudden passion due to an adequate cause, thereby reducing the punishment from a first degree murder 5-99 to a second degree murder 2-20, then put on character evidence for what an outstanding citizen I am, getting me the minimum 2 years to do as murder convictions are not probation eligible, assuming we are in Texas.

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

While I disagree with making this guy any kind of poster child for the death penalty or conviction integrity, I also vehemently disagree with using his other alleged crimes as justification for his punishment, whether death or life without parole.

Until and unless he's convicted of those crimes, we just need to STFU about them.

Agreed. 110 percent.

Look, chances are high Reed is a shitbag that needs a softpoint to the dome, but the Stites murder charge needs to be evaluated on its merits. And the other (still unadjudicated) cases on their own. Let the chips fall where they may in a court of law. But if we are going to impose capital punishment, the defendant deserves a fair trial with every procedural safeguard the system can provide. 

Right now the system has a history of doing a piss poor job, and the Reed case has some fucked up evidence in it (Thanks to Dr. Bayardo, same M.E as Michael Morton case).

For every NINE persons executed since the DP was reinstated, ONE has been completely exonerated. Actual 1508 to 166 as of today.

NINE TO ONE. Think about that.

The justice system has to be better than that

[Johnny Sack 8397]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

While I disagree with making this guy any kind of poster child for the death penalty or conviction integrity, I also vehemently disagree with using his other alleged crimes as justification for his punishment, whether death or life without parole.

Until and unless he's convicted of those crimes, we just need to STFU about them.

His other alleged and indicted charges are directly pertinent to his secret consensual relationship defense.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

7 hours ago, 4th and 5 said:

Yes I would be guilty of murder, and my attorney would prove by a preponderance of the evidence that I acted in sudden passion due to an adequate cause, thereby reducing the punishment from a first degree murder 5-99 to a second degree murder 2-20, then put on character evidence for what an outstanding citizen I am, getting me the minimum 2 years to do as murder convictions are not probation eligible, assuming we are in Texas.

Agreed. 110 percent.

Look, chances are high Reed is a shitbag that needs a softpoint to the dome, but the Stites murder charge needs to be evaluated on its merits. And the other (still unadjudicated) cases on their own. Let the chips fall where they may in a court of law. But if we are going to impose capital punishment, the defendant deserves a fair trial with every procedural safeguard the system can provide. 

Right now the system has a history of doing a piss poor job, and the Reed case has some fucked up evidence in it (Thanks to Dr. Bayardo, same M.E as Michael Morton case).

For every NINE persons executed since the DP was reinstated, ONE has been completely exonerated. Actual 1508 to 166 as of today.

NINE TO ONE. Think about that.

The justice system has to be better than that

What’s the cite on that 9 to 1?  Because that’s highly doubtful to me.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

7 hours ago, 4th and 5 said:

Yes I would be guilty of murder, and my attorney would prove by a preponderance of the evidence that I acted in sudden passion due to an adequate cause, thereby reducing the punishment from a first degree murder 5-99 to a second degree murder 2-20, then put on character evidence for what an outstanding citizen I am, getting me the minimum 2 years to do as murder convictions are not probation eligible, assuming we are in Texas.

Agreed. 110 percent.

Look, chances are high Reed is a shitbag that needs a softpoint to the dome, but the Stites murder charge needs to be evaluated on its merits. And the other (still unadjudicated) cases on their own. Let the chips fall where they may in a court of law. But if we are going to impose capital punishment, the defendant deserves a fair trial with every procedural safeguard the system can provide. 

Right now the system has a history of doing a piss poor job, and the Reed case has some fucked up evidence in it (Thanks to Dr. Bayardo, same M.E as Michael Morton case).

For every NINE persons executed since the DP was reinstated, ONE has been completely exonerated. Actual 1508 to 166 as of today.

NINE TO ONE. Think about that.

The justice system has to be better than that

Bayardo’s testimony was sound in Morton. The DA just misrepresented it to the jury

Edited November 14, 2019 by Johnny Sack

[futureman 22497]

9 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

While I disagree with making this guy any kind of poster child for the death penalty or conviction integrity, I also vehemently disagree with using his other alleged crimes as justification for his punishment, whether death or life without parole.

Until and unless he's convicted of those crimes, we just need to STFU about them.

you have to be the most level-headed sonofabitch on surly. 

[Deej 76847]

30 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Bayardo’s testimony was sound in Morton. The DA just misrepresented it to the jury

It's not like he didn't have questions surrounding his work, including the Morton case. 

https://www.kxan.com/news/body-of-evidence-a-medical-examiners-missteps/

[futureman 22497]

the evidence is clear.

 

substantial evidence exonerates him. 

 

#innocent

 

 

[futureman 22497]

so will there be rioting if he gets the needle?

[gecko 1104]

No rioting but a lot of tersely worded tweets and SM posts.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

14 minutes ago, gecko said:

No rioting but a lot of tersely worded tweets and SM posts.

Lots of Karens  demanding to see the manager.

[StruggleBus 3922]

47 minutes ago, futureman said:

the evidence is clear.

 

If she'd just tear her sign in half horizontally she'd be correct. The evidence is clear. 

Now execute this fuckstick already. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Been slow at work this week.  I've read through the trial transcripts.  The evidence presented against him was very compelling.  

Still wanting to see the punishment phase trial transcripts.  Because that has the testimony and evidence of the other women he raped (not admissible in guilt/innocence phase).  I have seen it summarized in state's brief and criminal court of appeals opinion with record cites.  But would like to read the transcript.  It is not downloaded to this site yet.  But this has the trial transcripts for anyone interested:

https://rodneyreedfulltruth.com/4-may-4-1998-morning-session-opening-statements/

[SquishMitten 10419]

9 hours ago, 4th and 5 said:

Yes I would be guilty of murder, and my attorney would prove by a preponderance of the evidence that I acted in sudden passion due to an adequate cause, thereby reducing the punishment from a first degree murder 5-99 to a second degree murder 2-20, then put on character evidence for what an outstanding citizen I am, getting me the minimum 2 years to do as murder convictions are not probation eligible, assuming we are in Texas.

Then you should’ve gotten a better attorney. One who asserts defense of others. 

I’m sure there are examples, but I’d bet there are more instances where a Texas prosecutor chose NOT to file murder charges in my scenario than that chose to pursue it. And I bet a lot of those didn’t make it past the grand jury.

In either case, it seems like he got a fair trial and had plenty of opportunity to raise these issues beforehand. Sorry if this latest appeal rings hollow to me. Like I said, I don’t support DP for someone who commits murder. But violent, serial rapists don’t get any sympathy from me. Personally, I think rape is worse than murder. The dead person isn’t suffering anymore. The dead person doesn’t benefit whatsoever from DP. But the rape victim will be traumatized for the rest of their life. I think for those victims, knowing their rapist can never come for them again actually provides some level of healing. And when you’re talking about raped children? DP is better than they deserve. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

Suffices to say that when celebrities jump on a bandwagon, I'm more likely to support the opposite side.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Beeper said:

The stupidity of Americans, particularly American women who dip their toes in political / societal waters without having the patience to gain an understanding of all the facts, is astounding and concerning. 

I blame social media. People with shitty opinions were ignored before. Now they have a forum to spread their shitty opinions and present them as facts.

[hayden_horn 11362]

11 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

While I disagree with making this guy any kind of poster child for the death penalty or conviction integrity, I also vehemently disagree with using his other alleged crimes as justification for his punishment, whether death or life without parole.

Until and unless he's convicted of those crimes, we just need to STFU about them.

this is a great point. i hate it when we use other allegations to convict someone of another crime. look, he may have done it, and the case may stand on its own merits. i honestly haven't done the research that @Johnny Sack has on the case. but it seems to me that if his guilt is so clear, why not test the goddamn belt? put the whole thing to bed. the rampant stonewalling by district attorneys in this state on dna testing is something i see as a massive problem, given the number of exonerations we have seen. the whole system was supposed to be built in this manner: "all presumptive evidence of felony should be admitted cautiously, for the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." 

we often lose sight of this in our bloodlust for justice. 

9 hours ago, 4th and 5 said:

Yes I would be guilty of murder, and my attorney would prove by a preponderance of the evidence that I acted in sudden passion due to an adequate cause, thereby reducing the punishment from a first degree murder 5-99 to a second degree murder 2-20, then put on character evidence for what an outstanding citizen I am, getting me the minimum 2 years to do as murder convictions are not probation eligible, assuming we are in Texas.

Agreed. 110 percent.

Look, chances are high Reed is a shitbag that needs a softpoint to the dome, but the Stites murder charge needs to be evaluated on its merits. And the other (still unadjudicated) cases on their own. Let the chips fall where they may in a court of law. But if we are going to impose capital punishment, the defendant deserves a fair trial with every procedural safeguard the system can provide. 

Right now the system has a history of doing a piss poor job, and the Reed case has some fucked up evidence in it (Thanks to Dr. Bayardo, same M.E as Michael Morton case).

For every NINE persons executed since the DP was reinstated, ONE has been completely exonerated. Actual 1508 to 166 as of today.

NINE TO ONE. Think about that.

The justice system has to be better than that

i would also like to see a citation on that 9-1 ratio, mostly to use myself in the future.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

but it seems to me that if his guilt is so clear, why not test the goddamn belt?

I understand the concern, but if you are a prosecutor who's already got his conviction, why would you want to? 

Lack of DNA on the belt would not be exculpatory. 

[hayden_horn 11362]

4 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

I understand the concern, but if you are a prosecutor who's already got his conviction, why would you want to? 

Lack of DNA on the belt would not be exculpatory. 

this is the problem. the conviction should not be the end result. we focus far too much on the conviction than actual justice. if he did it, fine. but what if he did not? that would mean that the actual killer is walking free, despite some evidence that this guy is a bad guy.

if there is a lack of dna on the belt, then why not test it? if he's so guilty, what do you have to lose?

losing a conviction makes me shrug. convictions should be hard.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

13 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

if he did it, fine. but what if he did not?

That's why we let juries decide, not twitter celebs.

[hayden_horn 11362]

2 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

That's why we let juries decide, not twitter celebs.

rodney reed's jury decided guilty. so did michael morton's. 

i think this is a bad case to highlight as it seems likely that he is guilty, and there are probably better cases upon which to focus, but i kind of wonder why not test the belt, if he's so goddamned guilty?

 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

[Johnny Sack 8397]

[SDG 3319]

4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

rodney reed's jury decided guilty. so did michael morton's. 

i think this is a bad case to highlight as it seems likely that he is guilty, and there are probably better cases upon which to focus, but i kind of wonder why not test the belt, if he's so goddamned guilty?

 

What is testing the belt going to do besides delay?  In other words what is the result Reed is looking for?  No DNA?: his dna was found in her sodomized anus.  The bf’s dna?: he lived with her so his Dna would likely be on most of here stuff.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Another thing, in his psyche report in the guilt phase I just read he states he always dated white women (since the mid 80s) and both mothers of his kids are white.  He lived with them too in the past (was single at time of offense living with his family).

That does not support his argument that he kept his secret relationship with Stites secret because he lived in a small Texas town that hated interracial dating,.

 

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31510]

3 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

His other alleged and indicted charges are directly pertinent to his secret consensual relationship defense.  

I didn't say they couldn't or shouldn't be admissible on retrial of the Stites case, but it still strikes me as wrong to say "well, we may have porked the pooch on the Stites case, but look at all this other shit  . . .  he needs to die."

[Johnny Sack 8397]

2 minutes ago, SDG said:

What is testing the belt going to do besides delay?  In other words what is the result Reed is looking for?  No DNA?: his dna was found in her sodomized anus.  The bf’s dna?: he lived with her so his Dna would likely be on most of here stuff.  

Nothing.  It has been handled by so many people since the murder.  Back then there was no touch DNA testing (skin cells that come off when you touch something).  So once they determined there were no fluids on the belt, they did not test it.  Nor did they think there was any reason they ever cold test it.  So all sorts of people handled it prior and during trial.  It was also stored in a box mixed with other evidence.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

I didn't say they couldn't or shouldn't be admissible on retrial of the Stites case, but it still strikes me as wrong to say "well, we may have porked the pooch on the Stites case, but look at all this other shit  . . .  he needs to die."

I don't think that at all.  I think he is guilty as shit for Stites.  And his other offenses establish he is a serial predator.

Just like if a Ted Bundy victim had his DNA on her.  Him claiming it was do to a consensual relationship wouldn't go far with me.

 

[TwiceHorn 31510]

4 minutes ago, SDG said:

What is testing the belt going to do besides delay?  In other words what is the result Reed is looking for?  No DNA?: his dna was found in her sodomized anus.  The bf’s dna?: he lived with her so his Dna would likely be on most of here stuff.  

On one hand, it can be really difficult for a lawyer to have to explain and anticipate all the ways potentially exculpatory evidence (this DNA testing) might exculpate their client.

On the other, I think it's not unreasonable to require laying out some theory of how the potentially exculpatory evidence is, in fact, exculpatory.

[TwiceHorn 31510]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

I don't think that at all.  I think he is guilty as shit for Stites.  And his other offenses establish he is a serial predator.

Just like if a Ted Bundy victim had his DNA on her.  Him claiming it was do to a consensual relationship wouldn't go far with me.

 

I know.  Just others seem to be using it in that fashion.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

3 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Nothing.  It has been handled by so many people since the murder.  Back then there was no touch DNA testing (skin cells that come off when you touch something).  So once they determined there were no fluids on the belt, they did not test it.  Nor did they think there was any reason they ever cold test it.  So all sorts of people handled it prior and during trial.  It was also stored in a box mixed with other evidence.

And that's their hope. It's either "See! They can't find his DNA on the belt! Ignore all the other evidence!" or "So much DNA is on it! Maybe they all committed the murders!!"

Edited November 14, 2019 by Cheeseweasel
fuck ou

[Johnny Sack 8397]

[Johnny Sack 8397]

[txhorns 2409]

Reed wants the belt tested because it's his 90 yard hail mary to simply keep from being executed.  If his DNA is not on it by some miracle then he claims innocence despite all of the other evidence stating he is guilty.  Maybe that keeps him from being executed.  If his DNA is on the belt then what does it matter, he was going to be executed anyway.  It changes nothing for him.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

@Johnny Sack

Please stop posting facts from the case. This case is about how celebrities and soccer moms feel.

[Underdog 28742]

By all means release this fuck to the custody of the Kardashians, the world would become a better place.  But if he lays one hand on Kourtney,  I'll kill the motherfucker myself. 

[fattyflattie 4639]

24 minutes ago, Underdog said:

But if he lays one hand on Kourtney,  I'll kill the motherfucker myself. 

Well given his track record, it would take him about 45 days before he rapes her.  

[CurlyDumps 4476]

3 hours ago, futureman said:

the evidence is clear.

 

substantial evidence exonerates him. 

 

#innocent

 

 

The similarities between this case and the Steven Avery case are profound, down to the demographic of supporters.

A cult of dumpy white female murder groupies - check.

Changing stories from the convicted murder to explain away damning DNA evidence - check.

A public woefully misinformed and misguided by  documentaries/ defense lawyers/media etc - check.

Tweets from celebrities - check.

How these violent multiple felons, with a long, documented criminal history of violence and abuse toward women, manage to accrue such a passionate female fan base is a mystery I've yet to crack. Is it just because they react so emotionally to whatever they see/hear/read first? Or is there some subconscious psychosexual attraction there, like women who want to marry serial killers?

[SquishMitten 10419]

It's because they heard their favorite blogger/celebrity say they were outraged. No further research or rational thought goes into it. Monkey See, Monkey Do. Nothing more.

[Brisketexan 105161]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I didn't say they couldn't or shouldn't be admissible on retrial of the Stites case, but it still strikes me as wrong to say "well, we may have porked the pooch on the Stites case, but look at all this other shit  . . .  he needs to die."

This.

And understand that there are two answers to this, depending on which level you look at it.  If we just look at it in the vacuum of only Rodney Reed, then that statement definitely makes perfect sense.  He's a bad dude.  There really isn't any question.  His imprisonment and/or death will make the world a better place.

But if we look at it in terms of the proper functioning of the criminal justice system -- which should matter to ALL of us, so that it works better in ALL cases -- then we need to evaluate this case based on the facts of this case, and this case only.  Note that the facts of this case only still may well support his conviction.  But the process matters.  Because the alternative is the voice of the mob -- either to hang him, or free him.  That's not a good path.

Oh, and in any case, the folks saying "Rodney Reed is innocent" and "free Rodney Reed" are dipshits.  The most they can say is that "there may be reasonable doubt."  And based on what we do know about the other crimes...."free Rodney Reed" doesn't seem wise.  Even if acquitted of Stites' murder someday, the proper next step would be immediate arrest for the other rapes, and no bond because he's clearly a risk to the community of re-offending.

I know, boring lawyers droning on about the rule of law.  But I don't want either alternative.  I don't want the Kardashians storming the Bastille to free Rodney Reed, and I don't want a system that fucked up executing him.  I want it done according to due process and the rule of law.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

She was put on her work uniform for a shift that started at 3:30 a.m. at an HEB 35 miles away.  So even if you ignore expert time of death evidence, you know she was killed sometime after 3 a.m.  Earliest would be about 3:30 a.m.  Truck is found abandoned by a cop at Bastrop high school at 5:23 a.m.  -- 35 miles from Fennel and Stites apartment and 6/10 a mile from Reed's place.  And the cop sees part of the belt (that turned out to be murder weapon) next to it.  I think we can safely put the time of murder between 3:30 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.

Her mother woke up Fennell at 6:45 a.m. 

If he killed her, how does he get from Bastrop back to the apartment 35 miles away in such a short amount of time?  Taxi records were checked.  It's not enough time to walk or run it (and apparently Fennell was a portly fellow from what I could tell from the testimony).  Stites mother had both sets of keys to her car.

And is the argument he caught her in the act with Reed and killed her?  Got to think Reed would mention that if so.  If not, someone was raping her.  It wasn't Fennell.  His DNA was not found anywhere on her.  Who did it then?

[fattyflattie 4639]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I know, boring lawyers droning on about the rule of law.  But I don't want either alternative.  I don't want the Kardashians storming the Bastille to free Rodney Reed, and I don't want a system that fucked up executing him.  I want it done according to due process and the rule of law.

Perfectly stated.  

Is there a DP thread, CR perhaps?   I’m interested in the thoughts of those opposed to it. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Perfectly stated.  

Is there a DP thread, CR perhaps?   I’m interested in the thoughts of those opposed to it. 

I oppose it unless I am 99.9% sure of guilt.  So in this case where I am just 99% sure of guilt, I would have sentenced Reed to LWOP.  And if I was on the Board of Pardons and Parol, I would recommend commuting his sentence to life.

Sometimes there are bad crimes with 99.9999% chance of guilt.  The railroad killer.  The Jasper trash that drug that man to death.  The POS who killed his small kids while on the phone with his ex wife.  Them, I support the DP.

[CurlyDumps 4476]

2 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

rodney reed's jury decided guilty. so did michael morton's. 

i think this is a bad case to highlight as it seems likely that he is guilty, and there are probably better cases upon which to focus, but i kind of wonder why not test the belt, if he's so goddamned guilty?

 

I wonder why test the belt?

There is damning DNA evidence linking Reed to the crime. He had his opportunity to mount a defense at trial.  Per this thread, there was no corroborating evidence or testimony, right?

Have Reed & his lawyers produced any evidence at all corroborating the secret affair defense? 

In my layman /non lawyer opinion, additional DNA testing only seems relevant if the person was convicted solely based on less reliable circumstantial evidence.  Like human eyewitness/memory etc.

[SquishMitten 10419]

But to the point about the belt. What is the science behind this type of testing? How likely is it that there would be DNA of every person who has ever held a 23 year old belt that was never preserved as evidence for eventual testing and handled by who knows how many people?

I can't find any recent studies on how far back you can get Touch DNA, but the most recent study showed that you can basically overwrite someones DNA by putting more of your DNA on the item. In that study they were testing bras worn by women for 12 hours, then removed, and later held by men for various timeframes up to 60 seconds. They only tested the exact areas the men touched the bras, but the results were pretty clear.  "In this experimental model, the results show that the person handling the garment last contributes the most even though he/she may touch the garment for merely a few seconds (even only 2 seconds)

If I'm reading it correctly, only 5 out of 240 samples yielded more DNA from the woman. Putting that into the context here, it would seem highly likely that testing would be unable to identify the DNA profile of the person who used it to commit the crime. If handling a bra for 2 seconds creates more DNA than wearing it for 12 hours, tell me how there's even a remote chance testing could identify who touched prior to lord knows how many cops, lab techs, evidence boys, etc held it. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

40 minutes ago, CurlyDumps said:

manage to accrue such a passionate female fan base is a mystery I've yet to crack.

I have a theory: Bitches be Crazy.

 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

8 minutes ago, CurlyDumps said:

I wonder why test the belt?

There is damning DNA evidence linking Reed to the crime. He had his opportunity to mount a defense at trial.  Per this thread, there was no corroborating evidence or testimony, right?

Have Reed & his lawyers produced any evidence at all corroborating the secret affair defense? 

In my layman /non lawyer opinion, additional DNA testing only seems relevant if the person was convicted solely based on less reliable circumstantial evidence.  Like human eyewitness/memory etc.

Two witnesses.  One a family member and one a friend.  It was laughable.

Edited November 14, 2019 by Johnny Sack