The Long Road
Newlyweds Are Murdered. Now, 20 Years Later, Were The Convicted Men Guilty?
-
Karen and Dyke Rhoads on their wedding day. (CBS)
-
Play CBS Video Video Witness In Doubt Darrell Herrington claimed he was an eyewitness the night that Dyke and Karen Rhoads were killed.
-
Video Witness Recants Testimony Debra Reinbolt gave a sworn statement that her entire testimony was a lie in the Rhoads murder case. Reinbolt, a self-described drug addict, testified that she had seen and taken part in the killings.
Click here for more information on the Medill Innocence Project.
Center on Wrongful Convictions.
Because understanding Paris, Ill. might be key to understanding who killed Dyke and Karen and whether the men convicted of this crime really are guilty.
Weekend after weekend, the students struggled with their investigation, knocking on doors and talking with the locals.
But Michael McFatridge, who prosecuted the Rhoads case, thinks the students were wasting their time. "I think when the dust settles they’ll be very disappointed because, in fact, Whitlock and Steidl are guilty. I mean, they’re the murderers."
But in 1986, the young prosecutor had had a tough time building a case against Whitlock and Steidl.
The students quickly learned that the investigation into the murders had gone absolutely nowhere for two months, until an eyewitness stepped forward with an amazing tale: Darrell Herrington claimed that he actually had seen Whitlock and Steidl at the scene of the crime.
And who was Darrell Herrington? He has been described to 48 Hours as the town drunk.
"At the time that would be, you know, a fair assessment. He was a big drinker," says McFatridge.
In a taped statement to police, Herrington said he woke up in Steidl’s car, outside the Rhoads’ home. "Apparently somebody was damn scared about something," Herrington told police. "I could hear a woman screaming and a man saying please don’t hurt me or kill me, or something like that."
After using his credit card to jimmy open the lock, Herrington told police he went inside and up the stairs, where Steidl confronted him. Herrington told police Steidl had blood on him and also had a knife. "Then I looked up and saw a body on the bed," Herrington said.
"He knew certain things, at least in our minds, that were not things that the town drunk would know," says McFatridge.
Town drunk or not, Herrington was key to the investigation. But without a confession, McFatridge was stuck. "We were not going to indict or charge somebody until we had a reasonable chance of conviction. We had one eyewitness with no corroborative evidence."
But five months later that changed when, incredibly, a second eyewitness came forward with that much-needed corroborating evidence. Debra Reinbolt, a self-described drug addict and alcoholic, had told police she had not only seen it all, she had provided a five-inch knife, and even helped with the killing.
By the time the students began their investigation, Reinbolt claimed she was clean and sober. But in 1986, she says, "I always drank, I was always drugged."
So what happened on the night of July 6, 1986?
"A big mess. Everything went wrong. I mean they were just going to go down there try and scare Dyke, and then things just got out of hand," says Reinbolt.
Reinbolt says she knew Whitlock and Steidl through her drug use and claims that she saw them both stabbing Dyke Rhoads.
Asked what was happening to Karen at that point, Reinbolt says, "She’s trying to get off the bed, and I had went over there and was telling her that everything would be okay."
Reinbolt says she held down Karen while they stabbed her and also claims that her husband’s knife was used in the killings.
Reinbolt’s story impressed police, especially when she accurately described a broken lamp found in the Rhoads’ bedroom.
Two separate juries believed both the eyewitness accounts. In 1987, despite their unwavering protests of innocence, the two men were convicted. Whitlock got life and Steidl received the death penalty.
Steidl says he had no involvement whatsoever in the crime and says he wished he knew who killed the young couple.
Whitlock also maintains his innocence. "I had a little belief that there was justice in the system. I was pretty naïve. I’m not naïve any more," he says.
Although prosecutor McFatridge had recommended no jail time for the two eyewitnesses, Reinbolt served two years in prison for concealing a homicide.
Herrington was never charged, but months into their investigation, the Northwestern students found new evidence that cast serious doubts on the testimony of the state’s two star witnesses.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



One comments that the investigators should be embarassed.
I only saw one investigator mentioned, and I doubt, at the time this took place, if Paris, Il. had more than one investigator.
Almost every ill of our system can be traced to one thing. Lack of money, or the realities of municiplal budgets. It is the same thing.
Statistically speaking, for every 7 convicted inmates in our sytem one is innocent. With almost 4 million people involved in our nations prison system that translates into a lot of innocent people in jail.
As our municipalities find themselves awash in a sea of crime, they have to cope in the best way they can, and that translates into shortcuts.
If the Police tell the DA they think this man did it, the DA doesn''t really have the time or the resources to challenge that, and as most of the time (6 out of 7 anyway) they are right the DA''s actually believe they are persuing the correct individuals.
Then it becomes a game. They must do X to get the convition. How many cases each week? Each month? Each year? Do you honestly believe anyone can feel compasion for an endless stream of names?
One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.
My only hope would be that when Karen saw what she had seen in that parking lot, which made her so afraid, that she did mention names.
What bothers me is the lack of accountability that the legal profession has and the low standards of conduct it holds itself to.
In many cases which are overturned there is prosecutorial malfeasance, especially including exculpatory evidence that is not turned over to the defense. Yet, how often do the stories finish with the prosecutors losing their licenses or even being diciplined? Amost Never. Examples like Nifong in the Duke Lacrosse case should be the rule. Instead they are the very rare exception...and probably only happened in the Lacrosse case because of the power and connections of Duke and the parents, their wealth and the notoriety of the case.
Judges fail us too, over and over. Where is the demand of the profession for studies which show that given the same set of circumstances most judges will make the same decisions? Why doesn''t the legal profession demand this of itself?
Until the legal system demands more of itself and can demonstrate such, I cannot participate as a juror.
- by tbone6648 March 2, 2008 2:17 AM EST
- How can a Police Dept representing the state be so incompetent. This corrupted police dept has not only caused pain to the wrongly accused but also to the family of the victims who are seeking justice. I think it is the least this police department owes them. How they could still consider the wrongly accused suspects shows how incompetent they truly are. This story brought tears to my eyes and outraged me so much I just had to coment.
- Reply to this comment
See all 19 Comments