Home Defense Against Police Raid

imported post

This is a terrible tragedy, but it could happen to anyone.

Anyone in a self defense situation has to make split-second decisions, but any action taken is subject to review.

See the links below for details (and avery interesting discussions).

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/06/prosecutor-wont-seek-death-penalty-ryan-frederick

http://antipolicemisconduct.meetup.com/37/boards/

imported post

Another victim to the "war on drugs" that has done nothing to curb drug usage and only turned America into a police state where we have no idea whether or not the folks busting down our front doors are criminals or agents of our Police state. Unfortunately my bullets don't know the difference either.

Now all any smart home invader has to do to disarm any LAC is announce that they are police and have a warrant before breaking and entering.

Lets hope a Jury not only finds this man innocent, but finds the police department responsible for putting these officers lives on the line for the sake of killing a plant.

imported post

Maybe I could see consideration of involuntary manslaughter. Maybe.


But guess what? You know who's responsible for bullsh*t like this? It's not the pansy-assed liberals... it's not the evil, demonic Democrats who want to take your guns... not those evil bastards at the ACLU who want to award an orphanage to every child molester... You can thank all of the good conservatives who know what's better for your body than you do!

:banghead:

imported post

You can't fire through your door. The warrant was lawful, the guy had weed. It is not murder, even 2nd degree,and no jury would convict him of that. Voluntary manslaughter "acting with reckless disregard of the potential to take a life without defense of situation and in so doing taking a life." Too bad for the cop, and I mean that, although I am clearly no big fan of kicking in doors for a misdemeanor allegation. And allegation is all a search warrant is based upon. But he was just doing his job.



PS: Should have added to make a charge of 2nd degree murder, it must be established that the accused had intent to kill the victim. That won't fly in this case, hence voluntary manslaughter. This is a case that looks like plea bargain, to me. The DA will say I'll push 2nd dm, the defense will say shove it. May even plea out at involuntary--if there is something fishy about the way the cops acted. Still, I'll say it again, I'm sorry for the police officer and his family. This should not have happened.

imported post

Gunslinger wrote:

You can't fire through your door. The warrant was lawful, the guy had weed. It is not murder, even 2nd degree,and no jury would convict him of that. Voluntary manslaughter "acting with reckless disregard of the potential to take a life without defense of situation and in so doing taking a life." Too bad for the cop, and I mean that, although I am clearly no big fan of kicking in doors for a misdemeanor allegation. And allegation is all a search warrant is based upon. But he was just doing his job.

Click to expand...

I am going to agree with you....

I will give him as much as maybe he did not know who was on the other side of the door.

He was reckless in his decision to shoot when he did.... I would rather go for Manslaughter. The "threat" came to him..... he did not search out a victim.

Disclaimer: This opinion is madewith the belief that Ryan had no clue the police were approaching his door and he was not trying to stop them [the police]from getting in.

imported post

I am not familiar with thedetails in this particular case. But I do know there's numerous rumors of a coverup and wrongdoings taking place by the police. Only time will tell if any of this is true or not.

So having said the above.... a cop can shoot and kill a civilian when they are in fear of losingtheir life. We just had a Virginia game warden in Greene Countyshoot and kill a 16 year old kid who put his car in park and tried to drive off. He was driving off because he had not committed the crime he was accused of and stopped for -- abduction. The girl was freely and voluntarily with him. The game warden was cleared of all wrongdoing at trial. But the point is, this is atwo way street. If Ryan Frederick can articulate why he was in fear for his life, none of us know what a jury will do in this case.

imported post

It appears that the informant who told the cops that Frederick had a grow operation going did so to; A: revenge upon Frederick for accusing him of stealing, and B: provide the cops a drug-bust to have a grand larceny charge dropped. Now the informant is a fugitive wanted by Chesapeake police, and Frederick was found to have only a misdemeanor amount of pot.

The PD aren't getting their stories straight about whether theyidentified/announced themselves as police before breaching; whether they returned fire or not, and where a mystery fired .223 case came from (Fredericks fired a .380, and did not have a .223/5.56mm firearm).

This guy was wrong for firing before identifying the threat. But he was definitely set up by a person with a criminal track-record seeking to have charges expunged..... and is now being railroaded by a police department & DA not willing to admit that one of their own was killed in a raid based on a criminal's say-so alone.

imported post

Not this BS again. We've already had how many closed threads on this? Use the search function people.
:banghead:

imported post

longwatch wrote:

Not this BS again. We've already had how many closed threads on this? Use the search function people.
:banghead:

Click to expand...

Or read http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/13020.html

The Case is a travesty none the less.

imported post

longwatch wrote:

Not this BS again. We've already had how many closed threads on this? Use the search function people.
:banghead:

Click to expand...

Maybe if they weren't closed........ a duplicate wouldn't be posted? :banghead:

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

longwatch wrote:

Not this BS again. We've already had how many closed threads on this? Use the search function people.
:banghead:

Click to expand...

Or read http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/13020.html

The Case is a travesty none the less.

Click to expand...

There was another thread that was having a good discussion grand juries. It was closed because a name calling...

imported post

possumboy wrote:

There was another thread that was having a good discussion grand juries. It was closed because a name calling...

Click to expand...

Well, that's the wrong reason to lock and close a thread. Deal with the person doing the name calling, and let everybody else continue their good discussion.

Maybe this is why John and Mike took moderation back themselves. :shock:

imported post

possumboy wrote:

There was another thread that was having a good discussion grand juries. It was closed because a name calling...

Click to expand...

Ahh, after some searching, I see why the thread was closed now.

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/11020-1.html


Somebody was being debated hot and heavy,and this somebody closed the thread once he was called a name. I should have known!

As I said, the namecalling should have been dealt with. Not closing and locking the subject. Maybe this is why Mike and John took moderation back themselves.

imported post

Be interesting to see if the dead officer was killed by the .223? I seriously doubt a .380 will go through a bullet resistant vest. So, either the officer was hit somewhere the vest didn't protect....or he was shot by a high powered gun. (Anyone remember Waco??)

imported post

Northern-Lights wrote:

Be interesting to see if the dead officer was killed by the .223? I seriously doubt a .380 will go through a bullet resistant vest. So, either the officer was hit somewhere the vest didn't protect....or he was shot by a high powered gun. (Anyone remember Waco??)

Click to expand...

There have been many cases where the officer was hit in a spot the vest was not protecting.

Below the arm pit or the neck.

Some cops wearing vests were also killed with a simple little .22 cal gun in jsut that way. Some bad guys have gotten off some real lucky shots.

imported post

Some Good Guys have gotten off some lucky shots too.

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

Some Good Guys have gotten off some lucky shots too.

Click to expand...

Yeah. The only problem is a civilian'slegal fees aren't footed by the taxpayer. :banghead:

imported post

AnaxImperator wrote:

It appears that the informant who told the cops that Frederick had a grow operation going did so to; A: revenge upon Frederick for accusing him of stealing, and B: provide the cops a drug-bust to have a grand larceny charge dropped. Now the informant is a fugitive wanted by Chesapeake police, and Frederick was found to have only a misdemeanor amount of pot.

Click to expand...

This seems to be a huge source of no-knock disasters - informants who give malicious and/or wrong information out to cops just to get some time knocked off their sentences.

imported post

Overtaxed wrote:

AnaxImperator wrote:

It appears that the informant who told the cops that Frederick had a grow operation going did so to; A: revenge upon Frederick for accusing him of stealing, and B: provide the cops a drug-bust to have a grand larceny charge dropped. Now the informant is a fugitive wanted by Chesapeake police, and Frederick was found to have only a misdemeanor amount of pot.

Click to expand...

This seems to be a huge source of no-knock disasters - informants who give malicious and/or wrong information out to cops just to get some time knocked off their sentences.

Click to expand...

Time for some letters to the judiciary that their standards (lack of)of reliability for tips justifying no-knock raidsis getting people killed?

The cops have no incentive to knock it off. Givinga better plea bargain is probably a great negotiating tool for them.

There is a little line in Terry vs Ohio where the court quoted an earlier opinion from 1948. The courts understand there is a competitive aspect to policing--that getting bad guys is important to a police officer's career:

"...police officers whose judgment is necessarily colored by their primary involvement in "the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime." Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 14 (1948).



This is off on a tanget, but in looking up the above cite, I came across again in Terry vs Ohio something that bears repeating.

For as this Court has always recognized,

Union Pac. R. Co. v. Botsford, 141 U.S. 250, 251 (1891). (Emphasis mine)



No right is held more sacred. None. For the common law, this is the most important right.

Keep that in mind the next time some police officer or other dissenter tries to persuade you why its OK to interfer with an OC'er in the absence of genuine reasonable suspicion.

imported post

It seems like this guy is the victim of one of these "no-knock"search warrants. Perhaps it was a "knock" warrant, but apparently these cops gave the guy about a half second to react before they started hammering the door down.

How can anyone hear (in the dead of night or anytime else) or much less respond to a shouting individual outside your door? It's impossible.

This is the basis of what happend in Waco. Cowboys stormed the place shooting (straffed by a helicopter) and wounding people and children--only the the people inside decided to shoot back. All over a tax stamp on some class 3 weapons which they were entitled to own (the Dividians had an FFL and made money at gun shows). At best their crime amounted toa$1,000.00 fine

Now if it were I who was having their door knocked down by masked men in military uniforms outside my door--the outcome would be much, much worsethan what happened here.

This is what I mean by LEO's becoming "militarized." In their training the young guys now are programed with the "us versus them" attitude, and it sticks.

There are fewer and fewer old guys left to teach the kids how thing should work.

This happens all over the country. Military style raids on matters that are at best a citation and misdemeanor.

I can see going in like this against MS13 gang members, against known violent criminals, but not against people who have no prior history of violence.

ST