Home Invasion Death of Chesapeake Detective

imported post

I read in Ryan Fredrick's my space blog that he was growing Japanese Maple saplings. I have a Japanese Maple, and when they are small, I could see how they could be mistaken for marijuana plants.

Mr. Fredrick's was burglarized a few days before the home invasion raid. If the confidential informant was the burglar and the Japanese Maples were mistook for marijuana then Mr. Fredrick's case is significantly strengthened.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

My error... The link did not work and I clicked the wrong one and I tried to piece it together.

You spoke about camping and that was the code I found. I have changed to the other code section but everything is still the same.

Click to expand...

I don't know how things work in your neighborhood, but if some unidentified person is violently trying to kick in my front door (violent or tumultuous manner) and I don't see a host of flashing police, ambulance, or firetruck lights in my front yard, it is hard to imagine a situation where it would not be reasonable to assume the intruder intended to cause serious violence to me and my family. Similarly, if I find some unknown person trying to sneak into my home (stealth or surreptitiously) while I am there the onus is on him to provide rapid and overwhelming evidence he does not intend to do me harm.

And I don't mean to be off topic in a Virginia forum, but I can tell you that in Utah, we don't even see people charged for shooting home invaders dead. We had a case recently where the homeowner chased the bad guys from the home and actually shot at them as they ran down the street. Which is more than I think is prudent. But he never left his own property and the DA decided he was legally justified under our laws.

The closest we've come to such a charge was a fellow who shot and killed home invaders with a gun he was not allowed to possess due to being a felon. No charges for shooting and killing the bad guys. He was charged with being a felon in possession of a gun.

I love visiting Virginia. Great food, and good gun laws. But if your laws and culture on home invasion require a person to wait until his door is violently breached before being justified in using deadly force, you do have my sympathies. That is no way to have to live.

And, interestingly, Utah police officers and departments manage to keep the peace and keep crime rates low even with these laws in place.

All the best.

Charles

imported post

There are still a lot of questions here, and a lot of miss-information. The facts do not support most of the assertions.

Fact 1. According to the medical examiner the officer was killed by a single gun shot to the arm and chest.

Fact 2. The officer was wearing body armor and helmet.

Fact 3. Marijuana and drug paraphernalia were found at the residence.

Fact 4. The warrant was served by 2 officers, not a SWAT team.

Fact 5. The warrant was a "knock and announce"warrant

Fact 6. The warrant was served at 8:40 in the evening.

Fact 7. Later a second warrant was served;

"After the shooting, a second search warrant was executed . Police seized a Bersa "Firestorm" .380-caliber handgun, three bullet casings and ammunition from the house, according to court documents. Police also took a broken door, a television set, a pry bar, a battering ram, a shoe and a flashlight."

(All of the above facts are found in the link below)

http://www.officer.com/web/online/Top-News-Stories/Medical-Examiner--Single-Shot-Killed-Virginia-Officer/1$39907

I have drawn several conclusions from the above facts;

1. It would be expected that a person would be awake and would respond to a knock at the door at 8:40 in the evening.

2. The officer was standing and probably operating the battering ram when he was shot. (the bullet went through his arm and into his chest.) He had his left side to the door.

3. The battering ram may have been coming through the door but the officer was not. (see #2)

4. I have never heard of bad guys using a battering ram in a home invasion.

5. Mr. Frederick did have something to hide.

6. I would not want to be in Mr. Frederick's shoes at this time.



On a side note, we, who own guns for personal and home protection, should take note of this case so that we can be as prepared as we need to be when and if someone tries to break into our home.

imported post

Sa45auto wrote:

1. It would be expected that a person would be awake and would respond to a knock at the door at 8:40 in the evening.

2. The officer was standing and probably operating the battering ram when he was shot. (the bullet went through his arm and into his chest.) He had his left side to the door.

3. The battering ram may have been coming through the door but the officer was not. (see #2)

4. I have never heard of bad guys using a battering ram in a home invasion.

5. Mr. Frederick did have something to hide.

6. I would not want to be in Mr. Frederick's shoes at this time.

Click to expand...

1. Mr. Frederick is an early riser, since his job is (was) soft drink merchandising. Having driven a soft drink route, I can tell you there were many nights that I was dead to the world before 8:30.

2 & 3. Facts not in evidence.

4. From the inside, a homeowner would have no idea if it was a battering ram, sledge hammer, or Size 12 being used to batter down the door.

5. Less than a joint's worth of personal use marijuana, a misdemeanor amount. Remember, the warrant was for a "major hydroponic grow operation" in the garage, not the house. Dynamic entry raids, whether no-knock or not, are supposedly justified to preserve evidence. I've never seen anyone flush a major grow op down the toilet.

6. Agreed. However, he wouldn't be in those shoes if not for, a) the insane War On Some Drugs; and, b) the apparent lack of even minimal investigation before the raid.

imported post

KBCraig wrote:

Sa45auto wrote:

1. It would be expected that a person would be awake and would respond to a knock at the door at 8:40 in the evening.

2. The officer was standing and probably operating the battering ram when he was shot. (the bullet went through his arm and into his chest.) He had his left side to the door.

3. The battering ram may have been coming through the door but the officer was not. (see #2)

4. I have never heard of bad guys using a battering ram in a home invasion.

5. Mr. Frederick did have something to hide.

6. I would not want to be in Mr. Frederick's shoes at this time.

Click to expand...

1. Mr. Frederick is an early riser, since his job is (was) soft drink merchandising. Having driven a soft drink route, I can tell you there were many nights that I was dead to the world before 8:30.

2 & 3. Facts not in evidence.

4. From the inside, a homeowner would have no idea if it was a battering ram, sledge hammer, or Size 12 being used to batter down the door.

5. Less than a joint's worth of personal use marijuana, a misdemeanor amount. Remember, the warrant was for a "major hydroponic grow operation" in the garage, not the house. Dynamic entry raids, whether no-knock or not, are supposedly justified to preserve evidence. I've never seen anyone flush a major grow op down the toilet.

6. Agreed. However, he wouldn't be in those shoes if not for, a) the insane War On Some Drugs; and, b) the apparent lack of even minimal investigation before the raid.

Click to expand...

If you are going to quote me and take that quote out of context and then refer to my statements as "2 & 3. Facts not in evidence", please have the decency to include enough of my quote so that my true meaning is evident.

The part you left out "I have drawn several conclusions from the above facts;" states clearly the following weremy CONCLUSIONS and not facts.

There are still facts to be disclosed, but as for now, from the facts at hand, I still stand by my conclusions.

A persons conclusions from a groupof facts, tells you a lot about that person. :what:

imported post

I really don't understand what part of breaking down the damn door some of you don't seem to get!

Someone knocking on my door or even pounding on it with their fist and breaking it down ARE NOT THE SAME. Who do you think it is if they are breaking down or breaking through your door? the neighborhood welcoming committee giving you an award, I don't think so.

Are you going to wait for them to break it down and come in firing on you before you realize, oh shit it's not little red ridding hood coming for a visit.

I veiw this the same as being out on the street and someone pulling a gun on me and taking aim. Would I wait until he starts shooting at me before I believe he means me no good?

imported post

kimbercarrier wrote:

I really don't understand what part of braking down the damn door some of you don't seem to get!

Someone knocking on my door and breaking it down ARE NOT THE SAME. Who do you think it is if they are breaking down or breaking through your door? the neighborhood welcoming committee giving you an award, I don't think so.

Are you going to wait for them to break it down and come in firing on you before you realize, oh shit it's not little red ridding hood coming for a visit.

I veiw this the same as being out on the street and someone pulling a gun on me and taking aim. Would I wait until he starts shooting at me before I believe he means me no good?

Click to expand...

That is exactly what makes this a case we need to look at.

We don't know all the facts and what we know makes me worry for Mr. Frederick's future.

As for breaking down the door. I have my guidelines and I hope you have yours.



Mine are as follows;



Sa45auto wrote:

Charles,... you made me re-think my position on when to shoot, when someone is breaking in my house.



My take is now this.



1. I am a law abiding person so I do not expect the police to be at my door.

2. If the police are doing their job, they will identify themselves BEFORE they try and break down my door.

3. If they are police and they have done their job,including identifying themselvesand I shoot through my door and kill one or more of them I am guilty of murder.

4. If someone is breaking down my door and they have not identified themselves as police, and I fear for my life, they will be shot....door or no door.

5. If someone is breaking down my door and have identified themselves as police, I will a. Try and get them to allow me to open the door and check their identity, while covering them with my weaponor b. Stand at ready and if they are not police, defined myself and my home.

6. If the police have not done their job and they are breaking down my door, and have not identified themselves...heaven help them.

Click to expand...

I think we also have to play it by ear and gut as we go along.



If any of us ever shoot a police officer who is coming through our door, we had better hope that we did everything right, and it was his mistake.

From the few facts we have I think there was some bad luck and some mistakes.

The two officers may very well have done everything by the book, and there are no facts I have seen yet that say that they didn't.

It is easy to see why Mr. Frederick did what he did, but my gut tells me that he made more mistakes than the officers did, and now they are both paying.

This is the scenario that scares me more than any other, and for which I want to be most prepared.

If there is any indication at all that they may be cops, I will have to wait and see before I shoot.

To my mind there were indicators in this case that Mr. Frederick should have seen, BUT there is no proof one way or the other and that is just my opinion. Opinions are like belly buttons.... everyone has one.

imported post

.but shooting through the door when you don't know if you are in danger is in my professional opinion, extremely reckless to say the least.

LRS76251 what exactly is your profession since you are giving us your professional opinion. Are you a LEO or a rent a cop or just one of us civilians?

imported post

Where is the line between due diligence toward your fellow man and the basic human right of self defense? The homeowners dilemma is clear. Hold your fire against the intruder or shoot to stop the threat. With only a .380 I would fire early. Not enough firepower to stop ameth head if he gets all the way through the door.

I have to support acitizens right to defend himself in his own home even if he has misdemeanor amounts of contraband in his home.

If this was not ano knockentry and simply a knock and announce warrant, then we have a big problem. The officers areinitiating violence, putting themselves and the occupants of the home at risk. What sort of police department uses a battering ram at night for a normal search warrant?

imported post

Kimbercarrier, I'm a Federal LEO.

imported post

Thundar wrote:

Where is the line between due diligence toward your fellow man and the basic human right of self defense? The homeowners dilemma is clear. Hold your fire against the intruder or shoot to stop the threat...........

Click to expand...

This is exactly why we have to be careful and prepared, and why this scenario scares the snot out of me.

http://www.wsmv.com/news/15072152/detail.html

Police Imposters Invade Hermitage Home




This is just one of many that I grabbed of the Internet.

We have to be aware and make the right call.

imported post

Sa45auto wrote:

snipped.....
On a side note, we, who own guns for personal and home protection, should take note of this case so that we can be as prepared as we need to be when and if someone tries to break into our home.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

imported post

Prosecution Changes Story Again

and

Shooter Denied Bail

Virginia Pilot Reports:

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/02/attorneys-differ-where-chesapeake-officer-was-when-shot?page=1

The new prosecutor is making new accusations that really do not seem to add up. According to the Virginia Pilot,prosecutors now claimthat the detective was in the front yard when he was shot.

From what we have read that really does not add up. A .380 going through a wooden door with enough force left to go through the detectives arm then penetrating the detectives chest and killing him in the front yard?

Is that the truth, or is the truth that the prosecutor is playing fast and loose in order to ensure that bond was not set for the shooter?

We don't know, but this is the fourth changed story from the state.

*******

No bail. wow. The disbelief of the defense attorney in the second video says more than what I could possibly say here.

********

The Virginia Pilot Blog after the article states that Chesapeake Police Department has not asked for a State Police review of the incident, and that the independent review is limited in scope by the Chesapeake Police Department. I really hope that blogger is wrong.

imported post

Thundar wrote:

Prosecution Changes Story Again and Shooter Denied Bail

Virginia Pilot Reports:

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/02/attorneys-differ-where-chesapeake-officer-was-when-shot?page=1

The new prosecutor is making new accusations that really do not seem to add up. According to the Virginia Pilot,prosecutors now claimthat the detective was in the front yard when he was shot.

From what we have read that really does not add up. A .380 going through a wooden door with enough force left to go through the detectives arm then penetrating the detectives chest and killing him in the front yard?

Is that the truth, or is the truth that the prosecutor is playing fast and loose in order to ensure that bond was not set for the shooter?

We don't know, but this is the fourth changed story from the state.

*******

No bail. wow. The disbelief of the defense attorney in the second video says more than what I could possibly say here.

********

The Virginia Pilot Blog after the article states that Chesapeake Police Department has not asked for a State Police review of the incident, and that the independent review is limited in scope by the Chesapeake Police Department. I really hope that blogger is wrong.

Click to expand...

Remember... you are reading the words and interpretations of another.

Maybe you are being given bad or misleading information.

The only thing I can believe from the story is that the Judge denied bail and that is because I watched him say it on the video. Unless I see it in video.. I am going to take everything I read from the news as plausiblebut not confirmed.

Keeping it gun related.... It could be possible to shoot through the hole in the door created by the police and then strike someone a distance away. We have no idea how thick the door is and the bullets did pass through it so the .380 did have penetration power.

It does not take much to kill a man with a well placed or extremely lucky shot.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Thundar wrote:

Prosecution Changes Story Again and Shooter Denied Bail

Virginia Pilot Reports:

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/02/attorneys-differ-where-chesapeake-officer-was-when-shot?page=1

The new prosecutor is making new accusations that really do not seem to add up. According to the Virginia Pilot,prosecutors now claimthat the detective was in the front yard when he was shot.

From what we have read that really does not add up. A .380 going through a wooden door with enough force left to go through the detectives arm then penetrating the detectives chest and killing him in the front yard?

Is that the truth, or is the truth that the prosecutor is playing fast and loose in order to ensure that bond was not set for the shooter?

We don't know, but this is the fourth changed story from the state.

*******

No bail. wow. The disbelief of the defense attorney in the second video says more than what I could possibly say here.

********

The Virginia Pilot Blog after the article states that Chesapeake Police Department has not asked for a State Police review of the incident, and that the independent review is limited in scope by the Chesapeake Police Department. I really hope that blogger is wrong.

Click to expand...

Remember... you are reading the words and interpretations of another.

Maybe you are being given bad or misleading information.

The only thing I can believe from the story is that the Judge denied bail and that is because I watched him say it on the video. Unless I see it in video.. I am going to take everything I read from the news as plausiblebut not confirmed.

Keeping it gun related.... It could be possible to shoot through the hole in the door created by the police and then strike someone a distance away. We have no idea how thick the door is and the bullets did pass through it so the .380 did have penetration power.

It does not take much to kill a man with a well placed or extremely lucky shot.

Click to expand...

I agree LEO 229 we don't know what really happened.

What is happening in the community is quite sad. How many people that shoot a police officer have a rally for them? This home invasion (or not, maybethe detectivereally was shot in the yard) and the botched home invasion in December have done very significant harm to the reputation of the Chesapeake Police. Community policing and community relations are at an all time low. I know I have lived in Chesapeake for a long time.

The story keeps changing.The ever changing state storyjust doesn't feel right and the shooters story seems to be quite consistent and solid. Many people here just feel that justice is being pushed aside in order to ensure that the shooter does not "get away with" shooting the police officer.

imported post

I can understand that....

The Judge and jury are the ones who are supposed to be absolutely impartial and will see stories from both sides. The prosecutor will have to present evidence and prove their case.

I now wonder whysome people want so badly for the shooter to be releasedand push for him to be releasedand not some other guy that shot someone else?

It seems that ifit involves a defendant and a government agent the people come to rally for the defendant. It appears that many think this guy is going to be screwed or "railroaded" during the case.But whatis the difference with ANY defendant being charged?

How quickly we forget that a police officer was shot and killed at the hands of another who admitted to the shooting. What we do not knoware all the details but will quickly assume the guy is innocent.

We would like to think he is because who would shoot at the cops if they were in their right mind. But if they called out as required we have no clue if he heard them or not.

I am going to sit back and let the case be heard in court. This is why we have a court system. His attorney will do everything to protect his client and ultimately the jury will decide.

The no bail is likely because so many others that were risking life in prison decided to go on the run and avoid prosecution. This guy is no different and could take that option.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

I can understand that....

The Judge and jury are the ones who are supposed to be absolutely impartial and will see stories from both sides. The prosecutor will have to present evidence and prove their case.

I now wonder whysome people want so badly for the shooter to be releasedand push for him to be releasedand not some other guy that shot someone else?

It seems that ifit involves a defendant and a government agent the people come to rally for the defendant. It appears that many think this guy is going to be screwed or "railroaded" during the case.But whatis the difference with ANY defendant being charged?

How quickly we forget that a police officer was shot and killed at the hands of another who admitted to the shooting. What we do not knoware all the details but will quickly assume the guy is innocent.

We would like to think he is because who would shoot at the cops if they were in their right mind. But if they called out as required we have no clue if he heard them or not.

I am going to sit back and let the case be heard in court. This is why we have a court system. His attorney will do everything to protect his client and ultimately the jury will decide.

The no bail is likely because so many others that were risking life in prison decided to go on the run and avoid prosecution. This guy is no different and could take that option.

Click to expand...

There is a difference when one appears to be defending their home or life, rather than when one simply murders another in the comission of a crime. Remember the Ice Cream man in Richmond. They couldn't even get a grand jury to indite the Ice Cream man, even though he followed the assailant out of the store to continue shooting at the robber.

This is a case where the local police truthfulness will be called into question. It would have been much better if the Chesapeake Police Chief had been smart enough to ask for the state police to take over this case. The judge and the prosecutor had that much common sense. Instead we have a meltdown in the confidence of our police.

I must say that I have been an ardent supporter of our local police, but this case and the one in December are plantingdeep doubts about the ethics of my local police.

I thought that no bail was only for capital murder or flight risks in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Doesn't seem to fit here??

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

I am going to sit back and let the case be heard in court. This is why we have a court system. His attorney will do everything to protect his client and ultimately the jury will decide.

Click to expand...

The court system is flawed. Its a system where an officer who lied to an internal affairs officer can tell a judge he saw you go this fast and do this or that and unless your famous or have a really good lawyer, the judge WILL NOT listen to you, as what happened in my case. The judge basically called me a liar.

What we all hate to see which is exactly what is happening in this case is that the police screwed up, either by listening too much to a stupid informant, going off bad intel and not doing enough research which ended up in one of their own getting killed. So instead of realizing thier mistake they are going to do anythign they can to burn this guy who had no idea what was going on because "he killed a cop". Cops lives are no better than anyone elses and often times are found to be currupt or high on power. Why not support someone who was doing what he felt was right? Because he killed a cop who screwed up?

What if it wasnt a cop but an actual burgler, who would you support then? As far as he knew and as far as the evidence is showing, thats exactly what he thought was going on. He wasnt defending a large crop of weed, he didnt even have enough to warrant an arrest!

The system is flawed and because police cant deal with their own mistakes they are going to fry a guy for his. Its unjust and anything done in court will more than likely be corrupted.

imported post

PackininVB wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

I am going to sit back and let the case be heard in court. This is why we have a court system. His attorney will do everything to protect his client and ultimately the jury will decide.

Click to expand...

The court system is flawed. Its a system where an officer who lied to an internal affairs officer can tell a judge he saw you go this fast and do this or that and unless your famous or have a really good lawyer, the judge WILL NOT listen to you, as what happened in my case. The judge basically called me a liar.

What we all hate to see which is exactly what is happening in this case is that the police screwed up, either by listening too much to a stupid informant, going off bad intel and not doing enough research which ended up in one of their own getting killed. So instead of realizing thier mistake they are going to do anythign they can to burn this guy who had no idea what was going on because "he killed a cop". Cops lives are no better than anyone elses and often times are found to be currupt or high on power. Why not support someone who was doing what he felt was right? Because he killed a cop who screwed up?

What if it wasnt a cop but an actual burgler, who would you support then? As far as he knew and as far as the evidence is showing, thats exactly what he thought was going on. He wasnt defending a large crop of weed, he didnt even have enough to warrant an arrest!

The system is flawed and because police cant deal with their own mistakes they are going to fry a guy for his. Its unjust and anything done in court will more than likely be corrupted.

Click to expand...

This is the attitude that the Chesapeake Police are fomenting by hiding behind the thin blue line.

They are quick to put out information about all sorts of busts, and have shameless perp walks, etc. But when there is a chance of police impropriety or error, there is a deafening wall of silence.

The question in this case is not whether the defendant can get an impartial jury in Chesapeake, but whether the prosecution can.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

I now wonder whysome people want so badly for the shooter to be releasedand push for him to be releasedand not some other guy that shot someone else?

It seems that ifit involves a defendant and a government agent the people come to rally for the defendant. It appears that many think this guy is going to be screwed or "railroaded" during the case.But whatis the difference with ANY defendant being charged?

How quickly we forget that a police officer was shot and killed at the hands of another who admitted to the shooting. What we do not knoware all the details but will quickly assume the guy is innocent.

Click to expand...

You already know the answer to that 229. The Departments and many, not all, but many, Officers project the image of being the Divine Power. You have the AUTHORITY to control the population...to keep you safe of course..

As you sow, so shall you reap?

In other words...don't expect respect, or even fair treatment, when you piss people off!