Ryan Frederick Update

Radley Balko | December 16, 2008

Lots of interesting new information came out at a pre-trial hearing yesterday in Chesapeake, Virginia for Ryan Frederick, the man charged with capital murder for killing Det. Jarrod Shivers during a botched drug raid on Frederick's home last January.

To briefly catch you up: Police were acting on an informant's tip that Frederick was growing marijuana in his garage. They found no plants, and only a misdemeanor amount of marijuana, which Frederick concedes was for personal use. Both I and the Virginian-Pilot newspaper have since reported that the informant in the case, "Steven," and another man who also says he was a police informant, Renaldo Turnbull, illegally broke into Frederick's home three nights before the raid to look for probably cause, likely with the consent or at least the knowledge of the police.

Here's what we learned yesterday:

• The State is now conceding that the police informant in the case illegally broke into Frederick's home three nights before the raid. Until now, they had either denied the connection or refused to comment.

• Frederick's attorney released an audio recording taken in a police car shortly after the raid. In it, Frederick tries to explain that he was confused and frightened because someone had broken into his home earlier in the week. A police detective replies, "We know that." In a second recording, the detective says again, "First off, we know your house had been broken into. OK?"

• Yet according to the Virginian-Pilot, the State still insists that, "there is nothing whatsoever to suggest police knew at the time who broke in or who was involved. They said police learned months later that the parties involved included one of their informants." (Emphasis mine.)

This doesn't make any sense. The affidavit the police filed to obtain the warrant notes that the police informant was in Frederick's home three nights before the raid. That's exactly when the burglary happened. The State is trying to argue that even though (a) the police knew their informant was in Frederick's house three nights before the raid, and (b) the police knew someone had broken into Frederick's home three nights before the raid, they apparently believed at the time that these two incidents were entirely coincidental, which is why they didn't include on the search warrant affidavit the fact that their informant illegally broke into Frederick's home to obtain probable cause.

There are two options here. The Chesapeake police are either corrupt, or they're naive to the point of incompetent. The State apparently believes its case is better served by arguing the latter.

But there's one other niggling detail that throws the State's argument into a tailspin: Ryan Frederick never reported the break-in. How, then, could the detective who questioned Frederick the night of the raid have known about it?

• Despite all of this, Judge Marjorie A.T. Arrington still denied a defense motion to suppress the warrant. Which if nothing else I guess gives Frederick an early issue to put in his appeal should he be convicted.

• There's now more than enough evidence to suggest that Chesapeake police had knowledge that the probable cause for the search warrant to Frederick's home was obtained illegally. Moreover, Turnbull's interviews with me and with the Virginian-Pilot also raise the possibility that this wasn't the first time a Chesapeake police informant burglarized a private residence to search for probable cause. According to Turnbull, this was common practice. And the police encouraged it.

It's past time for an outside investigation, preferably from the Justice Department.

• Special Prosecutor Paul Ebert subpoenaed Virginian-Pilot reporter John Hopkins, the other journalist to speak to Turnbull. Ebert never called Hopkins to the stand. But the possibility that he could have caused Judge Arrington to bar Hopkins from the courtroom. Hopkins—who has covered this case as well as I've seen any journalist cover one of these raids—now won't be able to attend next month's trial, either.

• The plants the informant Steven claimed to have found in Frederick's home were never turned over to the police, and thus were never tested to confirm that they were actually marijuana. For all we know, they could still have been Japanese Maple saplings. Turnbull says Steven turned the plants over to the police. The State is either arguing that the police didn't know Turnbull and Steven removed the plants, or that they were aware, but never got around to asking Steven to turn them over. Again, the choice here is corruption or incompetence.

That also means that this entire raid was conducted solely on the word of the informant Steven, a shady character who at the time was facing his own criminal charges for credit card fraud. There were no controlled buys, and no significant surveillance. The only corroborating investigation the police did were a few drive-bys of Frederick's home. According to the affidavit, that should have lessened their suspicion, because they noted no unusual activity.

Prior posts on the Frederick case here.

MORE: Chesapeake-area blogger Rick Caldwell writes:

Ryan Frederick is being harassed by the city of Chesapeake, through code enforcement. His sister has recently moved back to the area, having lived overseas for several years. Since her arrival, she has received numerous notices from the city's code enforcement division, regarding siding in disrepair, the condition of the pool in the back yard, and demanding the removal of two signs expressing support for Ryan from the front yard. The city has been sending these notices to Ryan at the jail as well, and is even threatening to sue over the pool.

Nice touch.

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.

|12.16.08 @ 12:28PM|#

Please put poeople who have read the Bill of Rights on the jury.

My gut feeling is that Ryan actually was growing some weed. It has no bearing on this case though since none has been placed inbto evidence.

QFMFT!

adrian|12.16.08 @ 12:29PM|#

sickening.

|12.16.08 @ 12:32PM|#

The Chesapeake police are either corrupt, or they're naive to the point of incompetent.

I suspect both malice AND incompetence.

Hopefully, John Hopkins can find a shit hot cow-orker or intern at the paper to pick up the ball.

creech|12.16.08 @ 12:35PM|#

Or they could have simply arrested Frederick when he left his house to buy groceries, and then sorted out the pot charges.

|12.16.08 @ 12:36PM|#

Get em! Get em!
Lock on to these corrupt pigs like a pit bull and don't let go till their bleeding out their asses.

|12.16.08 @ 12:44PM|#

Oops, I forgot to say thanks.
Thank you Radley for keeping us informed.
I know that neither of Motowns dailies is covering this. I haven't even seen anything in the NYT though I'm not a daily reader of that paper.

|12.16.08 @ 12:52PM|#

Why do I get the sinking feeling that Frederick will still, somehow, be found guilty?

|12.16.08 @ 12:57PM|#

Why do I get the sinking feeling that Frederick will still, somehow, be found guilty?

Because the jury will be made up of average Americans, thus ignorant of reality?

|12.16.08 @ 1:03PM|#

How can a judge rule that the warrant was legit? Cops sending informants to break into homes, and getting away with it? I hope Hopkins doesn't let up, you too, Radley.

|12.16.08 @ 1:14PM|#

How can a judge rule that the warrant was legit?

Because one of his buddies signed off on it? Who knows? Shit like this should have been thrown out by the judge in the first place. He's clearly not worried about "justice".

Naga Sadow|12.16.08 @ 1:22PM|#

James Ard,

Refer to Scalia's decision that there is a "new professionalism" for your answer.

Fluffy|12.16.08 @ 1:25PM|#

The State is trying to argue that even though (a) the police knew their informant was in Frederick's house three nights before the raid, and (b) the police knew someone had broken into Frederick's home three nights before the raid, they apparently believed at the time that these two incidents were entirely coincidental, which is why they didn't include on the search warrant affidavit the fact that their informant illegally broke into Frederick's home to obtain probable cause.

Here's what I don't get - how did the cops think that their informant got into the house? Are they saying the informant claimed to be a friend of Frederick's or something?

That's what I'd like to see everyone swear to on the stand. Something tells me it would be a perjury parade.

"We didn't know our informant broke in to the house."

"How did the informant gain access to the house, then?"

Crickets. Or perjury. Take your pick.

Fluffy|12.16.08 @ 1:27PM|#

How can a judge rule that the warrant was legit?

Because Frederick shot a cop, the warrant will now be stood behind no matter how absurd it appears in the light of day.

The warrant could be written in crayon and could rely on anonymous psychic visions for the probable cause and Maryland would find a way to make that warrant stand, now that a cop got shot.

cunnivore|12.16.08 @ 1:28PM|#

Assuming the warrant was obtained based on faulty evidence, how does this absolve Frederick of shooting the cop?

In other words, if we accept shooting a cop serving a warrant based on good evidence (under the circumstances Radley notes) is murder, are you telling me that the warrant being based on bad evidence makes it not murder?

cunnivore|12.16.08 @ 1:32PM|#

I should add that I don't think he should be held liable for murder, but because of the fact that he almost certainly thought he was shooting at burglars, not cops; not because of any defect in the warrant.

|12.16.08 @ 1:33PM|#

Did the warrant contain information about weapons, or a past history of violence, or any other thing which would have justified treating Frederick as a significant threat?

Why not go to the house, in the middle of the day, knock on the door and wait for him to open it?

|12.16.08 @ 1:34PM|#

I think that if the warrant is bogus and the cop has no right to storm into your home you may have a better shot at a self-defense defense.

Kaiser|12.16.08 @ 1:34PM|#

Because the jury will be made up of average Americans, thus ignorant of reality?

QFT

Because Frederick shot a cop, the warrant will now be stood behind no matter how absurd it appears in the light of day.

Again... QFT

The average American makes me quite sad. What makes it worse is that it is not that Americans are by nature, stupid or ignorant. They just don't give a damn. If it doesn't affect them directly they don't care. And when there is a cop involved it just gets worse. Which leads me to my next point: Cops have this image in this country of being superior. Much like most people believe that dogs can never mess up (search dogs, smelling weed, bombs etc) most people put police on a pedestal. This was brought up in another thread earlier, my apologies for not finding the correct person to quote, but it is in part because we consider them a separate entity. They call us "civilians" like they themselves aren't members of society.

This is a sad story that has played out way too many times in this country. I hope Mr. Fredericks gets off, and these police get what they deserve.

|12.16.08 @ 1:35PM|#

cunnivore

It could bolster the case that Frederick had no reason to think that the guys breaking down his door were cops.

Every lie exposes another weakness in the accuser's case.

I want to speak up too and add my thankyou, Radley. Keep up the good work.

squarooticus|12.16.08 @ 1:37PM|#

I ask again:

How can you not expect these outcomes when one group has a monopoly on force and justice?

Dave W.|12.16.08 @ 1:38PM|#

In other words, if we accept shooting a cop serving a warrant based on good evidence (under the circumstances Radley notes) is murder, are you telling me that the warrant being based on bad evidence makes it not murder?

Couple ways. First, if the warrant is tossed then so is the dope. That means that police cannot argue that Frederick had reason to believe that he knew a cop as at the door because of the fact that he had dope.

Second, and probably more importantly, it goes to credibility. the police will need to say that they announced clearly and loudly to establish that Frederick didn't act in self defense. they will probably try to say that Shivers was not reaching in the door to help defeat Frederick's inevitable claim of self-defense.

The jury can choose to believe the police or not. If it is established that the police told a magistrate lies and/or half truths to get a warrant, then a jury may well decide that the police are lying to the jury to get a conviction.

Kaiser|12.16.08 @ 1:39PM|#

There is a very big difference in shooting someone in cold blood and defending your home when someone kicks the door in. In my opinion anyways...

|12.16.08 @ 1:40PM|#

In other words, if we accept shooting a cop serving a warrant based on good evidence (under the circumstances Radley notes) is murder, ...

I don't accept the premise that defending your home against armed intruders who may or may not be cops is murder.

|12.16.08 @ 1:49PM|#

Cops have this image in this country of being superior

Actually, not really. A lot of people in this country dislike or outright hate the cops. But the problem is the WOD and people's attitudes towards drugs. Frederick had some pot? DRUGGIE! LIAR! SHOT A COP!

If Frederick got raided for brewing more than 200 gallons of beer a year for personal use and a cop was shot, I think the average person would care more. But they hear of any illegal drug and the demonizing begins.

Virginia Law|12.16.08 @ 1:49PM|#

Virginia's self defense law is as follows:

A defendant must reasonably fear death or serious
bodily harm to himself at the hands of his victim. It
is not essential that the danger should in fact exist.
If it reasonably appears to a defendant that the
danger exists, he has the right to defend himself
against it to the same extent, and upon the same
rules, as would obtain in case the danger is real. A
defendant may always act upon reasonable appearance of
danger, and whether the danger is reasonably apparent
is always to be determined from the viewpoint of the
defendant at the time he acted.

Mike|12.16.08 @ 1:53PM|#

In other words, if we accept shooting a cop serving a warrant based on good evidence (under the circumstances Radley notes) is murder, are you telling me that the warrant being based on bad evidence makes it not murder?

The deal with the warrant matters for those of us who are actually concerned with correcting the situation that resulted in an officers death.

If there's a policy of rubber-stamping illegal warrants, then that policy needs to be corrected and the rubber-stampers need to be punished. If there's a few individuals who sign warrants against policy, they are in part responsible for the dangerous situation that resulted in the death.

Someone Who Doesn\'t Want to L|12.16.08 @ 1:55PM|#

I suspect both malice AND incompetence.

Always a fair guess.

Kaiser|12.16.08 @ 1:56PM|#

Actually, not really. A lot of people in this country dislike or outright hate the cops. But the problem is the WOD and people's attitudes towards drugs. Frederick had some pot? DRUGGIE! LIAR! SHOT A COP!

I think a majority of this country believes police are superior in some way. Incapable of screwing up in the least. However I most definitely concede to you the point you made about the WOD and drugs. You are very correct there. As an avid smoker of cannabis and a resident in the bible belt I can attest to this point first hand.

|12.16.08 @ 2:01PM|#

Who hired his defense? Was it Frederick? Or some foundation that I can give some year-end charity money to?

Thanks for the update, RB.

Elemenope|12.16.08 @ 2:06PM|#

I ask again:

How can you not expect these outcomes when one group has a monopoly on force and justice?

Yeah, because what we really need are private firms of cops competing to see who can tag the most perps.

That'd be swell.

|12.16.08 @ 2:21PM|#

Fluffy: The warrant could be written in crayon and could rely on anonymous psychic visions for the probable cause and ~~Maryland~~ Virginia would find a way to make that warrant stand, now that a cop got shot.

Radley: Thanks for keeping the heat up on this. You must have the most depressing beat in American journalism. The Caldwell addendum simply adds to the outrage.

|12.16.08 @ 2:24PM|#

Elemenope-

Again, the monopolization of the administration of justice has produced, real, tangible chaos and mayhem. In and of itself, the monopolization of the administration of justice is an evil-an evil that we know-not a speculative evil abour competing administrators of justice.

|12.16.08 @ 2:26PM|#

In the military, where people are sometimes constantly faced with terrorist scum that slide into and out of the local population, there is more restraint shown to avoid killing innocents than by the Chesapeake Police.

How is this tolerated by people, specifically judges who are elected by the people? Cops may be hired and can hide, but judges face the electoral process. The person that signed such a foolish search warrant and authorized such things needs to be dragged out for public scrutiny.

|12.16.08 @ 2:28PM|#

Radley-

I see that you followed my advice about sticking to exposing the continuing horrors of the WOD. Leave it to the Daily Kos or MoveOn.org to expose the horrors of Pat Boone's thinking.

|12.16.08 @ 2:29PM|#

Libertymike: Please provide actual real-world examples of places where policing, courts and prosecution have been privatized, and how that improved things in those areas. If, as I suspect, there ain't no such place, please at least provide a theoretical example of how this would improve over the current situation.

Other Matt|12.16.08 @ 2:31PM|#

Fluffy: The warrant could be written in crayon and could rely on anonymous psychic visions for the probable cause and Maryland Virginia would find a way to make that warrant stand, now that a cop got shot.

Actually it should read "Maryland or Virginia", Fluffy wasn't necessarily wrong the first time around. Now had Ryan been a minority in MD, then they'd be pursuing a much lighter sentence, because that's the way MD works, but they'd find the warrant valid because they're the State, and they know better, and a firearm was involved.

|12.16.08 @ 2:32PM|#

Tonio, I think mike is merely saying that we know the current, monopoly system is a serious problem, so let's not demonize a private system that hasn't even been tried.

|12.16.08 @ 2:33PM|#

As we know, private security guards at malls and special events are never capricious and always exude professionalism.

How is this tolerated by people, specifically judges who are elected by the people?

Ryan: In Virginia, judges are appointed, not elected.

|12.16.08 @ 2:34PM|#

Squarerooticus-1:37

You know, I ask this same question and make the same point in almost every thread following a Radley article (except yesterday's Pat Boone non-sense).

Other Matt|12.16.08 @ 2:35PM|#

How is this tolerated by people, specifically judges who are elected by the people? Cops may be hired and can hide, but judges face the electoral process

I think you answered your own question. People are slaves to the 30 sec soundbite. You can't even get news via the internet lately unless it's via video, we seem incapable of actually reading something, much less applying rational evaluation to what we do take in. People react far stronger to pictures, or causes, or a story, so shout "Clean up the neighborhood!" or, maybe simply "Change!" and all kinds of ignorant people vote for you, regardless of your actions or lack thereof.

|12.16.08 @ 2:37PM|#

Tonio-

1. Would you agree that the current state of affairs is unacceptable?

2. Would you agree that competition is, all things being equal, preferable to monopoly?

3. Have you ever read Murrary Rothbard's treatment on the subject?

|12.16.08 @ 2:52PM|#

Tonio-

In Rothbard's For a New Liberty, check out Chapter 12, The Public Sector III: Police, Law and The Courts.

|12.16.08 @ 2:53PM|#

So lemme get this straight - the gov't locks a guy up, and then starts citing him for not cleaning his pool and keeping his house fixed up?

Wouldn't the fact that the state is making it impossible for you to do this be a defense?

Mo-

That's because they are auditioning for the real thing.

tarran|12.16.08 @ 2:55PM|#

Tonio,

Medeival Iceland. Essentially, thee were chieftains who provided legislation, adjudication and law enforcement services. The chieftains did not have a territorial monopoly. People could switch their alliegance at will (which meant that a farm protected by Chief A could be surrounded by farms protected by Chief B). Also, a chieftain could sell his chieftainship if he hit hard times.

The system actually lasted 250 years or so before it started breaking down, and after some brutal violence, at the 300 year point, the population asked the King of Norway to take over.

Roderick Long (I think) analyzed the Icelandic records and made some interesting observations:
1) The breakdown occured when 5 families gained control of all the chieftainships.
2) These families were able to gain control due to the introduction of christianity - they owned the land that churches were built on, and received tithes from the population. The tax concentrated wealth in the hands of the church owners.
3) The intolerable violence that prompted the locals to abandon the system was lower than the per capita violence we currently experience here in the U.S.

Irish Brehon law also had some elements of polycentrism, although it was nowhere near as anarchic as Iceland's system. It, incidentally, was ruthlessly supressed by the British when they conquered Ireland - they found the lack of harsh punishments (hanging, amputations etc) to be barbaric (under Brehon Law criminals paid fines that went to the local king and to the victim). Brehon law was unique in that there was no supreme authority, kings themselves were subject to special courts.

All this is from memory, so I apologize for any innaccuracies.

let it go already|12.16.08 @ 2:56PM|#

I see that you followed my advice about sticking to exposing the continuing horrors of the WOD. Leave it to the Daily Kos or MoveOn.org to expose the horrors of Pat Boone's thinking.

Yeah, I'm sure Balko is really "following your advice." Jesus, are you becoming as self-absorbed and delusional about your importance around here as lonewackoff? Speaking of advice, here's some: How about you stick to making inane comments and leave the editorial assignments to Balko.

(except yesterday's Pat Boone non-sense).

Oh for fuck's sake, you're still bitching about a thread from yesterday? Maybe you should see someone about this obsessions of yours. Whining about what story gets blogged in that thread is lame enough, continuing it in other threads on other days is pathetic. Let it go already. Here's some more advice: If you don't like a thread topic, move on to the next.

|12.16.08 @ 3:05PM|#

EL n' MO

As we know, private security guards at malls and special events are never capricious and always exude professionalism.

And they get away with murder too? Oh, that's right, they don't. Who is going to be easier to sue for violating your rights? Who is more likely to shoot your dog? Which group thinks they are not civilians? Duh, duh, duh, and duh.

None of these side issues really matter IMO.

If it was a no knock raid, then it is reasonable that the occupant might fire on police not knowing they are police... period.

|12.16.08 @ 3:12PM|#

Fluffy|12.16.08 @ 3:19PM|#

Tonio:

Thanks for the correction.

Between the fact that I think there's another high profile no-knock warrant case right now in Maryland, and the fact that the word Frederick makes me think of Frederick, Maryland, I keep getting confused.

|12.16.08 @ 3:31PM|#

I have sympathy for the dead officers family, but I see this case, based on information available to the public, as an example of local government run wild. I have seen this before up close and fortunately not personal, but at least no deaths were involved. Any person accused is up against the economic and political strength of the government and if even innocent, will be bankrupted. I worry a bit that as a citizen who has played by the rules and worked hard to achieve a decent life in retirement that we are living in a time when an accusation concerning drugs or child porn by someone who has an ax to grind against you can destroy you and your family. It also seems that those who have been shown to accuse falsely escape serious punishment. Such actions by the accuser, if done in malice or for personal gain, are a crime against the trust a society needs to properly function and such individuals should be severely punished.

I am of the opinion that the state would pick up a found innocent person's lawyer's bill. That would make the justice system think twice before running amuck. Secondly, these informers should be tried for at least involuntary manslaughter because their actions and information led to the officer's death.

let it go already-

I see that you have failed to follow your own advice. Talk about a drama queen! I guess you can't handle a person referencing another thread. Perhaps you haven't noticed that it is done quite frequently by many. Sorry if this phenomenon is so offensive to you-if you don't like it here-you have the option to go elsewhere.

FYI, we all are very important around here, Lonewhacko included. Even you.

|12.16.08 @ 3:32PM|#

It sounds as if Steven and Turnbull are not only police informants, but acting as AGENTS of the Police....in which case any evidence should get tossed, and Fredrick has a pretty reasonable self-defense claim considering the burglery 3 nights before and the police "no-knock"...

|12.16.08 @ 3:34PM|#

BBS, You raise some good points, but mall security has very limited jurisdiction and mission compared to municipal police. I'd like to keep this thread focused on Frederick, so won't respond further to OT posts here.

RADLEY: Are there any groups actively supporting Frederick? Is the ACLU on this?

|12.16.08 @ 3:38PM|#

let it go already-

You know what is inane? Your proposition that it is lame for posters to comment on day old threads. Talk about anti-intellectual, attention challenged disguised defecation.

Tsu Dho Nihm|12.16.08 @ 3:45PM|#

Some of yous interested in the topic of the monopolization of force and justice may want to check out the links on this page (unfortunately, some of the links are dead):

Historical Examples of Anarchy without Chaos
http://libertariannation.org/b/history.htm

Now I need to dig up the excellent article about the Harappa civilization which, by all evidence thus far, existed for about 700 years as a largely urban civilization without a government...

No Name Guy|12.16.08 @ 3:55PM|#

Radley - keep it up. You (and John Hopkins) need to keep shining the light on this stinking heap of corruption.

Paul|12.16.08 @ 3:57PM|#

Again, the choice here is corruption or incompetence.

Why not both?

Elemenope|12.16.08 @ 4:10PM|#

Why not both?

Because incompetence precludes effective corruption.

anarch|12.16.08 @ 4:38PM|#

we all are very important around here

I like that. Kind of a, well, libertarian sentiment.

|12.16.08 @ 4:46PM|#

Because incompetence precludes effective corruption.

I disagree, El. Your most incompetent cops and your most corrupt cops are generally one and the same.

|12.16.08 @ 4:52PM|#

"""Wouldn't the fact that the state is making it impossible for you to do this be a defense?"""

Rational thought would agree, but who would have thought you can't claim "I have a prescription for it" if your busted with a 30 day of your meds in Florida. I'm thinking a judge will toss them, we'll see.

"""Again, the choice here is corruption or incompetence."""

It's obviously corruption.

An example of incompetence is not understanding what a stop sign means. Knowing what it means and thinking you're exempt is corruption.

|12.16.08 @ 4:56PM|#

Some of the most corrupt are the most competent.

Context|12.16.08 @ 4:58PM|#

Elemenope | December 16, 2008, 4:10pm | #
Why not both?

Because incompetence precludes effective corruption.

Nailed it in one.

None of these side issues really matter IMO.

If it was a no knock raid, then it is reasonable that the occupant might fire on police not knowing they are police... period.

Also nailed it in one.

Head of the class, both of you.

|12.16.08 @ 5:05PM|#

""""Because incompetence precludes effective corruption."""

Incompetence prevents effective corruption. ;-)

|12.16.08 @ 8:01PM|#

RC- That's exactly how the Japanese-Americans had the Pacific Palisades stolen from them during WWII. They were sent to the internment camps and their property was then seized for non-payment of taxes. Nice system.

The feds tried this during the Civil War as a way of confiscating Arlington House (the house overlooking Washington that was owned by Robert E. Lee's wife, Mary Custis Lee). Mrs. Lee had evacuated the house shortly after the outbreak of the War, and ended up in a row house in Richmond. The feds imposed a tax of about $94 on the property. Gen. Lee sent an agent to attempt to pay the tax on behalf of his wife, but the Yankee tax commissioners insisted that Mrs. Lee (an arthritic cripple) or Gen. Lee himself would have to pay it in person. The Yankees then put a tax lien on Arlington House and bought it at auction (for how much, I'm not sure). After the war, Mrs. Lee's son, who claimed the estate by inheritance, brought suit against the federal officials who had taken his mother's property, and eventually the Supreme Court held in his favor. The feds had to pay young Lee $150,000, which was determined to be the fair market value of the property. (Of course, it would be worth millions, if not billions today.) That, of course, was in the days when people took the rule of law a bit more seriously than they do today (or did during World War II).

Mad Max|12.16.08 @ 9:10PM|#

"Ryan Frederick never reported the break-in."

You see, that's very suspicious. If he were a law-abiding citizen, he would report the break-in to the police, so that the police could investigate it.

In addition to being a bad citizen, Frederick is paranoid. He seems to have thought that the people breaking in to his house that night were potentially connected to the people who had pulled off the previous break-in. How absurd!

|12.16.08 @ 10:18PM|#

Did this judge and the police in question move here from Atlanta???

|12.17.08 @ 12:02PM|#

How is barring a defense witness from the courtroom kosher? I have heard of cameras being barred from the court. And I understand the press being excluded from juvenile proceedings. What are the grounds that the judge barred a defense witness and member of the press from the court?

|12.17.08 @ 2:15PM|#

This entire mess deserves to be turned over to the feds for police corruption! Oh, wait a minute ... the FBI lies too. That's like having the fox guard the chicken coop. The cops obviously know they screwed up and one of their own was killed in the process. Perhaps the feds should be investigating whether or not the deparment wanted this detective dead ... kinda like Serpico. Someone also needs to file a fraud complaint with the bonding company that handles the county's bond; why not challenge the judge's bond for conspiracy to commit judicial fraud. Once the judge's bond is revoked, she can no longer sit on the bench! We need to hold our police accountable, because they're turning out to be nothing more than jackbooted fascists!

|12.17.08 @ 5:12PM|#

My guess is that the judge will try to narrow the allowable evidence to exclude some things that would make the cops look bad. Like bar any information about the informant on the grounds that the warrant was ruled legal. That would make sense why he would risk losing an appeal when he ruled the warrant as legal. The warrant MUST be legal in order to save face.

""""We need to hold our police accountable, because they're turning out to be nothing more than jackbooted fascists!""""

Broken windows theroy where are you!!!! ;-)

But really, we as citizens are partly to blame, we've let it continue way too long. LEOs don't really take us seriously, what are we going to do about it? If you can't shoot them when they illegally break into your home, when can you ever?

All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.

|12.17.08 @ 10:42PM|#

Support Ryan Frederick at www.myspace.com/ryan_frederick and at www.meetup.com/freeryan

|12.17.08 @ 11:22PM|#

Obviously,mad max doesn't live in the area.Burglars are frequently used as informants by police locally,so reporting a burglary does nothing more than get the police in your house,where in someone real close's case,they wanted to fingerprint everyone who comes into the house legitimately,to 'eliminate suspects'.They weren't criminals,and would not submit to fingerprinting of innocent residents.They had to wait in the yard at night with witnesses for the burglar to return,which he did.The cops usually don't even come out for a garage burglary report,they are too 'busy'.Anyone who lives in the area and has reported a burglary knows it's a waste of time to report another one,you pretty much are on your own,especially in the cities of Chesapeake or Norfolk.

|12.18.08 @ 9:32AM|#

This is a travesty of the first order. If I were a betting man I would bet the house that Frederick will be convicted. If I were on the jury, based on what is printed here, he would get a not guilty from me. Personally I think he should have waxed a couple more. Allowing the government to get away with this is just wrong. Since the gov will not hold their agents responsible then it is up to the people to do so. And to those who posed the question a few post up, yes I think when this happens on an illegal warrant the gov has to bear the cost when things go bad. Additionally, had they raided Fredericks home by mistake (wrong address) and lost some people that is just a homeowner defending himself againt a home invasion. Job status does not absolve the gov of responsibility or give the state a reason to retaliate in court. After they loose a few they will change their habits.

|12.18.08 @ 12:26PM|#

Tonio: "Are there any groups actively supporting Frederick? Is the ACLU on this?"

HAHAHAHAHA! The ACLU assisting in a case involving a firearm. They pay be supporting the prosecution but that would be all. The ACLU is nothing but a bunch of Socialist twits.

|12.18.08 @ 12:28PM|#

Dang, They pay be = They may be

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements