PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I adopt the words of the formidable Ohio criminal defence lawyer/blogger Jeff Gamso..."JUST TEST THE FUCKING DNA.
http://gamso-forthedefense.blogspot.com/2018/05/what-is-truth-said-jesting-pilate.html
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog:
-----------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Reed, who was sentenced to death in the 1996 Bastrop County murder and sexual assault of Stacey Stites, has continually maintained his innocence. Reed’s execution was paused just days before he was set to be put to death in 2015. Bryce Benjet, Reed's attorney, said his team hoped the Supreme Court would immediately take up the constitutional issues raised by the rejection of DNA testing, but there is a separate civil action that can be taken in U.S. District Court for federal review of DNA. "We intend to pursue this remedy in the federal courts so that this important evidence can finally be tested," Benjet said Monday in a statement."
------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "US Supreme Court denies Rodney Reed's DNA testing appeal," by reporter David Barer, published by KXAN on June 25, 2018.
GIST: The United States Supreme Court rejected Rodney Reed’s
petition on Monday for further DNA testing of crime scene evidence that
Reed said could prove his innocence. Reed, who was sentenced to
death in the 1996 Bastrop County murder and sexual assault of Stacey
Stites, has continually maintained his innocence. Reed’s execution was
paused just days before he was set to be put to death in 2015. Bryce
Benjet, Reed's attorney, said his team hoped the Supreme Court would
immediately take up the constitutional issues raised by the rejection of
DNA testing, but there is a separate civil action that can be taken in
U.S. District Court for federal review of DNA. "We
intend to pursue this remedy in the federal courts so that this
important evidence can finally be tested," Benjet said Monday in a
statement. In his denied petition to the Supreme Court, called a
writ of certiorari, Reed argued for further DNA testing of evidence,
such as the belt used to strangle Stites. The Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals had already rejected Reed’s request for such testing, but Reed’s
defense said that rejection violated his due process rights and rights
to access to the courts. In their appeal to the Supreme Court,
Reed’s defense said the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals used an “unfair
and novel interpretation” of the chain of custody requirement that
included a “lack of contamination element” that does not appear in the
criminal code, according to the petition. The defense also said
the state used an “arbitrary and fundamentally unfair interpretation” of
the criminal code’s “unreasonable delay” element, which says a court
may grant DNA testing so long as the request is not made to delay the
execution of a sentence or administration of justice. Reed’s defense
argued he has not tried to unreasonably delay proceedings, and he sought
DNA testing in 1999 and 2014, according to the petition. For
years Reed has pointed to Stites’ former fiancé, Jimmy Fennell, as the
likely killer. Fennell was sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2008 for a
separate, unrelated crime. As a Georgetown police officer, Fennell was
accused of raping a woman in his custody. He pleaded guilty to
kidnapping and improper sexual activity with a person in custody and was
released from prison on parole in March."
The entire story can be read at the link below:
The entire story can be read at the link below:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/c