Case Files and Evidence in The Rodney Reed Case

This site is a work-in-progress!

This website was created with the intention of sharing with the public the collected and available case files, transcripts, police reports, evidence, video and photography files associated with the Rodney Reed death penalty case to further continued research, study and journalism on this case.

Please contact the website administrator to provide any additional documentation that you feel is relevant and necessary in order to make this file complete. (See Below)

Background: Since April 3, 1997, when Rodney was arrested and charged with the capital murder of Stacey Stites, a murder he claims he did not commit, the case and case files have been shrouded in a cloud of misinformation, mystery and secrets.   Now, for the first time, the original trial transcripts and evidence exhibits (as well as public documents and reports) are available in digital form. It is our hope that in providing this resource researchers, journalists, lawyers and concerned citizens will have the opportunity to fully study and review this critical and highly controversial death penalty case.   Our intention is that these materials can be finally and fully reviewed, analyzed and discussed in a public setting.    We believe the trial testimony, exhibits, court documents, witnesses and evidence (new and old), and a modern understanding of science, all speaks for itself.

Thank you for visiting this site.

 

 

 

40 thoughts on “Case Files and Evidence in The Rodney Reed Case

  1. Joseph Schillaci

    I am re investigating this case for a television program called dead again that airs on the arts and entertainment channel.

    Reply
    1. Cherrie Aaron

      Joe first I love the show. And I am from Georgia and my mother and sister were brutally stabbed to death 12/30/86 and no one has ever been arrested for their murders and we have the Good Ole Boys law here so I have been learning a lot about the law and what should be done to solve these crimes and I have tried to get them to see if they can look at their murders and maybe run new test that weren’t available in 1986 but no one will do anything I’m 60 yrs old now I would like answers before I die . Anyway that’s why I’m interested in this case I would like to know if you still think this man is innocent. I know that Stacys family wants her killer to pay but not a innocent man and the real murderer to walk What is the prosecutors afraid of if they really did the job they are paid to do they should be more then willing to. The witnesses and med examiner have changed their testimony. That puts her with the boyfriend. I have written the Texas governor and the asst. atternony Lisa Tanner what else can we do and how can they sleep knowing they framed this man
      Thanks Cherrie Aaron

      Reply
  2. Nicole

    Richard..
    I’m from here, I know these people.
    1. There was a LOT of evidence that wasn’t included in court.
    2. Friends and family of Rodney and Stacey were both harassed, repeatedly. Especially when they were found to be on the list to testify. What happened? The didn’t testify.
    3. Cops in a small town take care of their own, and that happened here. I haven’t bothered to read the documents above; but this goes with what I said about the evidence not being included in court. Her ‘loving’ fiance’s behavior was covered up. Anyone from this area with half a brain could tell you that.
    5. Rodney’s black. Stacey was a beautiful white girl. There’s no way she could be in a consensual relationship with him. It was Giddings, Texas in 1996. Of course the big, black, scary man did it.
    6. It’s well known the crime scene investigation was botched and the criminal trial was rushed. The beer cans from the crime scene had the DNA of her fiance’s friends present, all of them police officers. One of them joined the investigation team for Ms. Stites’ murder. Amazingly, he committed ‘suicide’ not long into the investigation. Or as I like to call it, murder. He was murdered.
    7. Let’s not also forget about the fact that Fennell, the fiance, is certifiable.
    Girl 1: Before Ms. Stites’ death he was accused of stalking and harassment by a local Giddings woman. Remember, this is at the same time he’s in a relationship with Ms. Stites. It culminated when Fennell’s friend, Hall, (the other officer whose DNA was present on the beer can) asked her to step outside her home one night.
    Girl 2: Fennell appeared to move on rather quickly from his fiance’s gruesome murder, and found another local girl/girlfriend to terrify. Just three months after Ms. Stites’ death, his newest victim attempted to break up with for being ‘possessive and jealous.’ Never one to give up on true love, Fennell persisted and stalked her for a month. I’m not sure if she still lived at her childhood home, but according to reports he drove to her house late at night and would shine his police light through her window and scream BITCH. Number 1…. Her childhood home is in the country. Like, down a road, then a road, then a road, etc. That requires a lot of effort. Which makes him extra crazy. Number 2…. In Texas, we can shoot first and ask questions later. Seriously, that’s a law here. I’m paraphrasing a little, but I’m pretty close. The poor thing, who also looks strikingly similar to Ms. Stites, finally filed a police report. What happened when a copy was requested at the local headquarters, where Fennell works? Nothing to be found. I’m also very puzzled why her parents never did more than this. Her parents have a ‘name’ in Giddings. I also think this speaks to Reed’s innocence. They were terrified, and saw what Fennell was capable of. I’m sure there are things that happened that we as the public will never know of unless they call her as a witness, which I hope they do, to speak of what Fennell’s behavior was like.
    8. In 1995, Fennell told a fellow police officer during crime scene training that he would strangle his girlfriend with a belt if he ever caught her cheating. Why strangle with a belt? To avoid leaving fingerprints. And, what was wrapped around Stacey’s neck??
    9. AND, finally Fennell found himself behind bars in 2007. Unfortunately, not for Stacey’s crime but because he is a predator whose time is finally up. He was convicted of raping a woman in his custody. After the rape, he threatened to ‘hunt her down and kill her’ if she ever told anyone. Unsurprisingly, several more of his victims came forward during the trial.

    These are all the things I can remember at the moment, which means there are more. Reed comes from a poor-lower middle class family. Everything he had during his original trial was court appointed. I’m not sure what his circumstances are now. He has also had MANY roadblocks in the state and federal court systems. Why they have refused to review new scientific evidence or listen to testimony from key witnesses is beyond me. Our court system should be ashamed of themselves, and I think they are. How sad they are too prideful to let a free man go free.

    Reply
    1. Unkown

      First of all stop being a reasest mother fucker its 2017 number 5 is way out off order second all the info withheld was all the info that proved he was not guilty he had a witness with him when her partner the dirty cop aka the killer tharetend him when he said he was home third the time of death was fully incorrect it was placed at 8pm when reed was drinking her partner was driving around when he said he was asleep y lie dirty cops do dirty things with power pined to there shoulder all u see is size and black skin open your eyes most of the time evil is right there standing in front of u wearing a badge all the info gos throw there hands that’s how the truth gets lost not in cort.

      Reply
      1. Izzy Wildheart

        whichever way you slice it, Todney is not the guilty one, the fiancé cop is, who Ibhave just discovered is serving 10 years for a sexual crime. Cops will always throw someone else under the bus and protect their own.

      2. Rosie

        The writer was being sarcastic dear. Go back to school and learn what that means and how to use punctuation.

  3. Lisa O'Brien

    I’m presuming that “Anonymous” is Mary Best/Blackwell. One of the things I don’t understand is why Vasquez, who was working for Reed’s defense, wouldn’t provide that information to his attorneys, who could have then called you to testify on behalf of Reed at his trial. I also don’t understand why you wouldn’t contact Reed’s counsel in 1998 during the trial with that information.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      Don’t continue to vomit lies and presumptions…you do not have a clue about the truth of this case…and you don’t have the common sense it takes to put it together.

      Reply
      1. Lisa W O'Brien

        My statements are based on your testimony and the testimony of Mr. Vasquez given at Reed’s hearing in Bastrop in around 2006. Were the two of you perjuring yourselves?

    1. May Justice Prevail

      My God,
      I cannot begin to understand what you are trying to convey….
      Use spell checker.
      And to make an argument, a valid one, skip the anger, and especially the insults….as those are sure signs of emotional and mental immaturity.
      This case isn’t about race, its about facts.
      Reed is a rapist. Fact.
      Reed is a liar. Fact.

      Reply
  4. Noisy Kitten!

    If this case happened twenty years prior I could be convinced that a substantial portion of US society would be unwilling to accept that a relationship could exist between those of different races, but this case happened in the late 90s, not in the 60s or 70s.

    A phone call between the two parties, or some evidence of the alleged relationship (love letters, other correspondence, etc.) would be conclusive. Prior to the online era that emerged after this case the telephone and pencil/paper were the only social media people had.

    Reply
  5. James Whitmore

    If Reed had a relationship with the victim prior to the murder, as he now claims, there would be ample cell phone records to prove it. Had any existed, either his original defense attorney or the new one would be waving them high as exculpatory evidence. They simply don’t exist.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      Actually, cell phones were not as common in 1996 as they are today. Based on the records and testimony, as well as the pleadings and court opinions, neither Reed, nor Stacey had a cell phone.

      Reply
  6. Anonymous

    Like in the OJ Simpson circus, this sad, horrifying case has been twisted & manoeuvred into being about racism and not the facts. Racism is the popular bandwagon to jump on. We cannot go one day without someone being labeled a racist or a sexist or a homophobe or someone who hates muslims or immigrants. Have any of you people claiming this man’s innocence given one single thought to the poor victim in this case and what she went through? It’s not popular, I suppose because she was white and had a “redneck” cop boyfriend, right? Let’s ignore all the other women & the child that were harmed by this man for one moment and focus on the victim in this case, who is dead & gone. How about taking the blinders off and study the actual transcripts? This isn’t just another “cause” to protest to, or get your feeling hurt by. A woman is dead and nobody seems to care one bit. It’s turned into a political debate, as usual. Frankly, I am appalled that people refuse to see what is clearly a fact: Reed is a violent attacker of women. No amount of debate will ever change this.

    Reply
  7. Lucifer Prince

    Why is it that when ever a minority’s is charged with any crime the justice system is evil and racist. There is so much hidden knowledge and facts people shy from and it is absolutely amazing how uninformed people can be and blinded by ignorance.

    Reply
  8. Renae

    Most people I’ve seen comment on this case, who think Reed is guilty, use his alleged sexual assault of other women as their argument for his guilt. I’ve read through these documents, read the transcripts provided, the autopsy results, read arguments on both sides and I’m not convinced Reed is guilty of any of the crimes he’s either convicted of or accused of. It’s not just to use allegations that haven’t been proven in court as a basis of someone’s guilt in a separate crime. It makes no sense that those alleged crimes were never brought to trial regardless of Reed being tried and convicted of killing Stacey Stites. Those are cases left unsolved and open. Furthermore, I have issues with the crime scene, the collection of evidence and numerous other things. First, why were Stacey’s fingernails clipped? It was an obvious forensic countermeasure. Who would know to do this? Her fiancé, who had training in forensics. If Reed in fact committed this crime and went to the trouble of clipping her nails, why would he do that, knowing he left behind semen? Second, her body was moved hours after being somewhere else. It doesn’t make sense that Reed somehow got into her truck, got her to pull over, raped & killed her, put her back in her truck and waited hours to move the body. In fact, the time frame doesn’t fit with the prosecution’s theory either. The lividity in her body shows that she was killed somewhere else, left face down for hours before being placed face up on the side of the road.
    Also, Reed is a big man. He could have strangled her with his hands. Why use her belt? Her fiancé told a co-worker that if he ever caught her cheating, he would strangle her with her own belt and no one would know he did it. The police never found the actual crime scene. They never searched her apartment, which I believe is where she was actually killed. There have also recently been disputes over whether or not she was even raped. The autopsy clearly states that there was no injury to her vagina or anus. The medical examiner has since admitted to falsely testifying otherwise in court. Lastly, Reed never stood a chance. His defense was not given a fair amount of time to do any investigation of their own and later when new evidence was found, the judge (who is the daughter of the original trial judge) denied requests for a new trial. In reading the transcripts from the trial, it’s obvious the judge was bias towards the prosecution. Reed did not have a fair trial, which is common in cases where the defendant doesn’t have the means to pay for a good defense. I don’t believe this is necessarily about race. It might be. But even if you disregard the possibility, there is blatant corruption at work here. It’s obvious that Fennell is guilty and his cop friends covered it up for him, and probably helped move the body. Whether or not Reed is guilty of other crimes is irrelevant because so is Fennell and he was actually convicted of them. People have to be punished for the crimes they’re actually guilty of in order for justice to be served. We can’t punish someone for one crime because we think they might’ve committed another.

    Reply
    1. Bill Beany

      That is the best articulated reason I have read for the argument of Reed’s innocence. However, murders aren’t about slyly contrived arguments. Murders should be about the evidence.

      If you have read up on this case as you say you have, then regardless of whether or not Reed has been convicted of other crimes, his DNA was clearly discovered in the 12 year old girl’s rape kit, and another victim. What grabs you about these two rapes is the similarity to Stacey’s rape and murder. All were beaten and all were raped anally. On top of that evidence, other women have testified to similar attacks by Reed. Also, some of these sexual assaults were near the area of were Stacey was attacked and happened in the early morning hours, just like Stacey’s attack.

      Now, if you take all of the evidence against Reed in those cases and put yourself into Stacey’s mother’s position, maybe you can see the big picture. Think about this:
      ‘Someone you love is raped and murdered and they find foreign DNA on her body. Police run the DNA and get a hit to a known sexual predator.’
      You aren’t thinking, “hmmm maybe it was someone else”. You are thinking, “At least they got this monster off the streets!”

      Its the same MO of a now known sexual predator. With the DNA match, the odds of Stacey’s killer being someone else other than Reed are zero.

      That with what we know about Reed’s criminal past. But just on the physical evidence alone, again there is absolutely no doubt that Reed killed and raped Stacey Stites. DNA is the “gold standard” when it comes to evidence. Reed’s DNA found inside her vaginal cavity, on the pants she was wearing that day, on her underwear, in her rectum and on her body (on her breasts) all added together make it a certainty that a sexual encounter happened that day. The tears in her rectum and Reed’s DNA being present there is compelling evidence of guilt.

      Now, when you take what we know about his other victims (the brutality and similarities to Stacey’s murder) and take the physical evidence, then it leaves absolutely no doubt of his guilt.

      Reply
      1. dp

        That is the most truth I have heard on this case, since Rodney murdered Stacey. It’s a crying shame when a career criminal cannot once in his life admit he is a career criminal with no regard to any of his victims. We don’t really know how many victims he has raped and/or killed.

      2. James Kitcher

        Bill Beany
        You are right. That is the evidence. The fiancée testified the night before the murder/rape he and Stacy took a shower together and did not have sexual intercourse because of a birth control pill issue. The next morning Stacey is dead and raped with Reeds DNA all over her. This is not leftover from a previous rendezvous between her and Reed. He’s guilty guilty guilty. November 20, 2019 carry out the sentence Texas!

  9. Chance VanDamme

    Not totally convinced Reed did it, but what a low life thug. He got away with aggressive sexual attacks regularly including pedophilia. .

    Here is a summary of the trial testimony from Reed’s punishments phase:The rape and murder of Stites was hardly Reed’s first or last foray against women. First was Connie York, a nineteen-year-old who had come home late one evening after swimming with friends. 57.RR.34–35. York was grabbed from behind and told “don’t scream or I’ll hurt you.” 57.RR.35–36. When York did not listen, she was repeatedly struck, dragged to her bedroom, and raped multiple times.

    57.RR.37–42. Reed was interviewed, and, while he admitted that he knew York from high school, he denied raping her. 57.RR.123–24. When confronted with a search warrant for biological samples, Reed had an about-face, “Yeah, I had sex with her, she wanted it.” 57.RR.138. The case went to trial four years later, 57.RR.30, 60, and Reed was acquitted, 57.RR.61.

    Next was A.W., a twelve-year-old girl, who was home alone, having fallen asleep on a couch after watching TV. 58.RR.36–42. A.W. awoke when someone began pushing her face into the couch and had blindfolded and gagged her. 58.RR.42–43. She was repeatedly hit in the head, called vulgar names, and orally, vaginally, and anally raped. 58.RR.43–49. The foreign DNA from A.W.’s rape kit was compared to Reed; Reed was not excluded and only one in 5.5 billion people would have the same foreign DNA profile from A.W.’s rape kit. 58.RR.51, 92;

    61.RR.26.Then came Lucy Eipper, who Reed had met in high school, and whom Reed began to date after her graduation. 59.RR.10–12. Eipper had two children with Reed. 59.RR.13–14, 19–20 Throughout their relationship, Reed physically abused Eipper, including while she was pregnant, and raped her “all the time,” including one time in front of their two children. 59.RR.14–17, 21, 25–32.Afterwards, Reed began dating Caroline Rivas, an intellectually disabled woman. 60.RR.39–41. Rivas’s caseworker noticed bruises on Rivas’s body and, when asked about them, Rivas admitted that Reed would hurt her if she would not have sex with him. 60.RR.41, 61.Later, Rivas’s caseworker noticed that Rivas was walking oddly and sat down gingerly. 60.RR.43. Rivas admitted that Reed had, the prior evening, hit her, called her vulgar names, and anally raped her. 60.RR.44, 63–65. The samples from Rivas’s rape kit provided the link to Stites’s murder. 60.RR.89–90.Shortly thereafter, and about six months before Stites’s murder, Reed raped Vivian Harbottle underneath a train trestle as she was walking home. 59.RR.87–92. When she pleaded for her life for the sake of her children, Reed laughed at her. 59.RR.94. The foreign DNA from Harbottle’s rape kit was compared to Reed; he could not be excluded, and only one person in 5.5 billion would be expected to have the same foreign DNA profile. 59.RR.95, 113–14; 61.RR.26.

    Finally, and about six months after Stites’s murder, Reed convinced nineteen-year-old Linda Schlueter to give him a ride home at about 3:30 a.m. 61.RR.10, 37–47. Reed led her to a remote area and then attacked her. 61.RR.47–58. After a prolonged struggle, Schlueter asked Reed what he wanted and Reed responded, “I want a blow job.” 61.RR.60. When Schlueter told Reed that “you will have to kill me before you get anything,” Reed stated “I guess I’ll have to kill you then.” 61.RR.60. Before Schlueter could be raped, a car drove by and Reed fled. 61.RR.62–64.

    Reply
  10. Reality

    Rodney Reed is guilty of rape and murder. He basically wrote out a sworn statement that he didn’t know anything about the victim, before he knew the DNA connected him to the crime.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to James Whitmore Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s