Rodney Reed

Conviction

The state’s case against Reed, who has maintained his innocence since his arrest for the crime, relied on a single piece of physical evidence: semen matched to Reed, found in Stites’ body; but multitudes of circumstantial evidence.

Reed initially denied knowing Stites at all. During his trial, Reed explained that he was in a relationship with and had sex with Stites, intermittently, for 4 to 5 months before her death. Reed testified he had sex with Stites during the early hours of April 22, a full day before her murder. According to the Magistrate, "Most of [Reed’s] witnesses did not know Stacey Stites, and identified her from memory by viewing her photograph. Those who claimed to have known her were proven to be badly mistaken. All of these witnesses were family, friends, or associates of Reed’s. Reed was never able to identify anyone who was a friend, family member, or associate of Stacey Stites who claimed to have been aware of a relationship between Reed and Stites. In short, there is no reliable evidence that ties Reed to Stites before her murder." Travis County Medical Examiner Dr. Roberto Bayardo testified that the recovered semen had been deposited recently, thus contradicting Reed's testimony. In August 2012, Bayardo admitted by affidavit his trial testimony was inaccurate, that he, in fact, didn't know the age of the semen or when it was deposited in Stacey. Multiple courts found Dr. Bayardo's affidavit "largely bereft of scientific evidence" or in any way supporting that someone else had committed a sexual assault (it was not disputed there had been a sexual assault of some type). It was stated it was already made clear to the jury that time of death estimation was not an "exact science".

Reed's defenders pose an alternative theory. They claim Fennell found out about Stacey and Rodney, and then he murdered Stites. Only the fingerprints of Stacey Stites and Jimmy Fennell were on Stacey and the truck. Investigators returned the truck to Fennell six days after the murder, after DPS completed processing it. Soon afterwards Fennell sold the truck to a dealership. There were no witnesses who could place Reed near the time and place of the crime scene although it was a place he was known to frequent. Jimmy and Stacey's shared apartment was never searched. Fennell, however, was vigorously interrogated on several occasions. Fennell also voluntarily provided authorities with a blood sample, and even though DNA testing excluded him as the donor of the semen, authorities tried to make a case against him anyway. Finding no evidence to support Fennell's involvement in the crime, authorities eventually eliminated him as a suspect.

Mary Blackwell, a police officer in the Dallas area, was a member of the same police academy class as Fennell. She told the court that Fennell remarked to several class members he would kill his girlfriend by strangling her if she cheated on him. When asked how he would make sure his fingerprints could not be lifted from her neck, Blackwell testified that Fennell said he would use a belt. Stites was found strangled with a belt. This evidence however was found to be sorely lacking by the court (stating her credibility was severely undermined). It was also found to be suspicious that an officer of the law (Blackwell) would withhold this evidence for the extreme length of time that she did were it true.

In 2008, Officer Jimmy Fennell pleaded guilty to kidnapping and sexual misconduct in an unrelated incident that took place in 2007. The victim in that case has spoken out against Officer Jimmy Fennell and questioned Reed's guilt.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected those arguments and ruled on January 10, 2014 that Reed’s claim of innocence lacked credibility. Reed was scheduled for a sentencing hearing on July 14, 2014 appearing in Bastrop, Texas before Visiting Judge Douglas Shaver. Reed's conviction and death sentence remain highly controversial.

On February 23, 2015, a Texas Appeals Court announced that they had postponed Rodney Reed's execution, originally scheduled for January 14, 2015, for the 1996 murder of Stacey Stites, after his attorneys filed a petition citing the existence of new “scientific evidence” that establishes his “probable innocence." It includes findings from three forensic scientists claiming their evidence shows Reed could not have been the person who killed Stites. Reed’s defense attorney says their new evidence shows she was killed hours earlier, the night before (on April 22, 1996) instead of at 3:00 a.m. on April 23, 1996. Reed's repeated appeals for freestanding actual innocence claims have been rejected outright by the courts on numerous occasions.