First, I said that militates against not executing him even if he didn't kill Stites. But this is a gross mischaracterization of what I said.
He was only not convicted because, as Mike already stated, they did not charge him because he was already sentenced to death and they did not want to subject the 12 year old girl to the trauma of a rape trial. A rape Reed was conclusively linked to via DNA, unless I'm expected to believe Mr. Innocence's DNA was planted there. "Rape he was never convicted of" seems to imply that there is not conclusive proof he did it, that it's doubtful. But, to reiterate, he indisputably did it. He was only not charged because he was sentenced to death for killing Stites, and prosecutors wanted to spare the girl from the trauma of a rape trial. Reed is a viscous beast and sexual predator. But wait, there's more. Allow me to proffer the sordid details of Saint Rodney the Innocent Victim's past:
"The Sexual Assault of Caroline Rivas
Reed has also been credibly accused and indisputably linked by DNA to the sexual assault of Caroline Rivas, an intellectually disabled woman that Reed was dating. The assault was noticed by one of Rivas’s caseworkers. She would frequently see bruises on Rivas’s body. When she asked Rivas about these, Rivas admitted that Reed would hurt her if she would not have sex with him. A rape kit was collected when Rivas admitted that Reed had, the prior evening, hit her, called her vulgar names, and anally raped her. The samples from Rivas’s rape kit provided the link to Stites’s murder." Abusing a mentally disabled woman, what a stand up guy, think of what we're losing as a society if we execute him!
But here's more:
The Sexual Assault of Vivian Harbottle
Reed has also been credibly accused and indisputably linked by DNA to the rape of Vivian Harbottle underneath a train trestle as she was walking home. The incident occurred about six months before the rape and murder of Stites. Semen collected from that rape was compared to Reed and was a match.
The Assault of Linda Schlueter
About six months after Stites’s murder, Reed was implicated in the beating and attempted rape of nineteen-year-old Linda Schlueter. She reported to the police that he asked her for a ride home at about 3:30 a.m. But he then led her to a remote area and attacked her. Reed fled when another car approached, and Linda with immediately to the police. This case prompted police to recover DNA from the Rivas case and compare it with that found in Stites. It was a match and Reed was arrested for murder."
And here's the most damning of all:
"The Sexual Assault of Connie York
On September 1, 1987, Reed was arrested in connection with an aggravated sexual assault on 19-year-old Connie York in a Wichita Falls house on August 25, 1987. The woman claimed that she had been dragged into her bedroom, hit multiple times and raped by a man that had broken into her home while she was out. In the first DNA case to occur in Wichita County, the semen found was linked to Reed. While Reed had at first denied knowing York, in the 1991 trial he admitted he knew her and the sex was consensual. His explanation for the beating was that she slapped and insulted him. Reed’s defense team also argued that Reed, who stands at a height of 6 ft 2 in (1.88 m), was too big to fit in the small kitchen window that the prosecutors claimed the man had used to enter her home. Reed was acquitted by jury on August 16, 1991.The 1987 sexual allegations were the only case in which Reed was prosecuted prior to the Stites murder."
Reed lies, then when confronted with infallible evidence such as the presence of his semen, he changes his story and claims consensual sex. Just as he did with Stites. And this avatar of greed and sin manages to portray himself as the victim but crying he was insulted.
So I will say unequivocally that absolutely nothing of value is lost, whether or not he killed Stites. Ends justify means. The end in this case being the execution of an evil monster, the means being the execution for the murder of Stites. This holds true to me even if Reed didn't kill Stites. I say this with 100% moral comfort. I say so unapologetically. I say so in full agreement with my values, beliefs, agendas, and the dogma of ends justifying means. I've expressed this as well in the case of Carlton Gary - even if he didn't kill the women in Georgia, he was indisputably linked to the murders of three women in New York, a proven killer regardless. Even if he didn't commit the GA killings, and I'm not saying that's the case, the execution was a good thing because he was still a killer. To me, the ends always justify the means.
Bookmarks