Ryan Frederick Trial Begins

Thundar · Jan 20, 2009

imported post

After delays, Frederick trial jury selection begins

By Tim McGlone
The Virginian-Pilot
© January 20, 2009
The trial of Ryan Frederick, charged with killing a detective during a drug raid, got off to a slow start this morning and then was postponed for two hours because of the inauguration.

Frederick, 29, made a brief appearance and was arraigned by Circuit Court Judge Marjorie T. Arrington. He pleaded not guilty to murder, firearm possession and manufacturing marijuana charges and then was led out of the courtroom as the attorneys had a private conference with the judge.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys had begun reviewing jurors’ questionnaires before Arrington called a two-hour recess. Jurors were watching the inauguration ceremonies in an adjacent room.

Jury selection will continue at 1:30 p.m.

TFred · Jan 20, 2009

imported post

This will be high visibility. You can use this Google news link to keep up with newly posted news stories:

http://www.google.com/news?q=%22Ryan+Frederick%22&scoring=n

(It's ugly, but it works...)

TFred

Thundar · Jan 21, 2009

imported post

Pay Me Now have you been interviewed for the jury?

Pay Me Now Momma · Jan 21, 2009

imported post

My son is still in the jury pool. He said they were kicking out lots of people from the pool. He cannot use the internet right now becase this is now a "case" and they are not allowed to discuss the "case" or go online to discuss it. He said it was OK to answer no to the lawyer questions about internet discussions about the shooting, because he didn't think it was a case until they got to court. Not sure what he means, but it sure is strange. Anyways, hopefully he willbe onthe jury. He is very smart and will make sure that there is justice.

tripledipper · Jan 21, 2009

imported post

The Defense has requested a mistrial. What are the particulars and does anyone think the Judge will honor the request?

Doug Huffman · Jan 21, 2009

imported post

http://hamptonroads.com/2009/01/prosecutor-frederick-knew-police-were-his-door-0

Ryan Frederick was “stoned out of his mind” and “in an angry, blind rage” when he killed a Chesapeake detective during a drug raid a year ago and later told a jail inmate that if he had more ammunition, “he would have taken them all down,” a prosecutor told jurors Wednesday.

“He’s over there” in jail “bragging about it. He thinks he’s going to beat this charge,” James Willett, one of three prosecutors, told the jury during opening statements.

Frederick’s attorney later disputed the scenario, telling the jury there was no evidence Frederick was stoned and that he thought he was protecting himself and his home from intruders.

I would ask for a mistrial I-ANAL over this opening statement.

marshaul · Jan 21, 2009

imported post

Here's praying for PayMeNow.

ETA: Oh, and even more so Ryan, of course.

Ric in Richmond · Jan 31, 2009

imported post

Audio taken IN the house after the break-in and shooting and the station hours later.

This is NOT a guilty man.

Everyone should remember to STFU and ask for your lawyer! YOU CANNOT HELP YOURSELF IN THAT SITUATION!!!!!!!!!

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/131383.html

Listen to the end of the 1st one. PD basically says that if someone kicks in your door and is unarmed you should just give them what they want.

Stunning stuff. Very sad day. Hopefully his attorney will rip them a new one

Citizen · Jan 31, 2009

imported post

Ric in Richmond wrote:

Audio taken IN the house after the break-in and shooting and the station hours later.

This is NOT a guilty man.

Everyone should remember to STFU and ask for your lawyer! YOU CANNOT HELP YOURSELF IN THAT SITUATION!!!!!!!!!

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/131383.html

Listen to the end of the 1st one. PD basically says that if someone kicks in your door and is unarmed you should just give them what they want.

Stunning stuff. Very sad day. Hopefully his attorney will rip them a new one

Thanks for the update!!

kaiheitai17 · Jan 31, 2009

imported post

Wow, what a moving interrogation. No wonder the prosecution tried to keep it out of the trial.

TFred · Jan 31, 2009

imported post

Ric in Richmond wrote:

PD basically says that if someone kicks in your door and is unarmed you should just give them what they want.

Virginia is without a castle doctrine. If the intruder is not a clear threat to your life or safety, what are you legally allowed to do, besides call the police?

Scenario: You are awakened in the middle of the night by noises downstairs. You grab your favorite gun off the night stand, and make your way down the stairs, to see a guy prying your 52" flat screen off the wall. You say "What in the heck are you doing?" He says "I'm taking your TV". You can't shoot him. You can order him to stop and get on the floor, but as long as he does not make any threatening moves toward you, you are not legally allowed to harm him, as far as I understand.

If he continues his work and walks away from you out the front door or window, what can you legally do?

This is a serious question.

TFred

MirkoCrocop · Jan 31, 2009

imported post

TFred wrote:

Ric in Richmond wrote:

PD basically says that if someone kicks in your door and is unarmed you should just give them what they want.

Click to expand...

Virginia is without a castle doctrine. If the intruder is not a clear threat to your life or safety, what are you legally allowed to do, besides call the police?

Scenario: You are awakened in the middle of the night by noises downstairs. You grab your favorite gun off the night stand, and make your way down the stairs, to see a guy prying your 52" flat screen off the wall. You say "What in the heck are you doing?" He says "I'm taking your TV". You can't shoot him. You can order him to stop and get on the floor, but as long as he does not make any threatening moves toward you, you are not legally allowed to harm him, as far as I understand.

If he continues his work and walks away from you out the front door or window, what can you legally do?

This is a serious question.

TFred

well first of all I wouldnt let him leave with my tv id yank his arse out of that window or door hit a double leg takedown pass to full mount and rain down elbows on him till he is unconcious and explain to officers he swung at me and said he was going to kill me. his priors on his recordwould conformwith those staements whereas my clean non exsistant record speaks for my side of the story. No man has a right to steal what I have worked for with my blood,sweat, and tears and no man has the right to make my family feel they are not safe within their one sanctuary known as home.

I forget the saying but its something like I wont be wronged, I wont be treated unjust, and i wont be layed a hand on, because i dont do this to anyone else or something like that by john wayne

Citizen · Jan 31, 2009

imported post

TFred wrote:

SNIP This is a serious question.

Its not like I've read all the Castle Doctrine statutes in the USA. But I have a vague recollectionthat they sometimesmakereference to "reasonable fear ofbodily harm."

Castle Doctrine isn'tnecessarily the magic genieit might seem to be.

Hawkflyer · Jan 31, 2009

imported post

MirkoCrocop wrote:

...SNIP

I forget the saying but its something like I wont be wronged, I wont be treated unjust, and i wont be layed a hand on, because i dont do this to anyone else or something like that by john wayne

"I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them. " (John Wayne as John Bernard Books in "The Shootist")

Doug Huffman · Feb 1, 2009

imported post

Citizen wrote:

Its not like I've read all the Castle Doctrine statutes in the USA. But I have a vague recollectionthat they sometimesmakereference to "reasonable fear ofbodily harm."

Castle Doctrine isn'tnecessarily the magic genieit might seem to be.

A thief in the night is notorious for doing evil and harm and he is not in your house, if not 'castle', to offer a full body massage. Just like a carjacker, they're not well-wishers.

TFred · Feb 1, 2009

imported post

I guess my point is, if you catch a guy in the act of walking toward your front door with your TV on his shoulder, you really aren't legally in a position to shoot him, which amounts to pretty much what the LEO told Frederick.

Not saying I think this is right, I was just looking for someone to provide a legally based rebuttal. If you shot him just because he was in your house uninvited in the middle of the night, perhaps you could get away with it, but it doesn't seem the law supports it.

TFred

Doug Huffman · Feb 1, 2009

imported post

The four elements of common law self-defense are; be innocent of instigation, reasonably fear bodily harm, use sufficient force only to deliver oneself from evil and attempt to withdraw.

wylde007 · Feb 1, 2009

imported post

The jury trial is one of the few remaining ways that the people have in their limited legal arsenal to speak out against bad policy or displacement of proper civil liberty.

A "good" jury in this case will exonerate Mr. Frederick, disavowing any information that comes after "Unknown assailant in my house".

Sorry about your luck, Mr. Policeman. The government needs to get out of the business of writing bad laws and telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies...

wylde007 · Feb 1, 2009

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

The four elements of common law self-defense are; be innocent of instigation, reasonably fear bodily harm, use sufficient force only to deliver oneself from evil and attempt to withdraw.

Safety first - keep your groups tight.

Doug Huffman · Feb 1, 2009

imported post

Tight groups is gun control.

Safety is the tyrant's tool because no one can be against safety. It is also the first act of security theater, including the National Security Theater that is the Department of Homeland Severity.

Ryan Frederick Trial Begins

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

New member

Regular Member

Banned

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Founder's Club Member

Banned

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned