TheAgitator.com
Ryan Frederick Update
Saturday, October 11th, 2008A few items on the Ryan Frederick case:
• Two weeks ago, I emailed Virginian-Pilot columnist Kerry Dougherty and public editor Joyce Hoffman asking for a correction for the errors and Dougherty’s last column about the Ryan Frederick case (explained in this post). So far, no correction. And it wasn’t a subtle error. Doughtery misstated some substantial facts about the informant scandal related to the case.
• A few people, like commenter FreedomFan, expressed concern about this comment from Frederick’s attorney James Broccoletti about the informants who broke into Frederick’s home:
In reality, the informer did not ‘observe’ marijuana plants, he stole them.
Is Broccoletti admitting Frederick was growing marijuana, here? I called Broccoletti’s office and spoke with another attorney working on the case. He said that comment was taken from the defense brief asking the judge to quash the warrant. The line was in response to the prosecution’s proffer, in the context of assuming that the plants were marijuana. He said the defense at this point is absolutely not conceding that whatever plants Turnbull and Steven may have taken from Frederick’s garage were marijuana. He wouldn’t comment on the Japanese maple theory.
My own feeling at this point is that there’s a good chance Frederick was growing a small amount of marijuana for personal use. Even assuming the worst, though, that doesn’t excuse the police breaking the law to obtain probable cause for a search warrant. The (lack of) investigation and paramilitary tactics were still wholly inappropriate, and of course Frederick shouldn’t punished for defending his home.
• A few people have also asked why we should believe Turnbull about the police misconduct, but not believe the portion of his statements to a Virginian-Pilot reporter where he says Frederick explicitly threatened the police. It’s a fair point–and the prosecution wants you to believe the latter, but not the former.
I guess the reason I’m inclined to believe one but not the other is because the police misconduct and intimidation of Turnbull fit the facts we already know about the case. Turnbull’s story about he and Steven working as informants, breaking into Frederick’s garage, and their ensuing arrests is backed by court records and the search warrant and affidavits. His story about Frederick calling his cell phone and threatening the cops, on the other hand, doesn’t fit what I’ve been told about Frederick by his friends, family, neighbors, and co-workers.
It also doesn’t make much sense. The prosecution’s theory is that after the burglary, Frederick got Turnbull’s number off his caller ID (Turnbull and Steven stupidly called Frederick before breaking in to his home to see if he was around). He then called Turnbull, said he knew the police were coming, and said he had “a plan for them, too.” Prosecutors say Frederick then got rid of the remaining marijuana plants, and waited for the police to come, so he could kill one of them.
Nothing about that passes the smell test. I don’t doubt that Frederick called Turnbull. He probably even threatened Turnbull, thinking it was Steven of an acquaintance of Steven’s (remember, Frederick and Steven knew one another–Steven once dated the sister of Frederick’s fiance). If Frederick planned to kill the cops, why would he go to the trouble of disposing of his marijuana plants? Why would he dispose of the plants, but leave the incriminating magazines, grow equipment, and keep around some marijuana for personal use? Why would he knowingly take on a team of raiding cops with a cheap handgun? Why would he give up seconds after killing just one of them? Why would he wait until his door had been busted in to start shooting?
As I wrote in my last reason piece on this case, it’s time for a federal investigation. We aren’t going to know what actually happened in this case until Turnbull and Steven are given immunity, and can speak freely without fear of Chesapeake authorities coming down on them for what they say.
You write: …it’s time for a federal investigation. We aren’t going to know what actually happened in this case until Turnbull and Steven are given immunity, and can speak freely without fear of Chesapeake authorities coming down on them for what they say.
Is it really the case that the feds can grant immunity against state prosecution? I had thought federal investigations could only grant immunity against future federal prosecution, but that a federal immunity grant couldn’t bind state or local prosecutors.
Even if true, how can the prosecution use the information that Frederick called Turnbull and threatened the police? Unless the conversation was recorded and can be played back for the court, isn’t it just hearsay?
I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t know the rules, but on its face it seems to be fairly clearly inadmissible.
As mentioned before, it’ll be a shame if Frederick had more than a trivial amount of pot in his garage. If the prosecution can paint him as a “cop-killing drug-dealer”, his chances of getting railroaded here have gone way up, no matter how badly the police screwed the pooch on this one.
And, it’s more the shame because of how flimsy the police account of this actually sounds. I’ve mentioned before how the prosecutor is pushing a very weak story. The prosecution’s basic narrative here is that Ryan Frederick is so stupid that (remember that this is the prosecution’s allegation) -
* Frederick knew in advance that the police were coming to raid his “grow operation” and that he “had a plan” for them.
* Frederick announced that plan to to people who didn’t like him personally and that he knew to be police informants. (Apparently, letting the police know that he had a plan was part of the plan. Very devious.)
* Frederick cleaned out his alleged grow operation. At this point, all the police had on him was the word of two criminals.
* Frederick is gainfully employed and engaged to be married and there is no evidence that he has a death wish. But, after making sure there was no evidence against him, he planned to lay in wait to engage in a suicidal gunfight with armed police. Nevermind that he was only facing charges for a small-time grow operation that likely couldn’t be proven anyway. And nevermind that a single person pointing a gun at several cops is more dangerous than pointing it at his own head. Even if no one had actually been hurt, it would result in the harshest possible prosecution.
* The police, knowing that he knew they were coming, still carried out their nighttime raid against someone against whom they were likely to find no evidence and who they believe was laying in wait. All that instead of peaceably picking him up en route to work or the grocery store.
* After shooting one cop, Frederick suddenly decides to give up willingly.
If the prosecution’s account were true, Frederick’s lawyer would have a pretty tight case that Frederick lacks mental competence to stand trial, because no one who isn’t an outright moron would execute such a plan.
And, all that is aside from other factors such as inconsistencies in where the police say they were when shots were fired; how little they actually found at the raid; potential evidence tampering at the scene with removed bullet slugs; etc. Add that to the issues of illegal police evidence gathering and warrant issues and Ryan Frederick really should have gotten this case dismissed. It seems certain that, if the people who broke through his door that night had been members of a different group, they would be on trial right now.
Re: “how can the prosecution use the information that Frederick called Turnbull and threatened the police? Unless the conversation was recorded and can be played back for the court, isn’t it just hearsay?”
1. The phone records are facts, and not hearsay. Who did the calling can be inferred.
2. What they spoke about is not hearsay if at least one party to the actual conversation is willing testify and is subject to cross examination. Thus, Turnbull can get on the stand and recount the conversation, but only if Frederick’s lawyer can cross-examine Turnbull to determine truthfulness etc. T
However, it would be hearsay for the police to say what Turnbull told them that Frederick said, if used to prosecute Frederick.
Obviously Frederick did not “have a plan”. Obviously the SWAT team did, and a very bad one. If Frederick does not take a plea ,he will walk, unless the justice system can railroad him. If Frederick does not walk ,then none of us are safe in our homes.