Rodney Reed raped and murdered Stacey Stites. There’s very little room for debate here. In fact, there’s absolutely none. Wikipedia editors aren’t convinced. In fact, they’re so unconvinced that a group of elite editors removed all of Rodney Reeds criminal history from the website, including references to his DNA being found on victims in other instances of sexual assault.
We rephrase: Rodney Reed bound, gagged, beat, and orally, anally, and vaginally raped a 12-year-old girl, his DNA from that incident was matched with DNA found on Stacey Stites, and Wikipedia editors removed that information.
But if one were to Google Rodney Reeds name they would have a hard time finding unbiased information. First, they wouldn’t find a Wikipedia entry under his name at all, despite an article already existing on the crowd-sourced encyclopedia.
By all appearances, it would at first seem as though someone at Google has either removed the Wikipedia page from the search giant’s index, or that the most powerful search engine on the planet has a glaring gap in their search algorithm.
At least, that was our first concern. We were wrong.
A further dive into the process that governs Wikipedia, however, reveals that the problem lies on there end. Articles that are younger than 90 days are not indexed on search engines such as Google and Bing. When Nationalist Review discovered this we set aside our story for the time being. But then, as we began to read the Wikipedia entry, a more sinister cover-up was revealed.
This sinister product of this cover up is the unfortunate reprieve that a guiltless monster like Reed receives. At the time of this report, Rodney Reed has been issued an indefinite stay of execution.
Background: The Murder of Stacey Stites, 23 April 1996
When Stacey Stites failed to show up for her 3:30 AM shift at the HEB grocery store in Bastrop, a coworker notified her mother who then called the police.
When her body was discovered, Stites displayed signs of obvious rape. At some point, her belt was removed and used to strangle her, and her body, left partially burned, had been discarded in a bush nearby Bastrop High School. A rape kit determined the presences of sperm in both her vagina and anus, and after testing her fiance’s DNA, and failing to find a match, the case hit a dead end.
Then, six months later, Linda Schlueter, 19, was assaulted in the same area as Stites. Linda had been driving alone at night and Rodney Reed had flagged her down asking for a ride home. He proceeded to lead her to an abandoned area and attempted to rape her. Luckily, another car approached and Reed fled the scene, but this incident led police to consider the possibility the Reed might be a suspect in the Stites murder.
They were able to recover DNA from a previous case in which Reeds had been accused of sexual assault by a former girlfriend he was dating named Caroline Rivas. When they compared that evidence to DNA found on Stites body, there was a match and Reed was subsequently arrested. He was later convicted of the murder and sentenced to death.
All of this context has been removed from Wikipedia.
The low-info activists and legislators begin to protest for his release.
Before diving into what the Wikipedia editors covered up, it’s worth noting that the pain Reed inflicted runs deep. Stites brother, unable to recover from the emotional trauma of losing his sister, committed suicide the following year.
Reed was sentenced to death for the murder of Stacey Stites, but at the behest of leftist political activist (and serial race-baiter) Shaun King, a petition was started calling for a stay of execution.
Celebrities such as Kim Kardashian West, Rihanna, Beyoncé, Meek Mill, Pusha T, Susan Sarandon, Seth Green, and even Oprah Winfrey rallied to the call, refusing to look for information regarding his past criminal exploits.
Eventually, 16 Republican and Democrat members of the Texas State Senate petitioned Governor Greg Abbot. On 15 November 2019, they were joined by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles in requesting that the governor grant Reed a 120 day stay. That same day, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals issued an indefinite stay of Reed’s execution in order to review his claims of innocence. At the time of the courts decision, 3 million misled petitioners had signed off on Shaun King’s propaganda.
Wikipedia editors lay covering fire for Rodney Reed
Rodney Reed has a long history of sexual assault. Apart from his DNA being found on the body of Stacey Stites, Reed’s DNA has been connected to no less than four other incidents of sexual assault. One of these victims was only 12-years-old at the time of the rape.
But if one were to look for information pertaining to these cases, they wouldn’t have much luck on his Wikipedia page. That’s because after 10 November 2019, just four days before Shaun King launched his petition, all references to his criminal history were purged. Thankfully, if one is willing to dig through the Wikipedia revision history, that information can still be retrieved.
That’s precisely what we did.[mfn] https://archive.ph/ExSUo [/mfn]
We’ve taken the liberty of providing that removed information below. We’ll explain the editors’ rationale for removing this information in the next section.
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.
The Sexual Assault of A.W.
Reed has also been connected by DNA to the rape of a twelve-year-old girl known only as A.W. She claimed that she was home alone and fell asleep on the couch after watching TV. She awoke when someone began pushing her face into the couch and had blindfolded and gagged her. She also reported being repeatedly hit in the head, called vulgar names, and orally, vaginally, and anally raped. The DNA collected from her rape kit conclusively implicated Reed. The case was never brought to trial, as Reed was already being tried for capital murder.
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.
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.
A justification for perhaps the most manipulative Wiki editing in their entire history
Wikipedia is one of the most useful sites on the internet. It’s a gift of open-access knowledge to humanity. Unfortunately, it’s also become highly politicized when it comes to coverage of current events.
Early on 10 November 2019, the Rodney Reed Wikipedia article was quite informative. It listed his suspected criminal history, his DNA being found at multiple crime scenes, and the full scope and context that the jury was informed of when they decided to hand down the sentence of death.
Unfortunately, by late afternoon, that was all purged from the record by Wikipedia editor “GorgeCustersSabre.” GCS, by his own admission, makes it a habit to delete large blocks of material from Wikipedia, claiming that he does so only when they are unreferenced. That’s not an accurate description of his behavior on the Rodney Reed page. The information provided on the previous versions of his page was meticulously cited.
The rest of this is about to get a bit wonky, but what you need to know has already been said: Wikipedia editors removed every reference to corroborating evidence found at other crime scenes including DNA matches that were linked to Rodney Reed beyond a shred of doubt. He raped a 12-year-old and they covered it up.
In the case of Rodney Reed, GCS argued that he is not a well-known figure—a highly dubious claim considering his case was promoted by high profile celebrities like Kim Kardashian and Oprah Winfrey, and received attention from millions of petitioning Americans.
After GSC removed that pertinent contextual information, other editors attempted to return it to its proper place. That’s when Wiki user “Wallyfromdilbert” jumped in to once again remove the most critical information corroborating Reed’s responsibility for Stites’ rape and murder. Then an editing war began. Then the page was locked and only approved editors were granted access.
Ultimately, it was WfD and GCS who won the day. As this article is being drafted, Reed remains breathing, his Wikipedia article remains sanitized, and the 3 million low-info petitioners that helped elevate his case to the eyes of influencers like Kardashian and Winfrey remain completely ignorant of his guilt.
Rodney Reed is a monster and the Wiki editors have enabled him.
A breakdown of the editing timeline:
9 November 2019:
The first major purge of damning information corroborating Rodney Reeds guilt was removed on 9 November 2019. The information had some errors, was somewhat poorly cited, but was generally on target and informed the reader about his past.
10 November 2019
Later on 10 November 2019
An editing war ensued. Ultimately, the 1987 incident was also purged. By the end of 10 November 2019, the article had been stripped of all contextual information about this man’s history of sexual assault.
The previous sexual assault allegations were not only relevant to the rape and murder of Stacey Stites, the evidence collected on those occasions constituted the backbone of the case against Reeds. The DNA collected from his assault in 1987 was matched with DNA found on Stites.
Wiki editors rationalized the removal of this crucial information by arguing with the “BLPCrime” policy—that’s a rule where “biographies of living persons” who are not “well known” do not display criminal histories that haven’t been fully assessed in court. At this point in time, they were not at all worried about other instances of BLPCrime violations. They were happy to leave up the name of Stite’s fiance who proponents of Reed’s innocence plea argued was the most likely culprit. Her fiance was DNA tested. There was no match. He’s not the culprit.
Some Wiki editors tried to make things right:
By any metric, Rodney Reed is “well known” and arguably a public figure by Wikipedia’s standards. He’s leveraged the likes of Oprah Winfrey, Kim Kardashian, and numerous other prominent celebrities for his cause. 3,000,000+ Americans signed a petition asking for a stay of execution. That’s pretty “well known.”
Wiki editors in favor of keeping the purged information argued just this point:
Unfortunately, they lost their argument. The page was ultimately locked and only approved editors could publish revisions. The censors won the day.