Reason Magazine - Topics > Militarization of Police

Two More Isolated Incidents

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:28:00 EDT

After a "wrong-door" drug raid in Harlem led to the death of 57-year-old Alberta Spruill in 2003, New York City officials promised to implement reforms with respect to the use of confidential informants, and institute checks to verify that narcotics officers and SWAT teams were hitting the right residences.

But as civil rights attorney Joel Berger and I explained in the Wall Street Journal a couple of years ago, the city soon reneged, claiming that the promised reforms were merely discretionary, and could be revoked at will. Soon enough, stories of wrong-door raids began popping up in the newspapers again—and have since.

There were two more in the Bronx this week.

The NYPD is admitting it was wrong when officers broke down the doors of two apartments in the Bronx during a pair of misguided drug raids.
They found nothing, and it turns out both homeowners were innocent.
Officials say the apartments never should have been raided, and they admit the search warrants were based on lies from a confidential informant.
[...]

Police say that three separate times, the drugs from his alleged undercover buys were really drugs that were hidden under his clothing. Cops were fooled, and because of it, two local residents were traumatized.
[...]
On Saturday, when Eyewitness News began questioning cops about the story, they adamantly insisted there were undercover drug buys in both apartments.
[...]
Now, after repeated calls to the NYPD, their story has changed. They now tell Eyewitness News that they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there were any undercover buys in the apartments, just a confidential informant who allegedly lied.
In a statement released Thursday afternoon, police say, "We've initiated an investigation which has resulted in the informant being arrested for possession of narcotics. The investigation is continuing regarding his conduct leading up to these two search warrants."
They also say surveillance video shows the informant, who was supposedly searched beforehand by cops, reaching into his undergarments three separate times, exchanging the cops' money for hidden drugs, then allegedly walking out of the building.

Why didn't they check the surveillance video before conducting the raids? And how thoroughly could they possibly have searched this informant if he was able to hide drugs in his clothing? Moreover, if they were this sloppy while using this informant, how do we know other cops in the city aren't making similar mistakes with other informants? This particular informant has been the source of information for at least a dozen other drug raids.

Once again, the larger point here is that these raids are too violent and dangerous, the margin of error too small, and the tips and investigations that lead to them too subject to mistakes and bad information for them to be used on nonviolent drug offenders.

Police Militarization? What Police Militarization?

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:32:00 EDT

Headline of the day:

"SWAT Team Looks for Purse Snatcher"

Comply, or We Will Erase your Memory

mriggs@reason.com (Mike Riggs) — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:50:00 EDT

Need still more reason to dislike Tennessee law enforcement officials? How about having your memory wiped? From Channel 4 in Nashville:

For almost two years, [Nashville] Metro police have had the option of calling for a needle loaded with a strong sedative to control the most unruly people they encounter on the street....
The drug is called Midazolam, which is better known as Versed. People who have had a colonoscopy have probably had a shot of the drug for the procedure.
"The drug has an amnesia effect, and we use that therapeutically because one of the nice ways to take care of the discomfort is to make people forget that they've had it," said biomedical ethics and law enforcement expert Dr. Steven Miles....
"It's something that in the medical community and in the EMS medical community is very common. It's a given. When I surveyed the major metropolitan areas around the country, I think only two cities were not actively using it," said [Dr. Corey Slovis, Nashville’s emergency medical director].

Read the whole thing here.

And no, this is not an alternative to being Tasered. Channel 4 reporter Demetria Kalodimos interviewed Dameon Beasley, who said that officers injected him with the drug only after failing to shock him into submission.

Editor Brian Doherty wrote here about police abuses during the 2007 immigration riots. Editor Radley Balko blogged here about police Tasering a man in his own home.

Appeals Court Rules in Rack 'n' Roll Pool Hall Case

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:35:00 EDT

A few weeks ago, a three-judge panel from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit tossed out (pdf) most of the civil rights suit filed by David Ruttenberg, owner of the Rack 'n' Roll Pool hall in Manassas Park, Virginia. Fortunately, the court did leave one Fourth Amendment claim that could save Ruttenberg's case.

For a couple of years now, I've been reporting on how officials in the tiny town of Manassas Park have been harassing Ruttenberg and attempting to take away his business. The police there have been investigating Rutenberg for several years, for what they've recently said are drug crimes. As of yet, they've found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Ruttenberg. They've arrested him twice on charges unrelated to drugs—once for filing a false police report and once for bouncing a check—and in both cases the charges were eventually dropped.

The police in Manassas Park have hired informants to set up drug deals in Ruttenberg's bar (which they later cited as evidence that Ruttenberg's bar was a filled with drug activity). They've pulled over Ruttenberg's former girlfriends, and threatened them with charges unless they provided information against him. They've even co-opted security Ruttenberg had hired specifically for the purpose of keeping drugs out of his bar, and had them set up drug transactions in the bar.

The story took a particularly weird twist last year when local politics blogger Greg Letiecq and I revealed that one of the charges levied against Ruttenberg by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control—that he was allowing lewd activity to go on at the bar—was due to photos dozens of photos of women dancing in various stages of undress that were taken by then-Manassas Park Vice Mayor Kevin Brendel. At the time, Brendel was working at Ruttenberg's bar as a part-time D.J. Current and former Rack 'n' Roll staff say Brendel encouraged the women to strip and put on lewd contests when Ruttenberg wasn't around, despite repeated warnings from Ruttenberg.

I've personally witnessed police harassment of Ruttenberg's customers. And I've gone through hours of surveillance video with him showing countless attempts to set him up.

Ruttenberg has shown remarkable resolve through all of this. He records every phone conversation. He keeps meticulous surveillance video that covers every corner of his property. He collects statements and affidavits from staff, friends, and witnesses. He has hired private investigators. He has a formidable collection of evidence of public corruption and police misconduct (I've spent hours with him at the bar going through it all). Unfortunately, local prosecutor Paul Ebert (the same prosecutor in the Ryan Frederick case) seems uninterested. As does the FBI. And the Virginia State Police.

The appeals court ruling was pretty dismissive of Ruttenberg's suit (the ruling also misstates several facts about the case). But the one claim they left intact may turn out to be enough. The appeals court panel reversed the district court's dismissal of Ruttenberg's Fourth Amendment claim that the tactics the police used in a 2004 raid on Rack 'n' Roll were excessive. And they most certainly were.

The police initially sought a criminal search warrant for the raid. They couldn't find a judge to grant them one. So instead, they claimed they were conducting a routine alcohol inspection, and raided the place anyway. This "regulatory inspection" was clearly intended to intimidate Ruttenberg and his customers, and to find evidence of criminality—the police brought more than 70 officers from Manassas Park and surrounding jurisdictions, some in uniform, some in plain clothes, and still others in ski-mask hats and camouflage pumping shot guns as the stormed the place (on Ladies' Night).

If this was a routine alcohol inspection, you have to wonder what an actual drug raid might have looked like. Here's Ruttenberg's surveillance video of the raid. Er, "inspection":

The only people arrested in the raid were either undercover cops or people Ruttenberg later learned were working for the police as confidential informants.

The bad news is that while the ruling remands the remaining claim back to the district court for further proceedings, the panel then expresses a good deal of skepticism about whether the remaining claim should ultimately survive. In fact, the ruling nearly instructs the district court on how to dismiss it.

The good news is that Ruttenberg has several state claims that remain intact, which he can now attach to his federal case. That gets him into discovery, where he can demand to see everything the town of Manassas Park has accumulated in its long investigation of him.

Ruttenberg's other problem right now is that he has run out of money to pursue the case any further. He had kept his bar open at a loss for a couple of years in hopes of selling it. He was finally able to sell it at a steep loss last year, but that and the legal fees he has accumulated have wrecked him. He's currently looking for legal representation to help him continue the case.

The Ballad of Kathryn Johnston

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:49:00 EDT

Atlanta native Shawn Mullins' latest album includes a tribute to Kathryn Johnston, the 92-year-old woman slain in a botched 2006 drug raid. Have a listen below.

reason coverage of the Johnston case here.

Another Isolated Incident

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 08:40:00 EDT

Last Thursday, narcotics cops in Troy, New York shot the locks off a door, tossed a flash grenade through a window, and stormed a house as part of an early-morning drug raid. They found only a single mother inside, not the drugs or weapons described in the warrant. The raid seems to have stemmed from a bad tip from a confidential informant. But Troy authorities don't seem particularly repentant. Here's District Attorney Richard McNally:

"The checks and balances were in place. We checked and double-checked the information in this case. All the checks and double-checks were done. Unfortunately, it didn't work as planned."

Obviously the checks and balances weren't in place, or the police wouldn't have terrorized an innocent woman (fortunately, her five-year-old daughter wasn't home at the time).

One local TV reporter spoke with a police sergeant related to the case, who said the police have no intention of repairing the damage they did to the woman's home.

Sgt. Dean: "We did not hit the wrong house, we hit the house that the search warrant directed us to hit."
Anya: "But was that information that led up to that right?"
Sgt. Dean: "My bosses are going through this whole investigative process to make sure that we were as thorough as possible."
Anya: "What was the level of threat that you assessed prior to coming into the home?"
Sgt. Dean: "That there were weapons in the house, or that the drugs were stored in that manor."
Anya: "In this house, you found no drugs?" Sgt. Dean: "We are not publicly speaking on that issue at this point."
Anya: "Do you think this will hurt your credibility?"
Sgt. Dean: "The last thing we want to do is enter an innocent person's home - it doesn't get us anywhere, and it doesn't hamper the drug trade."
Anya: "Will you be going back to clean-up the damage to the house?"
Sgt. Dean: "We just have to enter lawfully with our search warrant, that is our only obligation."
Anya: "And you can leave it in any state that you left it?"
Sgt. Dean: "Yes. We had probable cause that led us to believe there was drug activity."

Which apparently means they feel no obligation to clean up the mess they made.

YouTube Video Results in Raid

mriggs@reason.com (Mike Riggs) — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 14:35:00 EDT

After seeing a YouTube video made by Andre Moore, Philadelphia police broke down Moore's front door at 6 a.m. yesterday and arrested him for assault. Unlike the case of eight Florida girls who assaulted another girl, however, Moore's video didn't contain evidence of any criminal wrongdoing—unless verbally advocating violence against police constitutes a crime.

Michael Carroll from Villanova U. doesn't think the aggravated assault charges will stick:

"I'm not saying this is popular speech or that this is a responsible opinion. It's clear people are going to be upset by it, but that doesn't make it criminal."
Carroll believes this arrest stems solely from Moore's speech and nothing else, and speech, regardless of how hateful, is protected under the First Amendment.

Moore's video joins Body Count's "Cop Killer" on the list of "Protests Against Police Abuse That Actually Incite More Police Abuse."

Senior Editor Radley Balko wrote about another Internet phenomenon that earned police ire, here.

Another Week...

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:56:00 EDT

....another drug raid death.

Vincent A. Hodgkiss of Pembroke Pines, Florida, was killed on June 12 when police raided his home at 6:30am after complaints from neighbors of possible drug activity. They say an officer shot and killed Hodgkiss when he confronted them during the raid. Hodgkiss had no prior criminal record, and had a legal concealed weapons permit.

Police say they found a "felony amount" of drugs in Hodgkiss home, but have yet to say what drugs or in what quantity, or if Hodgkiss was responsible for them. The girlfriend of Hodgkin's son was arrested at the scene for misdemeanor marijuana possession.

And actually, there may be two more. A Monteagle, Tennessee, police officer was shot and killed earlier this month by a man named Kermit Bryson, who was wanted for violating his probation. Bryson had been convicted of felony marijuana possession. Bryson then killed himself after a manhunt. Friends and family are perplexed, saying Bryson was a petty drug offender, and wasn't at all the type to shoot a police officer. One friend said, "He's not a bad guy. He had to freak out in some way."

It isn't until the end of the article that we get an explanation of what may have happened:

Probation officials said the warrant was issued for Bryson because he failed drug screens and violated curfew while on probation for a 2007 felony marijuana possession charge.
Helm said the three officers approached Bryson's mobile home carefully and made their way inside. Officers often serve warrants early in the morning, expecting that suspects will be asleep.
"The officer was actually shot inside the residence," she said.

So they broke into the man's home, and woke him with an early-morning raid.

No Death Penalty for Ryan Frederick

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 08:35:00 EDT

Special Prosecutor Paul Ebert announced yesterday that he won't seek the death penalty against Ryan Frederick, the Chesapeake, Virginia man who killed a police detective during a botched drug raid last January.

Ebert said Frederick's lack of any prior criminal record and the fact that he shot just once would make it difficult to prove the aggravated battery necessary to get a death sentence.

Of course, both of those facts are also pretty good indicators that Frederick didn't intend to kill Det. Jarrod Shivers in the first place.

Stangely, Ebert cited Frederick's age as another reason he has decided not to seek the death penalty. Frederick is 28.

Prior coverage of the Frederick case here.

More Possible Police Misconduct in Ryan Frederick Case

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:07:00 EDT

Frederick is the 28-year-old Chesapeake, Virginia man facing capital murder charges for killing a police officer during a drug raid on Frederick's home. Police found only a misdemeanor amount of marijuana, not the massive grow operation alleged in the search warrant.

Now, WTKR TV reports:

The hands of six Chesapeake detectives present at the botched marijuana raid on Ryan Frederick's house have tested positive for "primer residue," meaning they had traces of chemicals on their hands sometimes left behind when a person fires a gun, according to a lab report filed in court. The lab report also said the residue can be left if a person is near weapon as it fires, or if a person handles a weapon with primer residue already on it. Police have insisted no officers fired during the Jan. 17 raid where police went looking for marijuana. Police contend Frederick alone opened fire, with one bullet killing narcotics detective Jarrod Shivers.

That's at least suggestive that the police haven't been truthful about the raid. And then there's this:

Meanwhile, Frederick's family revealed a bullet hole inside the home they say was caused by police fire. The hole passes through a corner by Frederick's back bedroom. Family members said, and Frederick's attorney confirmed, that police went to the home days after the shooting and plugged the hole with some kind of putty or filler. Defense investigators have pictures of the hole before and after the filler was added, according to attorney James Broccoletti.

And this:

The state crime lab also did some testing on a .223 Remington cartridge found in Frederick's home. However, the lab did not do DNA testing on the cartridge nor is there any indication what kind of weapon fired the round, according to the paperwork. Police search warrants do not show officers located any weapon in Frederick's home capable of firing a .223 round. Chesapeake police spokeswoman Christina Golden confirmed some officers are issued Bushmaster M4 Patrol Rifles, which shoot .223-caliber ammunition.

Prosecutor Paul Ebert will announce on Friday whether or not he intends to seek the death penalty. I'm still attempting to get in touch with Ryan Frederick's attorney James Broccoletti for comment on my report last week about a possible second informant in the case, who stated that he and a man named "Steven" broke into Frederick's house prior to the raid to gather evidence.

Prior coverage of Frederick's case here.

Basil Parasiris Acquitted

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 09:17:00 EDT

Parasiris is a Quebec man who shot and killed a police officer during a botched drug raid on his home. Parasiris' wife was shot in the arm, and his two children witnessed the exchange of gunfire. Last week, a Canadian jury acquitted Parasiris of murder charges. The Montreal Gazaette editorializes:

Laval police conducted the raid in the belief that Parasiris was involved in a local drug ring. Unfortunately, as Superior Court Justice Guy Cournoyer ruled, there was little proof to back this belief, certainly not enough for a search warrant to be executed in a surprise, pre-dawn raid. Such a raid should be carried out only in an emergency.
Parasiris was wakened by his wife screaming shortly after 5 a.m. on March 2, 2007. Seeing a shadow at the doorway to his bedroom, Parasiris picked up one of four loaded guns he kept in his bedroom and fired off at least two shots. He said he believed his home had been invaded.
In a way, it had been. Nine police officers forced Parasiris's front door open with a battering ram. Five officers sprinted up the stairs to the bedrooms. Within less than a minute, Tessier lay dying, Parasiris's wife was shot through the arm, a second police officer was hit by a bullet from Parasiris's gun and Parasiris's two children were traumatized.
Both sides seem to have panicked. It was an inevitable reaction on the part of the Parasiris family. But for the police to have fired off so many rounds suggests a lack of training in general and of planning for this raid in particular.
A search warrant for "dynamic entry" should not, on the evidence, have been issued in this case. Police could have arrested Parasiris under calmer circumstances.
A man is dead as a result of an apparently ill-planned raid. Only vigorous corrective action by the authorities can add anything positive to this tragic series of mistakes.

It's nice to see a sensible outcome to one of theses cases, even if it had to come from Canada.

Report from Chesapeake: Possible Second Informant Emerges in Ryan Frederick Case

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:41:00 EDT

Twenty-eight-year-old Ryan Frederick currently sits in a jail in Chesapeake, Viginia for killing Det. Jarrod Shivers during a drug raid on Frederick's home. He had no criminal record, and just a misdemeanor amount of marijuana in his home. He also says someone broke into his home three nights before the raid. He's being charged with capital murder and felony manufacture of marijuana.

The raid was conducted based solely on the word of a confidential informant. Police made no attempt to buy drugs from Frederick. A couple of weeks ago, local TV station WTKR identified the police informant in the case, a 20-year-old man named Steven who had several charges pending against him at the time of the raid, was dating the sister of Frederick's fiance, and had a standing grudge with Frederick. The station reported that Frederick and his friends and family believe Steven was the one who broke into Frederick's home the same week of the raid.

Last week I received a tip that there may have been a second man involved in the break-in at Ryan Frederick's house. My source has spoken to the man a few times over the last few months, and says the man has confirmed not only that he and Steven together broke into Frederick's house at the behest of the police, but that the two had been working as paid police informants for months—and had actually broken into several houses around Chesapeake, all with the blessing of Chesapeake police officers.

The second man is currently in the Chesapeake City jail. I don't see any point in revealing his identity right now, so I'll just call him "Reggie." I called the jail and arranged an interview with Reggie set for last Saturday afternoon. The jail checked with Reggie, who then asked what the interview would be about. I mentioned Steven's name, and Reggie agreed to the interview.

Reggie initially was reluctant to talk to me (more on that later). Between the time I arranged the interview and the time I drove to Chesapeake to speak with him, his attorney had instructed him not to talk to me at all. I asked if he'd be more willing to talk if I didn't use his name. He responded that he's not worried about retaliation for being a snitch, he's worried about retaliation from the police.

Still, after a few minutes, he did begin to corroborate some of the things my source told me.

Reggie told me he knows Steven "from the streets." He confirmed that the two had been working as paid police informants for several months. The police would pay them to find stashes of drugs or evidence of burglaries. I asked Reggie if the police ever encouraged him to actually break into a home to look for information, as he had told my source. Reggie hesitated, then declined to say. "I don't want to get into any more trouble," he said.

I then mentioned my source, and asked if Reggie he had spoken with him. He said "yes." I asked if what he told my source was true. He again said "yes," but added that he was scared, and "that's not something I can get into right now. I just want to do my time and go home."

Because they were regularly working with the police, the two men seem to have started to think they were above the law. Last January, just a few days before the Ryan Frederick raid, Steven was arrested and charged with credit card fraud and grand larceny for some credit cards police say he stole last December.

Reggie told me Steven contacted him shortly after that arrest, and told him about the charges. He says Steven told him he had worked out a deal with the police where they'd help him with the credit card charges if he could bring back evidence that Ryan Frederick was growing marijuana.

Reggie says he and Steven then broke into Frederick's detached garage to obtain evidence against Frederick. Once again, I asked if the police knew about the break-in. Reggie again refused to answer, and again explained that he was afraid of possible retaliation from the police.

Reggie said he's personally never met Frederick, and that the break-in at Frederick's house all went through Steven. He said he saw television reports of the raid later that week, and immediately knew it was the same house he and Steven had broken into days earlier.

Reggie was arrested a few weeks later on February 12 on a burglary charge he says was trumped up.

Reggie has a long record. In May 2007 he pleaded guilty to burglary, grand larceny, and breaking and entering. He served six months of a three-year sentence on those charges, with the rest suspended. He was released in August. In 2006 he was charged with burglary and arson of an occupied dwelling. Those charges were nolle prossed, meaning the prosecutor could refile them within the statute of limitations if he wished.

But Reggie says the burglary charge on February 12 was concocted to keep him quiet about the Frederick raid. If what he told my source is true—that the police were encouraging informants to break into private residences to gather evidence—that's pretty damning. It would amount to actual criminal conduct by members of the Chesapeake Police Department.

Reggie explained to me last weekend that one reason he was reluctant to talk to me is that shortly after he spoke to my source earlier this year, the police added additional charges to rap sheet. He believes this too was retaliatory, and designed to keep him quiet. This, he said, is why he couldn't be as forthcoming with me. He was denied bail on February 14th, and has been in the city jail ever since.

A search of the Chesapeake General Court's public records presents a time-line that supports Reggie's story. He was arrested on February 12 on charges of burglary, grand larceny, and credit card larceny. He spoke to my source a few times over the next several weeks. On June 5, the police then added another grand larceny charge, and a charge of entering a house to commit assault and battery. At that point, Reggie stopped talking to my source.

We also know that the credit card charges for which Steven was arrested in January were dropped in April. They were then reinstated in May, and Steven was indicted. On May 19 a warrant was issued for his arrest. I was able to get in touch with a friend of Steven's, who made it rather clear that Steven isn't interested in talking to journalists right now.

So at the very least, here, we now have more confirmation that informants working for the police illegally broke into Ryan Frederick's home three days before the drug raid. At worst, they may have done so with the consent of the police, this may not have been the first time they've done so, and the police may be intimidating the two men to prevent them from talking about it.

Moreover, you also have the unfortunate scenario where two men who may be the most important witnesses in Ryan Frederick's trial are facing a slew of charges of their own, and basically at the mercy of the very police department their testimony could implicate.

Back in January, Chesapeake City Manager William Harrell hired an outside firm to conduct a top-to-bottom review of the city police department. So it seems clear that some officials in Chesapeake city government know there are problems. Given the circumstances of this case, though, and that a man's life may be on the line, these latest allegations merit an outside investigation of Chesapeake PD, if not by Virginia Attorney General Bob McConnell, then by U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg.

Prior archive of Frederick posts here.

MORE: I should have included in the original post that I attempted to contact Reggie's attorney for comment. She didn't return my call. The Chesapeake Police Department also had no comment. I have not yet tried to call Ryan Frederick's attorney, but plan to this morning. Thus far, he hasn't been all that interested in speaking to the media.

Gonzalo Guizan: Another Death by Drug War

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:18:00 EDT

On May 18, police in Easton, Connecticut conducted a heavily-armed drug raid on the home of Ronald Terebesi, Jr. They began the raid by throwing flashbang grenades through Terebesi's windows, then battering down his door and storming the house. Friends say at the time of the raid, 33-year-old Gonzalo Guizan was visiting Terebesi to discuss the possibility of opening an employment business. According to police, the unarmed Guizan charged the raiding officers, at which point they shot and killed him.

As usual, the police, prosecutors, and state investigators are hunkering down, and not talking to the press. But some information is tricking out. Here's what we know:

• The raid came after a tip from a stripper who had visited Trebesi's home. She reported seeing two glass pipes and said she witnessed Trebesi smoke a small amount of crack cocaine he stored in a tin. She made the report at 9am on the same day of the raid.

• There was a reported drive-by shooting at Trebesi's home in March, though Trebesi appears to have been the victim, not the perpetrator.

• Police found no guns in the home, but did find some cocaine and the two pipes, and have charged Trebesi with possession, which means there wasn't enough to trigger an automatic charge of distribution.

So we have a heavily-armed, paramilitary-style raid conducted based on a tip from a stripper of drug use, not distribution. In the process, a slight, unarmed man runs toward the raiding police officers, and is shot dead.

I think it's safe to say that Guizan likely had no idea the intruders were police. If he was aware of the shots fired at Trebesi's home in March, he likely thought Trebesi was being attacked again. But it seems unlikely (to put it mildly) that an unarmed man would knowingly run toward a team of well-armed, raiding police officers to protect his friends small stash of cocaine.

We're told over and over that even in no-knock raids, the police announce themselves as they're coming into the home, and that everyone inside ought to know they're being raided by cops, not criminal intruders. But if that's the case, why deploy flash grenades just before making entry? They're designed to disorient and confuse. That's the whole reason for using them. You can't at the same time say it's necessary to disorient and confuse people, but that they also should hear, recognize, process, and believe the police announcement you make at the same time you're deploying the concussion grenades.

Finally, it looks right now as if the raid was a reaction to a tip from a single source that Trebesi and possibly Guizan were using drugs. There's as yet no indication there was any evidence of distribution. The raid was done within hours of the tip from the stripper, so it's unlikely the police did much surveillance or attempted a controlled drug buy from Trebesi.

The police will argue the officer who shot Guizan was reacting to a volatile situation. He had precious little time to determine whether the man running toward him was armed, or whether he presented a threat to the officer's safety. That's all probably true, though it doesn't account for the fact that the police created those volatile circumstances in the first place. It also doesn't account for the fact that had Guizan been the one who misjudged the threat and shot and killed one of the raiding officers, he'd almost certainly be in Ryan Frederick's shoes right now.

The best solution is of course to stop these aggressive drug policing tactics, which continue result in unnecessary deaths and injuries. But if you're going to insist on using them, you can't keep holding the people you're raiding to a higher standard than the (hopefully) well-trained police officers conducting the raids.

Guizan's parents—who lost their only other son in a car accident—are considering a lawsuit.

"Death Dealer"?

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:22:00 EDT

Bullet-50 is a company that sells street clothes to off-duty and undercover police officers. For example, they specialize in clothes that make it easier to carry a concealed gun. Bullet-50 was founded by Officer Joseph Salazar, who is also still a cop with the San Francisco Police Department. It looks as if the company markets exclusively to police officers. No problem so far. Seems like a good idea.

I wonder, though, what the hell they're thinking with this t-shirt, which is for sale on the Bullet-50 website:

Another Curtain Measurer Safely Taken Off the Streets; Or, Another Isolated Incident

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:06:00 EDT

Tom's River, New Jersey:

A Toms River man, who claimed he was in an apartment to measure for curtains when he was kicked and stomped on by law enforcement officers during a drug raid four years ago, has won a $350,000 settlement in exchange for the dismissal of his excessive force lawsuit, his attorney said.
Jon Caldwell, 54, suffered chest trauma and fractured ribs after law enforcement officers "put their boots on his neck and started beating him by kicking and stomping on him," according to the lawsuit, which attorney Eugene Melody said was filed in September 2006.
The lawsuit contends that on Dec. 17, 2004, the then-Dover Township Police Department and the Ocean County Narcotics Strike Force were executing search warrants on a pair of apartments in the Park Ridge Apartment complex on Walnut Street. The raids were part of an ongoing investigation into the distribution of marijuana in the Toms River area, according to the suit.
Caldwell had signed a lease to rent an apartment in the complex beginning in January. The superintendent of the complex had given Caldwell a key to the apartment so he could measure for window treatments and furnishings, the suit states.
On a tip that a person was in an abandoned apartment, law enforcement also raided an apartment that they did not have a search warrant for, the suit claims. Caldwell was in that apartment.
"Several men in SWAT-type gear broke down the door to his apartment and tackled him, slamming him face first to the floor. These men, . . . members of the Narcotics Strike Force, put their boots on his neck and started kicking and stomping on him," the suit states. "None of these men ever identified themselves as "law enforcement' to Mr. Caldwell or asked him what he was doing in the apartment."
After law enforcement realized Caldwell had nothing to do with the drug raid, they let him go, the suit states. The next day, Caldwell was admitted to Community Medical Center, Toms River, according to the suit. His medical bills total nearly $100,000, according to the suit.

Even they'd had the right guy, was the beating and stomping really necessary?

Note too the lack of an announcement.

Grand Jury Ups the Charges Against Ryan Frederick. Indicts.

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 08:36:00 EDT

A Chesapeake, Virginia grand jury indicted 28-year-old Ryan Frederick on charges of capital murder yesterday. The more severe charge (he was originally charged with first-degree murder) means the state will likely seek the death penalty, though there has been no official announcement as of yet.

Last January, Frederick shot and killed Det. Jarrod Shivers during a drug raid on Frederick's home. Police were looking for a major marijuana growing operation in Frederick's garage. They didn't find one. Frederick had no prior criminal record, and had a misdemeanor amount of pot (he says a few joints) in his home at the time of the raid. His home had also been broken into a few days prior to the raid.

We now know that the police informant whose tip led to the raid was responsible for the break-in. We also know that informant had credit card fraud charges pending against him that were dropped just before the raid. What we still don't know is if his burglary of Frederick's home was done with the knowledge or consent of the police.

Special Prosecutor Paul Ebert pushed the unlikely theory yesterday that Frederick looked out his window, saw several police officers about to break into his home, heard them announce themselves as police, decided to shoot and kill just one of them, then surrendered. This is a guy who friends, former employers, neighbors and family describe as harmless and unconfrontational to the point of being meek. The idea that he'd knowingly kill a cop over a few joints is absurd.

Frederick had a job he enjoyed, a record of steady employment and strong recommendations from supervisors, and he'd just gotten engaged. Again, hardly the profile of a cop killer with a death wish.

Ebert also got the law wrong in his statement to the press. He said:

"Anytime someone kills a police officer, who is acting properly with a legal search warrant, that is a case of Capital Murder."

Well, no. According to the Virginia criminal code, the act has to be willful, deliberate, and premeditated. If you don't know that the men breaking down your door are police when you shoot and kill one of them, you aren't guilty of capital murder. Virginia doesn't have a Castle Doctrine, so you may be guilty of something. But it isn't capital murder. This is why Ebert is arguing the "peered out the window" theory.

The grand jury also indicted Frederick on a charge of manufacturing marijuana. Ebert hinted at this possibility a couple of weeks ago. I'm still trying to figure out what evidence they have for that charge. They found no plants in Frederick's home. They seized some grow lights and planting pots, but the guy is a gardener. His friends and neighbors—or one look at his backyard—confirm that.

It's unlikely that police had information of Frederick manufacturing marijuana other than the informant's tip prior to the raid, or they'd have included it in the affidavit to obtain the search warrant. That leaves only the possibility that they've rounded up someone since the raid who might testify that he bought drugs from Frederick, or witnessed Frederick's alleged marijuana operation. At this point, it would be prudent to be wary of any informants with criminal records the police may bring forward to testify against Frederick.

The police did no controlled buys to confirm the informant's tip. They say their "surveillance" consisted of a few drive-bys over a three-month period, during which they reported no unusual activity. They claim to have done an extensive background check on Frederick, and found only traffic tickets. Yet they felt compelled to break down his door after nightfall, based on a tip from a shady informant, and very little else.

Bad as all of this looks, there are a couple of glimmers of hope, here. The first is that Paul Ebert has a long and illustrious history of incompetence. He seems to be living up to that reputation here with his overcharging of Frederick. The other reason for hope is that judging from the comments threads at the Virginian-Pilot website, public opinion in Chesapeake seems to have shifted decidedly to Frederick's favor. The public is usually reflexively pro-police, particularly when a cop is killed in the line of duty. That there's now considerable doubt about this case is testament to just how poorly this raid was executed, and how poorly it's been handled since.

Prior coverage of the Frederick case here.

Police Union Intimidating Derrick Foster's Supporters

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 09:09:00 EDT

Derrick Foster is the man who recently shot and wounded two Columbus, Ohio police officers conducting a drug raid on a house where Foster was shooting dice. There were no drug charges as a result of the raid. In fact, the only charges to come out of the raid are those against Foster and another man, both of whom say they mistook the raiding officers for armed robbers. Foster is a code inspector for the city of Columbus, Ohio who received glowing reviews from his supervisors, a former Ohio State football player, and a father of two. He had no prior criminal record.

As Foster's initial court appearance, his attorney introduced several letters attesting to his character from Ohio State athletes, local businessmen, and local educators. Many called him a role model.

That apparently has disrupted the police narrative that Foster is a dangerous cop-killer.

The Fraternal Order of Police passed on many of the supporters' letters to its 4,100 members and encouraged them to express their displeasure or boycott their businesses.

"I still believe he's a threat to society. The minute you put your thoughts on a letterhead, you open yourself and your business up to criticism," said Jim Gilbert, president of Capital City Lodge No. 9.

"We're asking our officers and the public to stand up between the citizens and the violence they put against our officers."

Weiner said the union is off base. "This is witness intimidation. I might be calling some of these people as character witnesses for the defense," he said recently.

The first two union targets were Michael McGuire, the owner of a Budget car-rental location and a lifelong friend of Foster's; and Pickerington Central High School Principal Scott Reeves, who met Foster at OSU in the mid-1980s. McGuire said he felt threatened when one officer called him and the union sent him an e-mail after he wrote that Foster "is a tremendous role model to his children and other teens in the community."

Wonder how the union feels about the violence Columbus police use against nonviolent citizens in these raids?

The high school principal was reprimanded by his boss, the school superintendent. The police union says it also plans to send a cadre of officers to the school's next school board meeting, again to register their displeasure for the principal's support of Foster. The superintendent may have a point in that the principal shouldn't have used official letterhead in his note of support for Foster. But then, I wonder how many of these police officers have acted in their official capacity in their efforts to intimidate Foster's supporters. I'd presume the answer is "all," given that if they hadn't, the recipients of their emails and phone calls wouldn't have known they were cops. How many will show up at the school board meeting in uniform?

So in sum: The Columbus police waged a hasty drug raid (the third that night for the same SWAT team) on a house where no significant amount of drugs were found. In the process, a man with no prior criminal record and who worked for the city understandably mistook them for armed robbers, and fired his legally-registered gun in self-defense. The authorities are now charging that man with attempted murder, and any of his friends or acquaintances who dare vouch for his character and judgment (both of which are pretty important to establishing his guilt or innocence) can expect intimidating phone calls, emails, and visits from the police, as well as police efforts to interfere with their careers and livelihood.

Foster's attorney is right. This is blatant witness intimidation. Ohio's attorney general needs to rein the police union in.

We continue to get these cases where someone with no prior criminal record fires on a team of raiding police officers. And every time, we're supposed to believe that said person knew the armed men breaking in were cops, and that for whatever reason, each time this person who had shown no prior indication of criminality suddenly turned into a deranged cop killer.

Hardly seems likely, does it? Isn't the more rational explanation here that these raids are dangerously volatile, confusing, and violent, and put the people on the receiving end of them in understandable fear for their lives?

Assistant Police Chief Who Oversaw the Kathryn Johnston Raid Is Up for a Promotion

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 28 May 2008 12:08:00 EDT

Shortly after the Kathryn Johnston raid, Assistant Atlanta Police Chief Alan Dreher sprang into action to defend the actions of his police officers. Less than 24 hours after the raid, before there had been any real investigation, Dreher assured the public that there was nothing to see, here. The police had made a controlled buy at Johnston’s home, Dreher said. They arrived at her house in a marked car, and came in in marked uniforms. Johnston shot at the officers, Dreher said. He later added that Johnston “should have recognized” the men breaking into her home as police officers. The cops returned fire only in self-defense, he said. Dreher even suggested that it was a police officer, not an informant, who bought the drugs from Johnston (as it turns out, no one did, the controlled buy was a lie).

Police defenders and critics of mine were quick to jump on Dreher’s statements to show that I and others were “jumping the gun” for questioning the raid. After all, if the police said they did a buy, they did a buy. If the police say they announced, then they announced. If the police inferred that this 92-year-old woman was a dope dealing criminal who got what she deserved, well, then she sure as hell got what she deserved.

We now know that just about everything Dreher said was wrong. Dreher was presiding over a corrupt narcotics unit that routinely lied on search warrant affidavits, harassed and intimidated informants, covered up mistakes, and was subject to damaging arrest and raid quotas that encouraged shortcuts and circumventing the checks in place to ensure the protection of civil rights. It was Dreher who spoke too soon, propagating the lie told to him by his officers that Johnston was some sort of dope-slinging, gun-toting granny.

Dreher was acting as spokesman just after the raid because Atlanta Police Chief Richard Pennington was out of town. When Pennington returned, he quickly dispensed with Dreher’s clannish, old-school, blue-wall-of-silence approach. Pennington was more forthcoming, and quickly announced he’d be conducting a thorough internal investigation. Within days, Pennington turned the investigation over to federal authorities. We now know that Johnston was innocent, that there was no drug buy, and that Johnston didn’t even get off a shot. The cops were wounded by fragments from their own bullets. When they found out they had made a mistake, the narcotics team handcuffed Johnston and left her to bleed to death in her own home while they planted marijuana in her basement.

I bring all of this up because you’d think that Dreher would have been fired. At minimum, as APD’s chief of operations, Dreher presided over an astonishingly rogue and unaccountable narcotics department that put who knows how many innocent people in jail, and subjected who knows how many people to mistaken and botched drug raids. He was either oblivious to all of the corruption, or he was complicit in it. Neither speaks well of him as a police manager, or as a leader. Dreher then helped disseminate an ass-covering version of the Kathryn Johnston raid that proved to be wrong in just about every way possible. Dreher’s early press statements were not only rash and wrong-headed defenses of his poorly-trained and poorly-disciplined narcotics officers, in the process he also sullied the name of the innocent woman his officers had just killed.

But Dreher didn’t lose his job. In fact, he's now one of four finalists for the police chief position in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. He’s up for a promotion. And this isn’t even the first time. He was also a finalist for police chief in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Ryan Frederick's Preliminary Hearing

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 28 May 2008 08:45:00 EDT

Yesterday was the preliminary hearing for Ryan Frederick, the 28-year-old Chesapeake, Virginia man facing murder charges for killing a police officer during a drug raid (see this wiki for more on Frederick's case). The police account of the raid as portrayed in the Virginian-Pilot yesterday differs pretty drastically from other accounts. A few items from the hearing worth noting:

• The police say sixteen officers were present for the raid, and that they were divided into two units, one at the front door to the house, and one unit that was prepared to enter the detached garage. This differs sharply from what Frederick's neighbors told me. One woman told me she came outside after she heard shots, and saw one car and two officers at Frederick's home. It was only later that other officers arrived.

• Pay close attention to this one: According to a reporter I spoke with this evening who attended the hearing, Detective Kelly Roberts testified that the police announced themselves four times, waiting four seconds between announcements. You can see part of this testimony at the Virginian-Pilot link.

After the fourth announcement (presumably, about sixteen seconds), they detected movement in the house. Roberts says a light "changed." It was at this point that they announced "Eight ball! Eight Ball!" a code signaling that the raid had been compromised. At that cue (pardon the billiards pun), they took down the door with the battering ram.Think about the implication, here. The police come to Frederick's home to serve a knock and announce search warrant. He's asleep in his bed. Sixteen seconds after the first knock, it isn't the fact that he hasn't yet come to the door that triggers the violent, forced entry. It's that there is a "change" in the light. It's the light that makes them conclude the raid had been compromised. Not the flush of a toilet, or the cock of a shotgun. A light. How do they know that light isn't someone coming to answer the door, possibly to allow the police to come in for a peaceful search?

What this means is that, as I've written before, there's no real difference between a no-knock and a knock and announce warrant. Once the warrant has been issued your door is coming down, and there's not much you can do about it.

This then raises the question of what exactly you're supposed to do when someone knocks on your door, and announces that they're the police and that they have a search warrant. Don't come to the door, and they're going to break it down and come after you. Come to the door to verify it's really the police (by no means a given)—and to let them in if it is—and your very movement toward the door can, also, be a trigger to break the door down and storm your home. Arm yourself and wait for them to come in? You're practically begging them to shoot you.

Seems your only option is stand somewhere in your own house with your hands in the air, wait for the door to come down, and hope the raiding officers don't mistake your t-shirt for a gun, or possibly trip or mistakenly fire and accidentally kill you. Be prepared to be thrown to the ground, stepped on, handcuffed, and have the barrel of a gun pointed at the back of your head.

This is just one of many conundrums posed by the proliferation of paramilitary-style police raids. The people on the receiving end of the raids are put in positions where it's nearly impossible to even know what the right response is, much less be in a position to make it. Not to mention that, at the same time, they're being subjected to trauma that makes any sort of clear-headedness or careful consideration of their options pretty much impossible. Make the wrong decision and you're either dead or facing a felony charge.

• Roberts also testified that none of the police officers fired a shot. What, then, are we to make of the .223 casing police recovered from Frederick's home? The police recovered only a .380 pistol from Frederick's home. I haven't been able to get the Chesapeake Police Department to tell me what type of gun the SWAT and narcotics teams carry, but many carry the sort of a gun that would fire a .223. So far, neither the police nor Paul Ebert have offered an explanation for the casing

• Frederick's attorney James Broccoletti made a good point, too. According to Roberts' own testimony, Frederick fired only after the battering ram breached the lower panel of Frederick's door. This is a pretty good indication that Frederick's mindset was one of self defense (never mind his clean record, and praise from neighbors, friends, and prior employers). If this were a premeditated attempt to kill a cop (which no one who knows Frederick says he's capable of ), and if Frederick knew these were police officers due to their alleged repeated announcements, why would he wait until they had broken down his door to begin firing? And why would he give up after firing just two rounds? Those seem like the acts of someone who's scared and uncertain, not someone hellbent on killing himself a cop.

• The prosecution says Det. Shivers was in the front yard when he was shot. Gun experts I've queried say it's doubtful that a bullet from a .380 pistol could go through a door and then, according to the autopsy, also go through Shivers' arm, and then penetrate Shivers' chest.

Frederick has told friends and family that he fired when he saw the bottom part of his door had been breached, and that someone was reaching up through the hole to grasp at the door knob. This seems more plausible, and more consistent with the autopsy. If Shivers was reaching through a hole in the door when Frederick fired at him, it's not difficult to see how a bullet would have first struck Shivers' arm, then his chest. It seems less likely that the bullet would have traveled through Shivers living room, through his front door, into his yard, then through both Shivers' arm and chest.

• Prosecutor Ebert has said that he may file felony drug charges against Frederick at a later date. I find this dubious, given that it's been four months since the raid, and the only illicit substance thus far recovered was the misdemeanor amount of marijuana.I see a few possibilities, here. Ebert could try to tie the gun to the pot possession and get Frederick for using a gun in commission of drug crime. I'm not sure how that sticks, given that Frederick wasn't smoking or selling the drug when the raid went down.

Ebert could also try to say the gardening equipment was evidence of a grow operation, even though the police found no actual marijuana plants. Given that Frederick's neighbors have said he was an avid amateur gardener, I would think it would be pretty easy for him to show the equipment had a legitimate purpose. The third possibility is that Ebert's sitting on some new evidence that he hasn't yet released. If you'll remember, Chesapeake police announced several weeks ago that they had seized Frederick's phone records. Perhaps they're preparing to trot out a few people who will claim to have bought drugs from Frederick. Maybe Frederick did sell some marijuana here and there, though everyone I've talked to insists he was a no more than a recreational, small-time pot smoker. Remember too that it's pretty easy to get an informant to say whatever you want him to, particularly if you're willing to help him wriggle out of other charges. I

In all, today's hearing offered up a bit more of the information that the police department has been sitting on for four months, but it raised quite a few more questions than answers. The case now goes to the grand jury, which is almost certain to indict Frederick on whatever charges Ebert asks from them.

Another Day, Another Drug Raid Death

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Tue, 27 May 2008 09:18:00 EDT

Over the weekend, police in Connecticut broke through windows and deployed flash grenades while conducting a drug rain on a home in Connecticut. Gonazalo Guizan, 33, who was visiting and didn't live at the house, charged at the raiding officers, unarmed. The police shot him dead.

Early reports don't say much about Guizan, though in this comment thread, friends and family say he wasn't a drug dealer, wasn't violent, and wasn't a criminal. I suppose it's possible that an unarmed man would knowingly charge a team of raiding police officers. But I think the far more likely explanation is that he thought the place was being robbed.

We don't yet have details as to why the police felt it necessary to shoot Guizan, other than that he charged at them. I suspect the shooting itself will be ruled justified, as it probably should be. The question is why the paramilitary tactics were necessary in the first place, and whether yet another person has now paid with his life for the very reasonable mistake of confusing invading police officers with invading criminals.

The owner of the house was charged with possession of drugs and drug paraphernalia. Which means there weren't enough drugs in the place to charge him with distribution. He was released on $10,000 bond.

Derrick Foster Speaks

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Thu, 22 May 2008 08:21:00 EDT

Foster, remember, is the former Ohio State University football player charged with shooting and wounding two police officers during a drug raid in Columbus. He had no prior criminal record, had a conceal carry permit for his gun, wasn't involved with any illicit drugs, and has a spotless record of employment as a code inspector for the city of Columbus. Foster admits he was at the house the police raided to shoot dice, but says he had no idea the raiding officers were cops.

From the article:

"What I heard was a boom," said Derrick Foster. "Like somebody was trying to kick in the door."
Foster, who played football at Ohio State, told 10TV News that he never heard anyone identify themselves as police officers.
"The first reaction from everyone inside was we were being robbed," Foster said. "We're being robbed."
Foster admitted that he went to the East Rich Street house to gamble. He also said he brought his gun - which he had a license to carry - for self-defense.
"My whole mentality was, if there were robbers, I want them to know somebody's in here with a gun," Foster said. "Go away."
According to Foster, someone else inside the home fired the first shot.
"Whoever was outside fired back in, and that's when I un-holstered my gun and I fired two shots," Foster said. "Basically, I was firing two shots, like a warning shot."
[...]
"They feel like, hey, this guy's a criminal," Foster said. "I'm not that. I'm not that -- and I want them to know I'm not that."
"I'm more remorseful than any person could ever be. This is something that has to stick with me for the rest of my life."

The police don't seem to have any such regrets.

Officers Garrison and Gillis did not comment on the pending court case, but said anyone who opens fire on another person needs to be held accountable.
"I think any person that has a firearm and is willing to shoot at any person is a dangerous person," Garrison said.

I wonder if that would include the officers who blindly fired back into the house.

Incidentally, this was the third drug raid of the night for the Columbus narcotics SWAT team. The police say the house Foster was in was "a suspected crack house." That doesn't appear to be the case. No one in the house has been charged with any drug crime. The only charges stemming from the raid are the attempted murder and felonious assault charges against Foster and Michael Gravely for their reaction to the raid. It looks like there wasn't even enough gambling going on to merit a charge.

It would be nice to see the Columbus media ask some tougher questions, here. Upon what evidence did the police conduct this raid? Why was this "a suspected crack house?" Why no drug charges? What does the affidavit say? Where there any controlled buys at the house? Is it typical for the narcotics unit to conduct three raids in one night? Early reports described a witness who claims to have heard police give an order to smash in the house's windows just prior to the raid. Did that witness hear an announcement? Was it loud enough to be heard by the people inside?

Adventures in Police Professionalism

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Tue, 20 May 2008 18:25:00 EDT

D.C. Police Chief Kathy Lanier rehires 17 police officers previously fired for misconduct.

Then she decides the city will arm them with semiautomatic weapons.

Sounds like a fantastic couple of ideas. What could possibly go wrong?

Meanwhile, a coda to the Kathryn Johnston botched drug raid case in Atlanta: Arthur Tesler was the only officer on the raid who didn't take a plea bargain. Despite admitting that he lied, helped cover up Johnston's murder, and stood watch outside while other officers handcuffed the bleeding 92-year-woman—allowing her to die while they planted marijuana in her basement—he was convicted today only on the charge of lying to investigators. He'll face a maximum of five years in prison.

The one good thing to come out of the case is we got to see just how vast, deep, and pernicious the culture of corruption and disregard for civil rights ran in Atlanta's police department. Tesler testified that narcotics officers were required to serve nine warrants and make two arrest per month, or they'd risk losing their jobs. This led to routine lying on warrants and bullying and intimidation of informants. What we don't know is how many people were wrongly raided, arrested, and jailed because of all of this.

Informant Revealed in Chesapeake Raid?

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:47:00 EDT

Some potentially big news in the Chesapeake, Virginia drug raid this past January that resulted in the death of Chesapeake PD Det. Jarrod Shivers, and sent 28-year-old Ryan Frederick to jail on murder charges.

Local news station WTKR reporter Stacy Smith was given access to letters Frederick has written to friends and relatives. From those, she has determined that the informant in the case is 20-year-old named "Steven." The station isn't yet reporting the man's full name. Chesapeake PD refuses to confirm his identity.

The informant was apparently dating the sister of Frederick's fiance. Prior to the raid, Frederick and the informant got into an argument after Frederick accused him of stealing something from his home. According to Frederick, the informant threateningly promised he'd be back—which may explain the break-in just prior to the raid.

The informant has a shady past, including arrest for trespassing, a spotty employment history, and—most interestingly—a grand larceny arrest for credit card theft and credit card fraud just prior to the raid. After the raid, the grand larceny charge against the informant was dismissed. The fraud charge was set aside. The fraud charge was later reinstated. "Steven" was due in court to face that charge last week, but didn't show. He's now considered a fugitive.

Smith writes:

According to the affidavit for the search warrant that informant is the only source for the raid. There were no corroborating confidential informants. There was no surveillance. There were no undercover dope buys.

If Smith is correct, the police took the word of an unemployed guy with a grudge, a criminal record, and who had just been arrested for stealing credit cards, all in order to conduct a nighttime raid on a guy who had no prior record, and for whom neighbors and former employers have nothing but praise. They apparently did no corroborating investigation. A cop died as a result. And now they want to bring the hammer down on Ryan Frederick to account for their mistakes.

It's increasingly looking like Ryan Frederick is not only innocent, but that he has a compelling civil rights suit against the city of Chesapeake and its police department.

Tracy Ingle Gets a Lawyer

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:15:00 EDT

Tracy Ingle is the Arkansas man I wrote about last week. He was shot five times during a no-knock drug raid on his home. Though police found no drugs, they charged him with running a drop operation, anyway, due they said to a scale and some plastic bags they found in his home. He's also charged with assaulting the police officers for pointing a broken gun at them when they broke into his bedroom and woke him. A few updates on his case:

• First, the good news. A couple of weeks ago while still researching the raid on Ingle's home, I called Arkansas defense attorney John Wesley Hall to get his thoughts on the case. This week, Hall agreed to represent Ingle. Hall is one of the best defense attorneys in the country. He's a former executive with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and argued the landmark no-knock raid case Wilson v. Arkansas before the U.S. Supreme Court. Ingle's defense (and possible lawsuit) is in good hands.

• I also spoke late last week with the prosecutor in the case, John Hout. Hout wouldn't go into the details of the case with me, but did confirm that (1) he plans to go ahead with both the drug and assault charges, (2) the officers who shot Ingle have been cleared of any wrongdoing, and (3) he can't release the affidavits from the raid despite the fact that they're public record, because the case is "an ongoing investigation." He did say the affidavits will be available to Ingle's attorney through discovery. I also spoke with the information officer of the North Little Rock Police Department. He also told me that the affidavits are off-limits.

• Finally, members of Ingle's family say the North Little Rock SWAT team visited Tracy Ingle again last week. This time, they came to his house asking for a man named Shawn Anthony Turner. Turner is Ingle's cousin, and has had frequent problems with the law—he has actually served time on drug charges. When Turner was released from prison several years ago, Ingle's mother agreed to have him released into her custody, mostly, she says, because no one else in the family would take him. For a short while, Turner lived in the home Ingle's mother (Turner's aunt) owned, along with Ingle and a few other roommates who came and went.. This is the same home the police raided in January. When Turner didn't clean up his act, the family threw him out. Turner continued to pester Tracy Ingle about letting him move in, the family says, and Ingle continued to refuse to allow it.

Tracy Ingle's family members now speculate that Turner somehow factored in to the January raid on Ingle's home. Ingle's house is Turner's last known address, though he hasn't lived there since mid-2006. Ingle's sister and mother believe either the police mistakenly raided the house while looking for Turner, or that Turner told the police Ingle was making methamphetamine in retaliation for Ingle's refusal to let Turner live in his home. Tracy Ingle's name doesn't appear anywhere on the search warrant for the raid.

Last week, when the police saw Ingle, they apparently recognized him, realized this was the same house they had raided months ago, realized Turner no longer lives at the address, and left.

RateMyCop.com

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Tue, 13 May 2008 12:00:00 EDT

Many police departments have set up Internet registries for sex offenders and drug offenders, and police also have begun posting the pictures and names of suspected johns online. Still, police groups took umbrage when a site called RateMyCop.com appeared in March.

Site founder Gino Sesto wrote to police departments across the country and obtained lists of the names and badge numbers of their officers. He then posted the names online in a format broken down by state and city, encouraging users to rate their experiences with individual officers.

All of the information Sesto posted was already open to the public, and he didn’t reveal the identities of any undercover officers. But police groups were outraged, making the dubious argument that posting publicly available names and badge numbers on the Internet somehow jeopardized officers’ safety. Jerry Dyer, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, told Wired the site could give citizens the opportunity to “unfairly malign” individual officers. He added that he’d be asking the state legislature to ban sites like RateMyCop.com.

Then in March, hosting service GoDaddy mysteriously terminated Sesto’s account and pulled RateMyCop.com offline. GoDaddy has offered several explanations to Wired, none of which has made much sense. Sesto gave up on GoDaddy and tried to get the site hosted at RackSpace. After initially accepting his down payment for hosting services, RackSpace sent a letter to Sesto saying, “We believe that the website to be found at www.ratemycop.com as described to our sales representative could create a risk to the health and safety of law enforcement officers.” At press time the site was back online, but its future is uncertain.