Radley Balko | January 30, 2008
Ryan Frederick was arraigned today. He was charged with first-degree murder, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and . . . simple possession of marijuana.
That's right. Though police still haven't told us how much marijuana they found, it wasn't enough to charge Frederick with anything more than a misdemeanor. For a misdemeanor, they broke down his door, a cop is dead, and a 28-year-old guy's life is ruined. Looks like the informant mistook Frederick's gardening hobby for an elaborate marijuana growing operation, and those Japanese maple trees for marijuana plants.
The parallels to Cory Maye are pretty striking. You've got a young guy minding his own business, with no criminal record, whose worst transgression is that he smokes a little pot from time to time. A bad informant and bad police procedures then converge, resulting in police breaking down his door while he's sleeping. He fires a gun to defend himself, unwittingly kills a cop, and now faces murder charges.
Here's hoping Frederick escapes Cory Maye's fate. This guy shouldn't be in jail. He should be compensated by the City of Chesapeake. As should the family of Detective Shivers. And these raids need to stop.
You wonder how large the pile of bodies will need to grow before the cops stop breaking down doors and invading homes to enforce consensual crimes.
Prior posts on this case here.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Ruining the lives of 2 men, killing one, and screwing up 2
families.
All because of a plant.
Hahahahahahhaha. Ugh.
Simple possession + time served. The fact that a cop is dead will likely override an obvious case of self defense.
Have any national organizations with serious lawyers taken up
his case?
Where's the ACLU? IJ?
Hell, the NRA should wade in on this one, except, of course,
they're hopeless morons on the WOD. If the NRA had any strategic
sense at all, they'd recognize that a WOD that has trashed the 5th
Amendment is on a collision course with the 2d.
This country will rip itself in half over 1% on the top tax rate, and the drug war victims just go under everybody's radar.
You wonder how large the pile of bodies will need to grow before the cops stop breaking down doors and invading homes to enforce consensual crimes. As Machievellian as it sounds, I think it would be healthier for society if the murder charge gets tried to a jury.
RC Dean:
It's already doing pretty well at nipping off parts of the 2D. A
couple of places have banned SKS's (cheap Soviet-era semi-auto
rifles) under the pretenses that only drug dealers have them and
they use them to murder cops.
http://www.vpc.org/graphics/sksfactsheetfinal.pdf
err, handy clickable link now http://www.vpc.org/graphics/sksfactsheetfinal.pdf
It still smells like the cops had the informant break in to
gather evidence for the warrant. Nothing was taken, right?
If that is so Shivers' family deserves nothing and
the surviving cops should be charged with felony murder.
Bingo =
Those rifles are semi auto - why do they call them 'assault
rifles'?
They look scary? I don't really know. I think they had to be
banned specifically by name in California because they actually
comply with most of the ridiculous Cali regs. (The magazine isn't
detachable, you need to load it with stripper clips in the top,
most models come with 10-round magazines, no pistol grip)
But its a semi-auto that is fairly reliable and affordable for the
folks in poor areas, and apparently you can't have that.
If the Chesapeake drug squad was running a warantless "sneak and
peak" before getting the rubber stamp on their warrants this is
more like the Kathryn Johnston case(or worse) than a wrong
address/bad tip sort of thing.
Am I being a paranoid cop-hater... or is this exactly what it looks
like?
Keep us updated and spread the word on how to help this guy. If he has a legal defense fund or something post it.
Radley--
I don't know why I would thank somebody for depressing the hell out
of me...but thank you.
Excellent work. Again.
Does he have an attorney yet?
I'd volunteer except I've been a lawyer for all of a week and I
would imagine he'd want good counsel.
Dave W,
As much as I dislike our justice system I would rather see it
"work" with this no-billed by the grand jury than go to trial.
"You wonder how large the pile of bodies will need to grow
before the cops stop breaking down doors and invading homes to
enforce consensual crimes." -Balko
Whenever I hear Mr. Bush and his drug warriors talk about "The
Culture of Death," when speaking of their opposition to abortion, I
am almost overcome by the absurdity. If there is a culture of death
in this country, the attitudes and actions of our intrepid Drug
Warriors are among the best examples. It seems that they feel
obliged to destroy the village, in order to save it. What else is
there to say?
As your litmus test for both common sense and simple human decency,
find out how relevant candidates and incumbents stand on the war on
drugs -- at least the war on pot. Don't re-elect any drug warriors.
Don't elect any new drug warriors. Repeal of the Controlled
Substances Act -- a cancer in our system -- must be the goal, and
it will only be possible if the drug warriors are swept away and
replaced with people who have their heads on straight with respect
to this issue in particular, and the idea of individual liberty in
general.
I'm even more depressed by the results of the Google news search I did for Ryan Frederick's name; it turned up less than two pages of results: other than local Virginia news outlets, Radley's posts and a mention in the Drug War Chronicle.
SIV--
My theory is that the burglar somehow caught a glimpse at some
earlier time of what he thought were pot plants (maybe he just saw
the boxes the grow lights came in when they were put out with the
trash). When he broke in and found no plants or quantities of weed,
he left empty-handed, and then when caught by the cops, decided he
could get the charges reduced by, um, being a bit loose with the
truth.
By no means does this let the cops off the hook. If true, this
means they accepted at face value the tall tale of some guy they
had just busted. And they either lied to the judge about their
evidence to get a warrant, or the judge's hands are not clean
either. Judges are supposed to be a check in this process to ensure
there really is probable cause. They should be held accountable as
well.
Is there a Pulitzer Prize for blogging or does this qualify
under journalism?
I'd say journalism, and Radley deserves his for the work he's done
following this sad case.
This once again demonstrates the exponentially bad effects that bad
policies have on private citizens.
Radley, thank you again for you commitment to this issue.
Some day...I hope I should live so long...some day enough people will listen and end all of this stupidity. Keep the stories alive. Keep telling the truth. Thank you, Radley.
As Machievellian as it sounds, I think it would be healthier
for society if the murder charge gets tried to a jury.
Dave W-
If it were 12 people from around this board, you'd be right.
But twelve virginians? esp 12 tidewater virginians? Cop is dead,
and drug user killed him. Case closed. And doubly so if Frederick
is brown-ish and Shivers was white-ish
Sorry, I call bullshit on the weed. C'mon! An enthusiastic
hydroponic gardner that smokes weed but doesn't grow it?
Plus, the whole notion of a dynamic entry or no-knock raid for an
indoor grow operation is ludicrous. It's not like someone can flush
a bunch of pot plants down the toilet.
I hope this dude gets enough legal help to get some serious
jury-selection help.
Sorry, I call bullshit on the weed. C'mon! An enthusiastic
hydroponic gardner that smokes weed but doesn't grow it?
Good point - but why didn't they charge him for anything more?
What kind of person reads Reason? Not one comment supporting the
police on this one. Cool.
Remember the 1970s "SNL" skit(s) where police break in on a couple
sharing a joint and end up shooting them … saying, "Another
marijuana-related death"?
This discussion begs a comparison between the "war on drugs" and
the "war on terror." Throw in our war against Bush's "axis of
evil," and you have to wonder how soon it will be before our police
state implodes.
you have to wonder how soon it will be before our police
state implodes.
you have no idea what it's like to actually live under a real-live
"police state", and I would never wish it upon anybody.
Hyperbole doesn't help this tragedy one iota.
1) Whatever happened to the burglary investigation?
2) How could we avoid taxpayers footing the bill for the citizen's
being, as Radley rightly suggested, "compensated by the City of
Chesapeake"?
Buzz Kill - Reading a Balko story.
New name - Balkill.
Thanks for the Balkill, Radley.
Keep up the great work. Please keep us posted as this winds it way
through the courts. I've got enough free time I may need to head to
Virginia for the ultimate trial. That should be an eye
opener.
CB
Not one comment supporting the police on this
one.
Lots of comments, on previous threads about this incident,
supporting the right of individual police officers to be protected
from the predictably tragic consequences of such foolish policies
and practices.
"Not one comment supporting the police on this
one."
That depends on whether you mean "police" to refer to the law
enforcement establishment or are using "police" as the plural of
"policeman." It seems people are genuinely upset that a cop is dead
and are angry at that institution for creating mortal danger where
it needn't exist.
Not a peep thus far from the ACLU of Virginia?
Have they lifted a finger in any of these cases?
...you have no idea what it's like to actually live under a
real-live "police state", and I would never wish it upon
anybody.
Hyperbole doesn't help this tragedy one iota.
Police states are not a binary affair; they occur on a continuum.
When someone describes what these cops did (kick down a person's
door on *rumor* of an illegal substance/activity, using extralegal
methods to gather evidence, and using tactics in a manner so as to
produce maximum terror and increase the likelihood of a
confrontation), police state is certainly the correct
descriptor.
Using that descriptor should not automatically imply that the
situation is equivalent to the infamous and far more total police
states of Stalinist USSR or Nazi Germany. e.g. "Torture lite" is
still torture, even if the prisoner's balls aren't being
electrocuted...if you know what I mean.
Now how does this factor in to the equation?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,326885,00.html
"Robbery Ring Disguised as Drug Raids Nets Convictions for Former
LA Cops"
Actual cops PRETENDING to do drug raids to rob people!
So, now in light of that story, even if it is the cops busting down
your door you still don't know if they are there to raid or
rob.
Actual cops PRETENDING to do drug raids to rob
people!
Reminds me of the movie "Training Day".
I'm a cop-hater in general so it's hard to be objective, but the
stupidity of this situation is astounding.
one day a presidential candidate will come around who will stop this kind of thing and won't have a past of mismanaging a 100-person circulation newsletter. That will be the guy we here at reason will vote for. Until then, tough shit for everyone caught up in the WOD.
Once more... These raids will not end until politicians families
and friends have their homes raided. Call in tips about a local
politicians son-in-law making a meth deal at 1234 Skippy Lane right
now but you better hurry. Once they lose a few of their loved ones
via these tactics shit will change quick.
Not till it affects them do they react why is this not obvious when
it is demonstrated all the time.
Unfortunetly the cops are to stupid to stop and think about it
themselves to change anything even though they are the ones getting
shot over these policies and laws. How do you explain to your 3
kids that daddy lost his life over simple possession of
marijuana?
Sorry but my definition of hero doesn't include someone putting
themselves in a dangerous situation on purpose only to put another
person in a dangerous situation in which they have to react
instantly in self defense.
If you cheap shot someone with a punch and they turn around and
beat you to a pulp should we feel sorry for the cheap shot giver? I
don't fucking think so. I make no distinction between that and
these raids that end like this.
ONLY person I feel for is the guy in jail on murder charges because
he decided to fight back.
Elemenope: "Police states are not a binary affair; they occur on
a continuum."
Well, we're still pretty far toward the "not a police state" end of
that continuum (though we are something of a prison state; we
incarcerate an ungodly number of people). But, if we want to win
the war on drugs we will have to move toward the "is a police
state" end of the continuum. We are clearly not far enough down
that road to effectively fight the war on drugs.
I don't agree with the anti-drug-warriors in at least one respect:
I think that the war on drugs is winnable. China set the template a
long time ago, and if we were serious about winning we would follow
that template. If I ran things, and I wanted to win the war on
drugs, I'd order the cops to put a bullet in the head of anyone
caught possessing controlled substances. On the spot. I'd also
order them to conduct a lot of random searches. No muss, no fuss,
and a lot less expensive than trial by jury followed by three hots
and a cot. Then I'd send the bill for the bullet to their family-
and it would be a ruinous bill. This would actually save so much
money that there would be a lot left over for interdiction- we
could just blow any ship or plane we didn't recognize out of the
water or the air, and since every incoming passenger on a
recognized vessel would be subject to strip search and summary
execution the amount of drugs getting into the country would be
pretty small. So, drug war won, at least against the drugs that
sneak over the border and displace native drugs.
I wouldn't want to see us follow this policy, but I think it is
useful to recognize what winning the war on drugs would require.
I'm not a pacifist- extreme violence has its uses. But you should
never start a war if you can't stomach the measures needed to win
it. You'll wind up doing whatever it is that you initially shrank
from, eventually, but too late and too half-heartedly for it to be
effective. The last thing we want is a police state full of drug
addicts.
One more thing- What would the odds be we would know anything at
all about this case if the homeowner was killed?
I hear you can bet on anything in Vegas. Wonder if there is a
bookie to set the odds for that.
As someone who has been to China I can assure you it is not
"drug free". Not sure why you think they "won" the war on drugs
there.
Perhaps you should go see for yourself.
nonesuch - "I'd order the cops to put a bullet in the head of
anyone caught possessing controlled substances"
And I would summarily hunt you down and put one in yours. Next.
one day a presidential candidate will come around who will
stop this kind of thing and won't have a past of mismanaging a
100-person circulation newsletter. That will be the guy we here at
reason will vote for. Until then, tough shit for everyone caught up
in the WOD.
Paul is not going to end the war on drugs. He's just going to leave
it up to the states to fight it how they like.
Are there no anti-drug war lawyers out there? It seems someone could become quite famous by fighting for Frederick in this case. Self-defense is winnable even if it seems like an uphill battle. Turn Frederick's fear of the burglary that occurred the week before into his reason for firing his weapon in the middle of the night. If he is telling the truth about growing Japanese Maples instead of drugs, he has a real chance. It only takes one juror to be sympathetic to his real fears of having his home broken into.
ktc2: China was pretty successful at eradicating opium, when
they were willing to do what it took. They also managed to clamp
down on prostitution and gambling to a remarkable degree- where
there's a will there's a way. The problem is that it required
really extreme measures, and as soon as they loosened up just a bit
drugs, prostitution, and gambling came right back- were you in
China before, say 1982, or after? If we want to win the war on
drugs we will have to be more a police state than modern China
is.
and Dee: I think you have missed my point. I posed a hypothetical:
"If I ran things" (I don't, and never will, though I've always
liked the idea of naming a small ship the "I do") and "If I wanted
to win the war on drugs" (again, I don't) "this is what I would
do". Probably a lot of people wanted to hunt down Mao- none
succeeded in doing so.
I just can't see how Frederick can be convicted. It was
justifiable self defense. If he had a brick of hash for sale I
could see a jury hanging him out to dry. But a joint or two? Oh
noes, was there a six pack in the fridge too?
Maybe I'm being optimistic (I have next to no knowledge about
Virginia jurors), but I just can't see 12 people agreeing to
convict here. Hung jury at worst.
Dave W-
If it were 12 people from around this board, you'd be right.
But twelve virginians? esp 12 tidewater virginians? Cop is dead,
and drug user killed him. Case closed. And doubly so if Frederick
is brown-ish and Shivers was white-ish
That is what I meant by Machievellian. I think it would be
healthier for society, even if he convicted. Maybe more so.
Although, frankly, I don't think he would be convicted assuming
that the policeman had the panel out of his door. I think Virginia
is gunnutty (I mean in a healthy postive way) enough to understand
that if someone is removing your door panel then that is enough to
justify reasonable self defense.
Besides raising self defense, that Broccoli lawyer should also
raise the 4th Amendment right to resist unlawful arrest &
seizure. It is about time that that forgotten nugget of old time
law be dusted off and brought back into the mainstream. Tell Judge
Scalia that when he talks about sufficient remedies against rogue
cops that this was traditionally understood to be one of them. The
seizure was clearly unlawful here because the warrant should have
been for the garage, not the house.
DavidS,
He's just going to leave it up to the states to fight it how
they like.
Without a federal WoD and without fed money funding SWAT teams, how
long do you think the state WoD will last? Especially in states
that have already tried to legalize or decriminalize some
things?
As Machievellian as it sounds, I think it would be healthier
for society if the murder charge gets tried to a jury.
Of course, even if the jury acquits, Mr. Frederick will have been
punished by the process by being jailed pending acquittal, by
having the charge on his record, and by all the costs it
entails.
Episiarch: Good luck with that one. Compare to the Maye case. At
least Frederick is white.
and adrian: electing one president or another is about the least
useful thing in this case. The War on Drugs is a perfect example of
the problems with democracy. It is pursued because a significant
chunk of the electorate wants it pursued. We were getting somewhere
with this in the 70s, but then crack came along and woke every
racial bugaboo from the 30s. I know nothing gets through to fervent
Paulites, but you might stop to consider the idea that the drug war
was reinvigorated by exactly the people those newsletters pandered
to- people who consider blacks "animals".
One more thing- What would the odds be we would know
anything at all about this case if the homeowner was
killed?
Radley would ferret it out and report. He's real good at that.
Of course, even if the jury acquits, Mr. Frederick will have
been punished by the process by being jailed pending acquittal, by
having the charge on his record, and by all the costs it
entails.
Yeah, I am kinda saying that it would be nice to have a Rosa Parks
type figure. Easy for me to say. I am not volunteering for the
role.
Radley would ferret it out and report. He's real good at
that.
Ummmm. First of all the police would have shot someone with a gun
pointed at them. Second, a lot, lot more drugs would have been
found in the house and garage.
There are plenty of stories that show up on the Cop boards that Mr.
balko steers clear of.
Episiarch: Good luck with that one. Compare to the Maye
case. At least Frederick is white.
As unfortunate and shitty as it is, being white is why I think he
would get acquitted. Also, he is a little guy who looks relatively
harmless and liked gardening (i.e. NERD). As I said, I just can't
see all 12 people deciding to convict.
Radley would ferret it out and report. He's real good at
that.
as just a random example out of 100s I could choose:
remember Rigoberto Alpizar, the man shot for running off a plane.
Witness said that he was not shouting that he had a bomb.
Investigators said he was shouting that he had a bomb. Alpizar was
unavailable to testify. Case closed. Not much that Mr. Balko or
anyone else can do with that.
This is part of the reason that I fear that police departments will
end up putting a higher priority on killing people like Mr.
Frederick or Mr. Maye in the future. They like how the Alpizar
thing or the daniel Castillo thing went down a lot better.
Those rifles are semi auto - why do they call them 'assault
rifles'?
Violence Policy Center definition of "Bullet Hoses:"
4. However, this is a distinction without a difference
in terms of killing power. Civilian semiautomatic
assault weapons incorporate all of the functional design features
that make assault weapons so deadly. They are arguably more deadly
than military versions, because most experts agree that
semiautomatic fire is more accurate-and thus more lethal-than
automatic fire.
5. The distinctive "look" of assault weapons is not
cosmetic. It is the visual result of specific functional design
decisions. Military assault weapons were designed and
developed for a specific military purpose-laying down a high
volume of fire over a wide killing zone, also known as "hosing
down" an area.
(Emphasis in the original. Note that the two points contradict each
other.) VPC is the Brady Center on steroids.
C'mon! An enthusiastic hydroponic gardner that smokes weed but
doesn't grow it?
Good point - but why didn't they charge him for anything
more?
On the second search, an ounce was all they could "find" without
getting caught? They could hardly claim to have missed five pounds
during the original search.
A more reasonable answer might be, if I was proud of my plants and
wanted to show them off to the neighbors, I might not want weed
among them.
I'm trying to keep up with the Ryan Frederick posts at the unofficial wiki. It may be easier to follow than Radley's search results.
I nominate Radley Balko for "Greatest social activist of the
millennium"
Keep on agitating.
Dave W. "remember Rigoberto Alpiza..." vaguely.. I think. Much
as I admire Radley's reporting on this subject (while disliking his
take on the Duke three), he isn't going to Rambo the war on the war
on drugs. It's too big for one man ;).
But yeah, once the cops shoot you you are less likely to tell your
side of the story well- and the boot-lickers aren't going to do it
for you. I'm reminded of an old joke (one appropriated by Terry
Pratchett) about the nature of the Universe... the punchline is
"You're very clever, young man, but it's turtles all the way down."
Well, it's boot-lickers all the way down, and don't forget
it.
Dave W.: "I fear that police departments will end up putting a
higher priority on killing people"
I had the same thought about police priorities. Dead men tell no
tales. In one post an officer was quoted saying they wouldn't have
done anything differently. I was skeptical. I think that, knowing
what they know now, they would have chosen to shoot first ;). One
less dead cop, one more dead perp, that's a win,
statistically.
Epeisiarch: well, maybe the publicity will help Frederick, but the
main difference between black guys who justifiably shoot cops and
white guys who do so is what they wind up pleading to. The normal
course for this case would be to point out to Frederick that he's
facing a capital case and suggest that he might be better off
taking the 25. With good behavior he could be out in 12.
That 12 is a chimera. Having killed a cop is not the crime you want
to come before a parole board with, and being white might even make
it worse. The board will have some liberals and some conservatives.
Both will understand that it is natural for a black man to shoot up
some po-pos.
The conservatives will want to punish the black man further for
that, while the liberals will find it cruel to punish a man too
much for his natural inclinations. Neither side will question
whether or not it might have been reasonable to shoot that
particular police. But Frederick is white- he has no excuse.
Killing cops is aberrant behavior for a white man, and that means
that even the liberals on the board will want to hang onto
him.
If I were Frederick, I think I'd want to go to jury trial, but it's
easy to say that when you aren't facing a death sentence.
A more reasonable answer might be, if I was proud of my
plants and wanted to show them off to the neighbors, I might not
want weed among them.
During that several day period that the police department went dark
on this, I'll bet you anything they talked to a few neighbors who
said they had seen the "grow operation" and they never saw anything
but maple trees.
Somebody used the term "Drug War Victims". I would like to see some numbers on how many Americans have been truly victimized by our governments war on drugs, which at this point is nothing more than a very big business. If so many lives wern't being ruined it would almost be comical.
LarryA: "civilian semiautomatic assault weapons incorporate all
of the functional design features that make assault weapons so
deadly"
I suppose that being able to "hose down" an area might make weapons
deadlier for people who can't shoot straight. But I'd be willing
(hypothetically- in reality I'd rather not) to duel someone
carrying an "assault rifle" with even a child's 22. At 20 paces the
outcome might be uncertain- at 50 it wouldn't.
Full disclosure: I've never shot another human being. But I sure as
hell have killed some deer- more than any normal hunter has. When I
was a kid we were allowed to take as many deer as we wanted, buck
or doe, any time of year- our hunting season started on 1 Jan and
ended on 31 Dec. I was taught a "one shot one kill" policy, mainly
because it is a pain in the ass to track down a wounded
animal.
The truth is that a good rifle is still a lot more dangerous than
an "assault weapon" if the man holding the rifle can shoot.
"A special prosecutor has been appointed to handle the
first-degree murder case against Ryan Frederick, a 28-year-old
Chesapeake man accused of killing a Chesapeake police
detective.
Chesapeake Commonwealth's Attorney Nancy Parr said this morning
that she requested a special prosecutor because her office worked
closely with the detective in the prosecution of drug offenses and
the forfeiture of money and property in such cases. Parr made the
request for an outside prosecutor to avoid any perceived appearance
of conflict or bias by her office."
The story was printed on another board I frequent.
Unfortunately, this was one of the min sentiments:
Pot-head loser. Kill him.
And unfortunately the jury is more likely going to be made up of 12
people who think like that than it is with 12 people who think like
the majority of people on this blog do.
The Tidewater area has a large African-American population. As
racist as it sounds, if I'm Frederick's lawyer, I make sure that's
who sits on the jury.
What will it take to end this horrific crap? When non-marginal
and/or prominent people start being victimized in large numbers. In
that way, it's no different than the '60s anti-war movement. Apart
from a few "lifers," it didn't start in earnest until the draft
boards started plucking nice white college boys to go to Vietnam,
rather than just blacks and white trash. (Note the sarcastic tone
here--some folks don't seem well attuned to that, and I don't want
to get into a tedious discussion about it).
This is the first I have heard of this story, this has become a
troubling trend lately by police forces. Waiting until it's
reasonably certain that the home occupant is sleeping, then conduct
a no-knock raid. To me this is all the proof I need that the police
forces do this to maximize the danger and risk to both the police
officer and the subject of the raid.
It would not surprise me in the least if the departments who
conduct these raids also have an acceptable police casualty figure
as well. They have to know that they will be shot at by a
percentage of the raided 'suspects'.
While I am no fan of lawsuits, a few families of the slain
detectives successfully suing some police departments for reckless
raid policies leading to the loss of a father/son/etc. would put an
end to these raids quicker then any legislative action. The trick
here is for the families to realize what really cost them their
loved one.
"A special prosecutor has been appointed..."
This is probably good news for Frederick. Parr is right to do this-
the local prosecutors probably knew the deceased too well to be
allowed to bring the charges. If Frederick is lucky the outside
prosecutor will not hit him with a capital case- it's a lot easier
to negotiate when you aren't facing the death penalty. That said, I
think this guy is looking at some time. Andrew's right- if this
comes to trial it is unlikely to involve 12 angry men. It will be
12 bored burghers, and they will convict. He shot a cop.
Rachel: well, if I wanted to calculate the number victims of the
war on drugs, and if I wanted to restrict that to residents of the
US, I'd start by setting a threshold. How victimized must you be to
be counted?
Absent that, I'd say that we should assume that all citizens of the
US are victims, to one degree or another. From that number I would
subtract everyone who gains more than they lose... this would
include most politicians, most cops, all correction officers, and
many dealers.
Call that 5% of the population. The population of the US recently
passed 300 million. So, I think that we can safely say that at
least 285 million US citizens are victims of the drug war.
Here's a better question: how many victims of the drug war are
happy to wage it?
As racist as it sounds, if I'm Frederick's lawyer, I make
sure that's who sits on the jury.
You underestimate the universal human desire to see people who
aren't "us" get fucked. Individuals who should know better,
assembled into a group (of, say, 12), will always regress to it.
Sympathy - and maybe even reason - is only personal.
You'd have to strategically split that jury's makeup very carefully
to avoid a group-reactionary conviction. The best you could
reasonably expect is to hang it.
This guy's boned.
We're all primarily victims of the drug war because A) we pay
for it through excessive taxation and B) it takes away from
finding, prosecuting, and imprisoning legitimate criminals such as
murderers, rapists, thieves, child molesters, and politicians. It
actually creates murderers, thieves, and politicians in many
instances, so it's doubly worse in that regard.
If you like to partake in certain vices, you are further
victimized.
"You underestimate the universal human desire to see people who
aren't "us" get fucked."
I wonder how a black juror would view this case. Would s/he view it
as "OK, time for a white man to pay for a change" or "fuck the
cops." Considering jurors are made up of voters, any black folks on
the jury are probably the community church going types and might
side with the police and/or think the drug pusher needs to be
rehabilitated.
Frederick's best hope is for an intelligent gun rights advocate on
the jury, and that brings up my next question. What happens if
there is a hung jury? Do they re-try the case? If all it takes is
one...
I so wish I was on that jury.
"Here's a better question: how many victims of the drug war
are happy to wage it?"
snitches = vichy
Nonesuch, I'm willing to bet China is not drug-free. It's
probably deep underground. But I'll agree for arguement's sake. You
give a great example of how much like our enemies we must become to
win.
To win (if possible), we must abandon everything we stand for. Why
fight that war.
Living in Colorado, my home is my castle is not only a slogan,
but also written into law, as it is in Texas I understand as well,
probably other states, but I don't know.
Anyway, I can't help but wonder, why you don't hear about this kind
of things in CO. I can't speak for TX, as I don't live there, so
anything would have to be national news for me to hear of it.
Anyway, in my town, there have been a rash of 2 AM forced
burglaries involving busting down of a door and multiple suspects
entering the residence armed. As a result, we keep one of our
handguns out of the gun safe and next to our bed. If I were
startled awake by armed strangers, I am quite certain I would open
fire, shoot first ask questions later, my wife and kids safety
depend on it.
I am also sure that even if they strangers were shouting POLICE
POLICE, in my heightened state at the moment, with adrenaline
pumping and still half awake, I wouldn't even recognize the word,
and there would certainly be dead people in my house, probably
including me.
Maybe thats why we don't have many no knock raids here in Colorado,
the cops know that people shoot to kill when someones breaking in
at night.
Maybe more states should adopt the castle doctrine.
I wonder how a black juror would view this case. Would s/he
view it as "OK, time for a white man to pay for a change" or "fuck
the cops." Considering jurors are made up of voters, any black
folks on the jury are probably the community church going types and
might side with the police and/or think the drug pusher needs to be
rehabilitated.
Frederick's best hope is for an intelligent gun rights advocate on
the jury, and that brings up my next question. What happens if
there is a hung jury? Do they re-try the case? If all it takes is
one...
I so wish I was on that jury.
You're right, it depends on the jury. But in the Tidewater area, I
would rather take my chances with a black juror, who could have
either direct or indirect acquaintance with police misbehavior,
over a gun-rights type that is likely also to be military or
ex-military, who I'm guessing would have a strong "law 'n order"
stance. Trust me, after trying to talk about the drug war with my
Navy uncle, I wouldn't want him on Frederick's jury, and there are
a lot of guys like my uncle living in the Tidewater.
Also consider that the special prosecutor may be more likely to
offer a "reasonable" plea agreement, since he won't be part of the
local political process. Regardless of the injustice, such a deal
might be tempting for Frederick, given the uncertainty of the
situation.
SIV asked:
"Am I being a paranoid cop-hater... or is this exactly what it
looks like?"
It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.
TrickyVic SAYS: "Nonesuch, I'm willing to bet China is not
drug-free"
Well, not anymore, and that's part of my point. They got soft ;).
Trust me on this one- they really did make opium use rare for a
while. They proved that it is possible to eliminate the
underground- you just have to shoot them on the spot.
But, thanks for understanding what I am getting at. The truth is
that China got fucked with China's permission. The war against
opium is a small part of that.
If I were doing jury selection I would do my best to keep blacks off the jury. I'd be looking for people with macbooks- maybe people who own Subarus. Blacks won't empathize with a suburban white guy.
I'd post bail if possible and take off. You'd never hear from me again. I would not even hope my 5% chance of aquittal succeeded. I'd be in South America so fast, your head would spin. Even if I thought I had a good chance at victory in the case, why risk it? I'd send incremental payments to the bail bondsman if I felt he could find me and I'd just keep moving. Like Kaiser Soze, I'd be gone.
Not a peep thus far from the ACLU of Virginia?
It involved a firearm. ACLU steers clear of anything related to
that.
Lamb: "I'd post bail if possible and take off."
My mom was nuts enough to register my existence under a few names,
in a few countries. This makes me a citizen of more than one
nation, under more than one name. I'm _still_ not sure where I was
born.
But, I don't think you get out on bail when you shoot cops. I'm
pretty sure they are going to keep you. No Costa Rica for you,
motherfucker,
"""Trust me on this one- they really did make opium use rare for
a while. They proved that it is possible to eliminate the
underground- you just have to shoot them on the spot."""
Make opium use rare? I agree, but not end drug use. I doubt it was
ever drug free. However, if you want to say that's good enough to
be called a victory for your example, I'll play along. Besides the
most important thing to take from your post is how far we would
have to go to get remotely close to a drug war victory. It's not
worth it.
TrickyVic: My point is that they won their war on drugs. It can
be done. You just have to decide to give some shit up to win
it.
and, On the Lamb: As a matter of fact I have given money to a few
people fleeing drug charges. They get to hang out on pristine
beaches and swim in blue waters. Good! I'm not rich, but I have
enough money that I can put a bit of it toward my ideals.
Speaking of similar cases...this was on Channel 3 news
site:
http://www.wtkr.com/global/story.asp?s=7805833
Ryan Frederick should not be charged with any crime for
defending his home. Here in the bay area there are several brutal
home invasion robberies every month.
Doors are broken down, victims are tortured, robbed and murdered by
vicious crooks. Like SWAT teams they do not knock. These merciless
thieves crash in, take the household prisoner, steal everything
worth taking and force victims to give up pin numbers so they can
close out their bank accounts.
When the police behave like dangerous brigands, they have to accept
the risk that an innocent resident will shoot first when they smash
in the door rather than risking death at the hands of outlaws.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245