Home Defense Against Police Raid

[Sheriff]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

We are still waiting for an explanation for the night time home assault.

Kerry Dougherty
Virginian-Pilot columnist



The Virginian-Pilot
© August 17, 2008
....Shivers was killed in January while executing a search warrant – at night – at the home of a man suspected of growing marijuana. In the months since the tragedy, there has been no good explanation as to why the officers had been ordered to surprise the suspect at home at night. The guy reportedly had a job and a regular routine. Seems there might have been easier, safer ways to detain the suspect and search his house. ....

They have been watching too damn much TV, that's why. After being a sworn deputy sheriff for almost 3 decades, I had the local police surround my home semi-swat style in a mistaken identity case. Even though I was born and raised in this city, worked in this city all my life, and was well known to most veteran cops..... the rookiestreated me like Clyde Barrow.Their silly tactics actually placed them, myself, and my family in grave danger. And there was no damn excuse for any of it.

 

[Thundar]

imported post

Prosecutor wants Frederick trial moved out of Chesapeake

By John Hopkins
The Virginian-Pilot
© September 3, 2008

CHESAPEAKE

The special prosecutor in the case against Ryan Frederick, a Chesapeake man accused of killing a city detective, wants his murder trial moved out of Hampton Roads.

The commonwealth has urged the court for a change of venue from Chesapeake to a jurisdiction elsewhere in the state. Frederick is scheduled to stand trial Jan. 20 in Chesapeake Circuit Court on charges of capital murder, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony and possession with the intent to distribute marijuana.

His defense attorney, James Broccoletti, said Tuesday that he opposes any move, arguing the mere public knowledge of the case alone is an insufficient reason for a change of venue.

"The citizens of Chesapeake have not only the obligation but also the right to sit in judgment in a capital case of this

magnitude, involving allegations of murder of a police officer that occurred in their own city," Broccoletti said in response to the change-of-venue motion. "That opportunity should not be taken away from them and shifted to jurors in another jurisdiction without cause."

A pretrial-motions hearing is scheduled for next week before Judge Marjorie A.T. Arrington.

Frederick is accused of fatally shooting Detective Jarrod Shivers on the night of Jan. 17 while Shivers and more than a dozen other officers executed a drug search warrant. Shivers, a 34-year-old father of three, was standing at the steps of Frederick's front door in the 900 block of Redstart Ave. when he was shot, police said.

Frederick said he fired two shots through his door at what he feared were intruders that night. The shots were fired as officers on the other side of the door used a battering ram on it.

One shot from a .38 -caliber handgun hit Shivers in a side area of his body unprotected by his vest.

Paul Ebert, the commonwealth's attorney from Prince William County, was appointed to prosecute the case after local prosecutors who had worked closely with Shivers said they wanted to avoid any perceived appearance of conflict or bias.

The case has received local and national publicity.

Ebert said the publicity - some of it inaccurate and based on speculation - makes it impossible for the commonwealth to get a fair trial in Hampton Roads. He wants the court to find a jurisdiction that could host a trial of such size.

"As a general rule, they try to get a place with similar demographics," he said.

Broccoletti said he thinks that "the pretrial publicity regarding this case has been remarkably restrained and objective."

He argued that a decision at this time about a change of venue is premature and, if granted, would impose a substantial burden to his client and civilian witnesses. The move would burden the Chesapeake Sheriff's Office with transporting and securing Frederick in another jurisdiction, Broccoletti said.

It also would burden the host jurisdiction, he said. The defense, its witnesses, support staff, the judge and court clerks would have to travel and make overnight accommodations in a new jurisdiction, Broccoletti said.

Broccoletti, in a motion to the court, asked that the selected jury for the trial be allowed to travel to the Portlock section of the city to view the crime scene, both inside and outside Frederick's home. He also seeks to have the court sever the drug case from Frederick's murder case.

"They're separate events and should be tried separately," he said.

John Hopkins, (757) 222-5221, john.hopkins@pilotonline.com

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

Thanks for the up-date.

 

[Gunslinger]

imported post

"Search warrant," like I said. No justification to bash in a door like the ******* KGB. The cops exceeded their authority and this guy acted in defense of person and property. The publicity shows this, and the DA is scared as hell. Poor, stupid cop that got killed--find a backwater that thinks cops walk on water and he gets the jury he wants. Try it in the open light of facts, and the guy walks.

 

[MetalChris]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

One shot from a .38 -caliber handgun

It was a Bersa Thunder .380.

But why would I expect the lame-stream media to get it right?

Thanks for the update Thundar.

 

[JoeSparky]

imported post

AnaxImperator wrote:

Thundar wrote:

Shooting at a threat to defend oneself might not seem reasonable to those in this forum with our significant experience and training in firearms, but the standard is what a reasonable person would do, and it does not seem rash or unreasonable for a small person who has recently been robbed to defend his home against a night time home assault.

Even to someone without a significant level of experience & training with firearms, shooting through a door without a positive threat ID is ratherrash, even if he was the victim of a recent burglary. Reasonable fear is no excusefor unreasonable use of deadly force. While it's fairly impossible to know whatan average person may have done in an exact recreation of that situation, IMHO I don't think the average person would blast through a door at what could be a scared/concerned neighbor, a cop doing door-to-door knock & talks, a kid selling magazines/candy-bars, etc. And yes, I've had high-school kids knock on my door after 9pm selling subscriptions & candy for school. In any case, I think an average armedhomeowner would've held their fire until the door was kicked in; even if they were burgled recently. It would certainly take a higher level of self-control to not pull the trigger, but concern for what might not be a threat behind the door would outweigh the adrenaline.

I don't know about Virginia law but in UTAH I am allowed deadly force in a Home Invasion senario specifically if the entry is made in a "tulmultuous or violent manner."
I am unable to think of a more tulmultuous manner than a battering ram at the front door in the middle of the night, especially if done only 3 days after being robbed!
It is a tragedy that the officer was injured and died but IMHO the shooter in NOT criminally liable!

THIS REASONABLE PERSON MAY HAVE RESPONDED IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY AS THIS HOMEOWNER... except my weapon of choice would have been a larger caliber... most likely the 12 guage.

JoeSparky

 

[2a4all]

imported post

Prosecutor's bid to move Frederick trial is a rarity

http://hamptonroads.com/node/479312

Prosecutor claims that pre-trial publicity is a hindrance. Could it be that the good citizens of Chesapeake have doubts about their own PD? Or if we can't railroad this guy here, let's extend the rails to somewhere else.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

"Ebert said the publicity - some of it inaccurate and based on speculation - makes it impossible for the commonwealth to get a fair trial in Hampton Roads."

Sounds like the people are hearing information that may not be correct.

This could be on either the homeowner or the police.

Not a bad idea to move to a place where little is known so the known facts can be presented on both sides in court.

 

[2a4all]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

"Ebert said the publicity - some of it inaccurate and based on speculation - makes it impossible for the commonwealth to get a fair trial in Hampton Roads."

Sounds like the people are hearing information that may not be correct.

This could be on either the homeowner or the police.

Not a bad idea to move to a place where little is known so the known facts can be presented on both sides in court.

Where would such a place be, given that the internet is everywhere?

What do the facts have to do with venue? Won't the facts be presented wherever the trial is held? The major undisputed fact is that Frederick admits to firing the fatal shot. The debate is about the justifications of the actions taken by both sides.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

da7f2q8 wrote:

Where would such a place be, given that the internet is everywhere?

What do the facts have to do with venue? Won't the facts be presented wherever the trial is held? The major undisputed fact is that Frederick admits to firing the fatal shot. The debate is about the justifications of the actions taken by both sides.

The internet is world wide but I doubt every user that logs on has read the story.

Venue has been an issue for a long time. Even back in the 1850s where in a small town everyone knew everyone. If they all believed the guy was guilty... there is NO WAY a jury could be picked that would NOT convict him. It would be hard to stop them from just fetching a rope and stringing him up immediately.

So the same applies today. With the news and TV churning out stories and embellishing details or leaving out important details.... many people believe what the media says. (except me)

Is it obvious that he shot? Ya... but the people that live there may decide based on emotionand notbased on fact and reason.

So both sides will have a jury of people that have no connection to the event or the location.

 

[ilbob]

imported post

I didn't know the prosecution could file for a change of venue.

I would be the main reason they want one is to make it even harder for the guy to put up a vigorous defense.

Get the guy a few hundred miles away from his support system and he is pretty much hung out to dry while the state can spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to prosecute him.

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

It is an interesting turn, arguably the prosecution trying to avoid the notoriety of the state's infamous actions. The defendant here is quite mundane in community stature and his actions. It is the infamy of the state's actions that has raised community interest.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

ilbob wrote:

I didn't know the prosecution could file for a change of venue.

I would be the main reason they want one is to make it even harder for the guy to put up a vigorous defense.

Get the guy a few hundred miles away from his support system and he is pretty much hung out to dry while the state can spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to prosecute him.

I am going to doubt that it is the reason you suggest.

It does not matter what court room you are in or where. Your lawyer is going to be able to do the same thing at any location.

The prosecutor and all the witnesses must also travel so they are all in the same boat. It is not "convenient" by no means....

But it does help to remove the emotional attachment in a jury pool the local people would probably have.

 

[irfner]

imported post

The cops were doing what they were trained to do. Unfortunately that is like a Doberman being trained to attack. It is not the fault of the dog. The responsibility lies at a higher level. The level where these activities are allowed, encouraged and condoned.

The whole bit of screaming police once at 2am then immediately smashing the door down is designed to catch the drowsy suspect (citizen) before he can figure out what is going on. The problem is when it works the citizen (suspect) doesn't even realize it was the police until it is all over. When things go wrong the cops want to claim "we called police" like someone is in there listeningas they sleep. What a bunch of bull.

Try this; call the citizen (suspect) on the phone. Tell him we are the police, we are at your door with a warrant. Open upinfifteen secondsor we will breakit down. Turn onthe flashing lights you are so fond of. If he runs out the back you got him. If he opensthe dooreven better. If he starts shooting how are you worse off than the scenario on this thread? Also is is unlikely an innocent or misidentified person will do anything other than open up. It is called not attacking innocent people. Not causing innocent people to shoot at you. Oops forgot. It is not in the training that way. You like pulling people out of bed at 2am and throwing them to the floor. That is what you are trained for. Just like the Doberman.

 

[2a4all]

imported post

New information revealed by prosecutor at change of venue hearing.

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/09/prosecutors-say-frederick-knew-police-were-coming-door

Prosecutors say Frederick knew police were coming to door

By John Hopkins
The Virginian-Pilot
© September 9, 2008 CHESAPEAKE
Prosecutors contend the killing of Chesapeake Detective Jarrod Shivers during a drug raid at a Portlock home was no mistake.
Ryan Frederick knew police were coming to his home the night he fired shots through his front door as Shivers and more than a dozen other officers prepared to gain entry, prosecutors said. Frederick, however, has maintained he fired two shots through his door at what he feared were intruders.
Frederick is accused of fatally shooting Shivers on the night of Jan. 17 as the 34-year-old officer stood at the steps of the home in the 900 block of Redstart Ave. He is scheduled to stand trial Jan. 20 in Chesapeake Circuit Court.
Prosecutors revealed new information about the case during a pretrial hearing to determine if the trial should be moved out of the Hampton Roads area because of pretrial publicity. Judge Marjorie A. T. Arrington will rule on that issue next month.
Prosecutors said they have evidence that more than one person broke into Frederick’s detached garage days before the deadly drug raid, taking about half of the marijuana growing inside. They said Frederick later made contact with one of the burglars and made threats.
He also told the burglar, “I also know police will be coming to my house,’’ according to Richard Conway, a prosecutor from Prince William County.
Frederick never reported the break-in to police because he had a “significant if not lucrative marijuana growing operation’’ in his garage, Conway said.
The burglars removed half of the evidence. Frederick removed the other plants before the raid, prosecutors said. Still, prosecutors said police found grow lights, tubs that contained traces of marijuana and magazines such as Marijuana Horticulture, Buds for Less and Growing Great Marijuana.
Frederick’s attorney, James Broccoletti, argued that police only confiscated one-third of an ounce of marijuana from his client's home and are getting information from unknown informants.
“Who knows who they are,’’ Broccoletti said. “Who knows what they said. Who knows what their records are.’’

 

[sjalterego]

imported post

da7f2q8 wrote:

New information revealed by prosecutor at change of venue hearing.

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/09/prosecutors-say-frederick-knew-police-were-coming-door

Prosecutors say Frederick knew police were coming to door

By John Hopkins
The Virginian-Pilot
© September 9, 2008 CHESAPEAKE
Prosecutors contend the killing of Chesapeake Detective Jarrod Shivers during a drug raid at a Portlock home was no mistake.
Ryan Frederick knew police were coming to his home the night he fired shots through his front door as Shivers and more than a dozen other officers prepared to gain entry, prosecutors said. Frederick, however, has maintained he fired two shots through his door at what he feared were intruders.
Frederick is accused of fatally shooting Shivers on the night of Jan. 17 as the 34-year-old officer stood at the steps of the home in the 900 block of Redstart Ave. He is scheduled to stand trial Jan. 20 in Chesapeake Circuit Court.
Prosecutors revealed new information about the case during a pretrial hearing to determine if the trial should be moved out of the Hampton Roads area because of pretrial publicity. Judge Marjorie A. T. Arrington will rule on that issue next month.
Prosecutors said they have evidence that more than one person broke into Frederick’s detached garage days before the deadly drug raid, taking about half of the marijuana growing inside. They said Frederick later made contact with one of the burglars and made threats.
He also told the burglar, “I also know police will be coming to my house,’’ according to Richard Conway, a prosecutor from Prince William County.
Frederick never reported the break-in to police because he had a “significant if not lucrative marijuana growing operation’’ in his garage, Conway said.
The burglars removed half of the evidence. Frederick removed the other plants before the raid, prosecutors said. Still, prosecutors said police found grow lights, tubs that contained traces of marijuana and magazines such as Marijuana Horticulture, Buds for Less and Growing Great Marijuana.
Frederick’s attorney, James Broccoletti, argued that police only confiscated one-third of an ounce of marijuana from his client's home and are getting information from unknown informants.
“Who knows who they are,’’ Broccoletti said. “Who knows what they said. Who knows what their records are.’’

 

[Theseus]

imported post

da7f2q8 wrote:

New information revealed by prosecutor at change of venue hearing.

Still not shure I believe it. If this is the same case as I remember from other sources they also said that the person that gave them the tip in the first place had fled from them and was being sought!

I bet they just leaned on someone to get the evidence so they wouldn't look like fools.

 

[Thundar]

imported post

LOGIC

There is no logic to the basic story told by the prosecutor. If Ryan Frederick knew the police were coming, why would he plan to have a shoot out with only a .380 and call 911? If I knew the police were coming to bust me, I think I would flee. If I were a homeowner woken in the middle of the night with my home being assaulted I think I would defend myself and myhome.

PROSECUTORS PAST CONDUCT

Unfortunately we know this prosecutor has already lied in court in this case. In the original detention hearing he told the judge that Mr. Frederick shot Detective Shivers in the front yard. This assertion was a key part of the initial decision by the judge to deny bail. After even the Chesapeake PDdenied the DA's story, he made a statement that the front porch is in the front yard. I certainly do not believe the DA.

THE BASIC PREMISE

The basic self defense premise has not changed. Justifiable homicide is determined by the jury. The prosecutor is running scared and trying for a venue where the people have more confidence in the competence and honesty of the prosecutor and the police than Chesapeake.

WHATCOULD BEBEHIND THE PROSECUTORS MOTION TO CHANGE VENUE?

I am not alone here in Chesapeake in my distrust of the DA. This known liar problem that he has in Chesapeake could have a lot to do with his desire to move the trial. The "inaccuracies" reported in the press are of his and the Chesapeake P.D.s doing. There has been one simple story from the defense that hasn't changed since first told by Mr. Frederick to the press in a jail house interview. The prosecutors story and the Chesapeake PD story has changed many times. If the prosecutor has a known liar problem and there are distortions in the Chesapeake PD story they have only to look in the mirror to see whom to blame. They made their bed and should have to sleep in it.

 

[possumboy]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

PROSECUTORS PAST CONDUCT

Unfortunately we know this prosecutor has already lied in court in this case. In the original detention hearing he told the judge that Mr. Frederick shot Detective Shivers in the front yard. This assertion was a key part of the initial decision by the judge to deny bail. After even the Chesapeake PDdenied the DA's story, he made a statement that the front porch is in the front yard. I certainly do not believe the DA.

THE BASIC PREMISE

The basic self defense premise has not changed. Justifiable homicide is determined by the jury. The prosecutor is running scared and trying for a venue where the people have more confidence in the competence and honesty of the prosecutor and the police than Chesapeake.

WHATCOULD BEBEHIND THE PROSECUTORS MOTION TO CHANGE VENUE?

I am not alone here in Chesapeake in my distrust of the DA. This known liar problem that he has in Chesapeake could have a lot to do with his desire to move the trial. The "inaccuracies" reported in the press are of his and the Chesapeake P.D.s doing. There has been one simple story from the defense that hasn't changed since first told by Mr. Frederick to the press in a jail house interview. The prosecutors story and the Chesapeake PD story has changed many times. If the prosecutor has a known liar problem and there are distortions in the Chesapeake PD story they have only to look in the mirror to see whom to blame. They made their bed and should have to sleep in it.

The DA is from Prince William County. The is this the same DA that lied to get the denial of bail? I thought that was a different DA - one from Chesapeake/Hampton Roads.

I see the request has a bid to win the case. It seems to be about winning now instead of seeing justice served.

I do not know how prosecutors are paid and performance is rated, but it seems like it is just did you win? Not was justice served?


Plus, Chesapeake PD stands to lose a lot. They have already lost a life of an officer. If Frederick is found not guilty, then that may show that Chesapeake PD did a lot wrong. Currently Chesapeake PD can blame Frederick for the officer's death. If he is found not guilty, all they have to blame is themselves and the way Chesapeake PD handled the situation.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

LOGIC

There is no logic to the basic story told by the prosecutor. If Ryan Frederick knew the police were coming, why would he plan to have a shoot out with only a .380 and call 911? If I knew the police were coming to bust me, I think I would flee. If I were a homeowner woken in the middle of the night with my home being assaulted I think I would defend myself and myhome.

Snipped....

Why would he call 911?

Playing Devil's Advocate as I do so well.... Maybe he wanted to do something to cover his tracks and make it look like he had no idea it was the cops outside.

You would not believe the dumb things people do right after a crime as they think it will help cover up what they did or give them a way out.

We can all speculate here on the case... but it will make absolutely no difference.

We can only learn from the event itself.

You may be justified in your own mind in doing something.... but the courts and the criminal justice system may not see it that way. You could end up in the court system so be sure you make wise decisions... know your target.. and what is beyond.