Tami Reay’s purse, phone and vehicle were still at home in Pierre, South Dakota. The washing machine was running. She’d missed her usual contact with her mother and her ten o’clock shift. A coworker who reported her missing told police they’d begun a relationship. Tami and her husband, Brad, had been sleeping in separate rooms. She’d proposed waiting until their daughter’s school year ended to divorce. [1]
What was left at home
The previous evening, February 7, 2006, had included their daughter’s basketball game and shopping. The everyday things Tami left in the house were among the first details investigators could check. [1]
Police interviewed Brad at Walmart. He described Tami leaving with another man and offered an account of a vehicle arriving during the night. At the house, officers saw a blood droplet in the garage and noticed a strong cleaning smell in the Durango. They stopped the consensual search and obtained a warrant. Brad was arrested on February 8, before searchers found Tami near Oahe Dam two days later. That sequence shows the investigation developing from the missing-person report and the house, rather than beginning with the recovery of her body. [1]
The discovery near the spillway
Two days after Brad’s arrest, a National Guard pilot spotted Tami’s body near the Oahe Dam emergency spillway. Brad was in custody. His calls and letters to his brother became part of the investigation, including a map he presented as directions to fishing spots. [1]
The supposed fishing map
From jail, Brad communicated with his brother Bret through calls and letters. Investigators monitored those exchanges. A drawing presented as a fishing map led them to an area near Oahe Dam, where they recovered three City of Pierre trash bags holding items including bloody linens, gloves, a blanket and a tarp. Vegetation associated with the hiding place and items from the home became additional comparisons described at trial. [1]
The correspondence also exposed an attempt to redirect the inquiry. Investigators intercepted Bret near Spearfish and found notebooks linked to anonymous letters containing information about the case. The court connected the letters, jail communications and discoveries rather than treating an anonymous message as an independent witness. The map illustrated in this gallery is a new schematic, not a reproduction of Brad's drawing or directions to the evidence site. [1]
That chain of events gave jurors material to consider beyond Brad's later admission that he had concealed the body. His accusation against his daughter remained his defense account; the verdict did not establish that accusation against her. [1]
Blaming the child
Brad eventually claimed that his daughter had killed Tami and that he had only cleaned up and disposed of evidence to protect her.
That was a defense allegation, not an established fact about the child. She was not convicted of killing her mother.
His account also changed the evidentiary dispute. Because he admitted transporting the body and cleaning the home and vehicle, some physical findings no longer distinguished between the prosecution’s theory and his explanation of a cover-up.
The jury had to decide whether his claimed reason for those acts was credible.
It convicted him of first-degree murder. He received a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without parole. The state Supreme Court affirmed in 2009.
The later expert-evidence challenge
Brad later sought habeas relief, arguing that his lawyer should have retained experts to examine particular items of evidence.
The 2019 opinion [2] addresses an uncertain mark on Tami’s skin, DNA on a towel and damage to a tarp. Brad argued that expert work could have supported his accusation against his daughter.
The court record did not establish the skin mark as a reliable bite identification. The original pathologist could not definitively determine its cause.
The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of relief. It examined the ineffective-assistance claim under the governing legal standard, rather than reopening the case as a new jury trial.
The map led investigators to items they could examine and compare with things from the house. Tami’s last evening had included a basketball game with her daughter. Brad tried to put responsibility for her death on that child. The jury convicted him, and the two appellate decisions cited here left the judgment in place. [1] [2]
Case brief
Pierre, South Dakota · 2006
- Recorded outcome
- Brad Reay convicted of first-degree murder; life without parole; 2019 relief denied
Key moments
People in this case
- Tamara “Tami” Reay
Murder victim
Photo at source · Cowboy State Daily · photographs from her daughter’s account - Brad Reay
Convicted of murdering Tami Reay
Photo at source · Cowboy State Daily · photograph provided by Haylee Cole
Look closer · 3 visuals
Inside the evidence.
Open a visual to explore what it contributed to the case—and the limits of what it shows. These original illustrations explain the record; they are not photographs of the actual evidence.
The map concealed in correspondence
Original editorial illustration — not an actual evidence photograph or exhibit.
Read the evidence notes
Calls and a supposed fishing map directed investigators toward discarded material near Oahe Dam.
A new schematic with no usable route or scene coordinates, not Brad’s actual drawing.
The bags near the dam
Original editorial illustration — not an actual evidence photograph or exhibit.
Read the evidence notes
The recovered items supplied evidence linked to the concealment and the home.
Generic, non-graphic bags. No actual blood, remains or exhibit photograph is shown.
The anonymous-letter trail
Original editorial illustration — not an actual evidence photograph or exhibit.
Read the evidence notes
Investigators linked supposedly anonymous information with correspondence involving Brad and Bret.
No handwriting or letter text is reproduced. The child Brad accused was not convicted.
★ Key evidence used in a conviction · ✓ Exclusion or reversal · ◇ Disputed evidence · ⊘ Excluded at retrial · ◆ Identity / investigative finding, not a conviction. A symbol does not mean one item proved the whole case.
Follow the locations
Put the story on the map.
Follow the dated entries, then select an event to find its regional setting. Shared-location pins open a group of events. Evidence symbols identify important findings and their limitations.
Open the map in its own window ↗Sources & further reading
Editorial review: 2026-11-12 · 702 words