Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 7 days ago)
35,627 posts, read 17,961,729 times
Reputation: 50650
Advertisements
Very well-written and informative article, on the prosecutor's perspective in the case and why they believe Reed is guilty.
I don't understand why the prosecution didn't answer the public's questions 15 years ago, but I guess better late than never.
There are still some questions left unanswered (the question of whether Stite's nails were cut back below the skin line before she was delivered to the morgue, why Fennell lied and said he was home that night when he wasn't, etc.) but this article featuring the prosecutor's quotes clears up a lot of the questions.
Does it explain how his semen ended up in a raped and brutalized 12-year-old girl?
This guy has a history of rape allegations--for which he wasn't prosecuted only because he received the DP after a guilty verdict. In the first case that did go to trial, he did the same thing he did in the Stiles case: denied being anywhere near the victim, until he was told his DNA was found--then he came up with the "secret lovers" excuse, which the jury bought that first time, resulting in an acquittal.
I'm not listening to a podcast; I've read enough about this case over the years.
You are correct.
Reed’s supporters are ignorant of the facts and the “new evidence” will not exonerate the vicious rapist.
He has breathed oxygen for far too long. Good riddance when he gets his due.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 7 days ago)
35,627 posts, read 17,961,729 times
Reputation: 50650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delahanty
Does it explain how his semen ended up in a raped and brutalized 12-year-old girl?
This guy has a history of rape allegations--for which he wasn't prosecuted only because he received the DP after a guilty verdict. In the first case that did go to trial, he did the same thing he did in the Stiles case: denied being anywhere near the victim, until he was told his DNA was found--then he came up with the "secret lovers" excuse, which the jury bought that first time, resulting in an acquittal.
I'm not listening to a podcast; I've read enough about this case over the years.
Finally, the prosecution has stated why that was never prosecuted, if true.
Delahanty, that was one of the huge sticking points, among many huge sticking points.
If it were true that they had conclusive DNA evidence that Reed raped a 12 year old girl, it seems not believable that wouldn't be prosecuted. To say yeah there was an allegation but it was never prosecuted is bizarre.
Unless you're told why - it's because they learned his DNA matched the rape of the 12 year old at the same time they realized his DNA matched a dead woman - and chose to prosecute and go for the death penalty for the dead woman, and pass on prosecuting the rape of the 12 year old girl. Possibly further traumatizing her.
The State should have held a press conference to make their position as clear as KVUE has made it here - when the ball really got rolling to stay his execution.
And IMHO, it's just arrogance that kept them from doing that. They kept responding to questions saying "We're confident we got the case right" without giving the public answers to the questions they have.
And there are still questions out there. Reed is no saint but there's still some evidence Fennell committed this, and he's no saint either.
The public deserves a full accounting, before we the people put this man to death.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 7 days ago)
35,627 posts, read 17,961,729 times
Reputation: 50650
Interesting 14 minute video summing up the case, with Stacy's sister commenting, and another victim, and the DA in Bastrop.
Compelling.
Roderick (Rodney Reed's younger brother and tireless advocate) is given two chances to make his case, and all he keeps saying is "just look at the evidence. That's all I'm asking, is just look at the evidence".
That was a terrible error. How about play your best card, Roderick? What can you say that will create the doubt you're counting on the public to have? That was either a terrible oversight, or Roderick simply doesn't have anything, at this point.
Hearing for Rodney Reed, scheduled for tomorrow in Bastrop has been cancelled.
I can't tell if this is good or bad news.
My guess, is, it's good news. Hopefully the Governor is now saying, Bastrop court system, this is out of your hands. Higher powers will now take over this process. And that could only be better news for Reed - getting this case OUT of Bastrop.
It hasn't been cancelled, he's been given a stay. I don't see how it can be anything but good news. If there is even a sliver of evidence he might not be guilty, they can't in good conscious execute him without looking at it. 156 inmates on death row have been found to be innocent with the advent of technology. I cannot even imagine how many innocent people have been executed in days past, but even one is too many.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 7 days ago)
35,627 posts, read 17,961,729 times
Reputation: 50650
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl
It hasn't been cancelled, he's been given a stay. I don't see how it can be anything but good news. If there is even a sliver of evidence he might not be guilty, they can't in good conscious execute him without looking at it. 156 inmates on death row have been found to be innocent with the advent of technology. I cannot even imagine how many innocent people have been executed in days past, but even one is too many.
The hearing in Bastrop was cancelled, link was included.
I couldn't tell whether cancelling the hearing was good news, or bad news for Reed, was the point of the post.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 7 days ago)
35,627 posts, read 17,961,729 times
Reputation: 50650
There is controversy over the presiding judge. Judge Shaver was the one who signed Reed's execution date papers in July, and then he removed himself from the list of retired but active judges in August.
And now, for some reason, he's been dragged back out again to preside in this continuing case.
I don't see how a judge, who removed himself from rotation in August apparently citing cognitive issues has been kept on to make decisions in this case, after the Texas Court of Appeals has overturned the last one he made a few months ago.
This just seems unbelievably difficult, and fraught with insurmountable injustices.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
