• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Prosecutor Abusing Gun Owner

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
imported post

Why is the case of Ryan Frederick so important to gun owners? Dr Tabor explains it very well so I have lifted this from his web site. This is a lot of reading, so the last, and most important part for Virginia gun owners is in BOLD.

Premeditation is usually proved by demonstrating a series of overt acts on the part of the accused that establish motive and anticipation of the act of murder. Such a series of actions is clearly missing in this case. Frederick did not know Det. Shivers, and did nothing to confront him, or any other law enforcement officer, and to the contrary, all of the overt acts leading to the death were committed by the police. Given the known circumstances of the shooting, the prosecutor would have to prove that Fredericks had formed the intention to shoot a policeman serving a warrant at some point and then waited for the opportunity. Given Frederick’s non-violent past and the absence of any evidence he was guilty of any serious crime beyond misdemeanor possession of marijuana(and thus would have reason to expect a police raid), only Fredericks himself could provide such testimony.

So, given the implausibility of the charge, we must question the motives of the police and prosecutor in continuing with such a gross overcharge. None of the possibilities cast a favorable light on our law enforcement officials.

One rational is that there is hope that the possibility of being convicted on a capital charge will frighten Frederick into accepting a plea to a lesser charge, (such as manslaughter rising out of negligence,) rather than have his day in court in hopes of being found not guilty based on self defense. It is not the proper duty of prosecutors to convict innocent citizens just for the sake of winning. Frederick was either acting in self defense, in which case Det. Shivers death is excusable, or he was negligent. A jury should decide if there is uncertainty in the mind of the prosecutor. Terrorizing Frederick into taking a deal is not a just outcome.

Another is that the police and prosecutor know that Frederick’s claim of self defense is valid, and that they will ultimately lose in court, and they simply wish to punish him anyway by keeping him in jail without bail for over a year awaiting trial, which is only possible if the first degree charge is kept in place. Using the technicalities of the legal system to exact vengeance on an innocent victim of police blunders would be most despicable of all.

Most frightening of all, for the rest of us, is the possibility that the prosecution intends to make the case that arming oneself to defend ones home is evidence of premeditation in and of itself. The consequences of that theory would be catastrophic to the rights of every Virginian who owns a firearm, or even a knife or bat. Equating the intention to defend one’s life and home with premeditation to commit murder if a mistaken identity leads to an accidental death would effectively deny the rights of self defense to all Virginians.

Link: http://tidewaterliberty.wordpress.com/2008/05/11/ryan-fredericks-day-in-court-is-ours-as-well/
 

MeBaby

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Messages
257
Location
Right Here, Virginia, USA
imported post

Thanks for opening it back up Thundar

Grand juries that aren't a rubber stamp for the CA don't usually sit any longer than necessary but grand juries that do, usually get asked to stay on a little longer.

Miss CLEO's bias is well documented in this forum. I'm not trying to pick on him he just needs to understand that he does have a bias, just as we ALL have.
 

BobCav

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,798
Location
No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
imported post

Well I guesssince I wasin the military I guess you could say thatI premeditated to kill ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC. (And damn proud of it too!)

Thenall LEO's must premeditate to kill criminals.

And all vendors who sell tobacco premeditate killing everyone with cancer.

And everyone who wears a seatbelt must be premeditating being in an accident.



See how the anti's show their lunacy and idiocy! He just lost his case with that line of reasoning.
 

doctork

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
38
Location
Vinton, ,
imported post

MeBaby wrote:
Thanks for opening it back up Thundar

Grand juries that aren't a rubber stamp for the CA don't usually sit any longer than necessary but grand juries that do, usually get asked to stay on a little longer.

Miss CLEO's bias is well documented in this forum. I'm not trying to pick on him he just needs to understand that he does have a bias, just as we ALL have.
I agree, I'm glad that the thread is re-opened. Also, I totally agree that LEO is very bias. He also likes to create undue tension on the boards. Then when others start hitting back he wants the threads shutdown. The difference now is he can do it at his whim.
 

caltain

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
122
Location
Northern Virginia, , USA
imported post

We are all biased by our experiences, training and knowledge. Why point it out? No good reason I can think of.

Oh, and pet names may not be appreciated either. Especially when they are derogatory...
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

JeffersonDavis wrote:
doctork wrote:
The difference now is he can do it at his whim.
Yup just what we needed a jack booted IT dept........:banghead:

I can remember quite a few pre229 threads that were shut down on a whim....at any rate, so far there's been a lot more LEO discussion than Prosecutor Abusing Gun Owner.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
imported post

BobCav wrote:
Well I guesssince I wasin the military I guess you could say thatI premeditated to kill ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC. (And damn proud of it too!)

Thenall LEO's must premeditate to kill criminals.

And all vendors who sell tobacco premeditate killing everyone with cancer.

And everyone who wears a seatbelt must be premeditating being in an accident.



See how the anti's show their lunacy and idiocy! He just lost his case with that line of reasoning.

As I have said before, I really don't know if this was justified homicide or manslaughter. That determination is a job for a jury of Mr. Frederick's peers.

The thuggish behavior of the Commonwealth's special prosecutor certainly does not make me proud to be a citizen of Virginia.

Watch this case carefully. It has significant implications for all gun owners that would defend their homes in Virginia.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Thundar wrote:
SNIP Watch this case carefully. It has significant implications for all gun owners that would defend their homes in Virginia.
Just e-mail the prosecutor and ask her if she would like to guarantee that cries for Castle Doctrine come down irresistibly hard on the General Assembly next year.

THAT ought to do wonders for her career. Especially if it passes. She'll be known as the prosecutor who forced Castle Doctrine.

It might just be that a little bit of "we're watching you" would bringsober thoughtfulnessto this situation.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Citizen wrote:
Thundar wrote:
SNIP Watch this case carefully. It has significant implications for all gun owners that would defend their homes in Virginia.
Just e-mail the prosecutor and ask her if she would like to guarantee that cries for Castle Doctrine come down irresistibly hard on the General Assembly next year.

THAT ought to do wonders for her career. Especially if it passes. She'll be known as the prosecutor who forced Castle Doctrine.

It might just be that a little bit of "we're watching you" would bringsober thoughtfulnessto this situation.
Well said! Castle Doctrine to include total protection from civil liability.
How about an email campaign to show solidarity?

Yata hey
 
Top