TheAgitator.com
Ryan Frederick Update
Tuesday, December 16th, 2008Lots of interesting new information came out at a pre-trial hearing yesterday in Chesapeake, Virginia for Ryan Frederick, the man charged with capital murder for killing Det. Jarrod Shivers during a botched drug raid on Frederick’s home last January.
To briefly catch you up: Police were acting on an informant’s tip that Frederick was growing marijuana in his garage. They found no plants, and only a misdemeanor amount of marijuana, which Frederick concedes was for personal use. Both I and the Virginian-Pilot newspaper have since reported that the informant in the case, “Steven,” and another man who also says he was a police informant, Renaldo Turnbull, illegally broke into Frederick’s home three nights before the raid to look for probably cause, likely with the consent or at least the knowledge of the police.
Here’s what we learned yesterday:
• The State is now conceding that the police informant in the case illegally broke into Frederick’s home three nights before the raid. Until now, they had either denied the connection or refused to comment.
• Frederick’s attorney released an audio recording taken in a police car shortly after the raid. In it, Frederick tries to explain that he was confused and frightened because someone had broken into his home earlier in the week. A police detective replies, “We know that.” In a second recording, the detective says again, “First off, we know your house had been broken into. OK?”
• Yet according to the Virginian-Pilot, the State still insists that, “there is nothing whatsoever to suggest police knew at the time who broke in or who was involved. They said police learned months later that the parties involved included one of their informants.” (Emphasis mine.)
This doesn’t make any sense. The affidavit the police filed to obtain the warrant notes that the police informant was in Frederick’s home three nights before the raid. That’s exactly when the burglary happened. The State is trying to argue that even though (a) the police knew their informant was in Frederick’s house three nights before the raid, and (b) the police knew someone had broken into Frederick’s home three nights before the raid, they apparently believed at the time that these two incidents were entirely coincidental, which is why they didn’t include on the search warrant affidavit the fact that their informant illegally broke into Frederick’s home to obtain probable cause.
There are two options here. The Chesapeake police are either corrupt, or they’re naive to the point of incompetent. The State apparently believes its case is better served by arguing the latter.
But there’s one other niggling detail that throws the State’s argument into a tailspin: Ryan Frederick never reported the break-in. How, then, could the detective who questioned Frederick the night of the raid have known about it?
• Despite all of this, Judge Marjorie A.T. Arrington still denied a defense motion to suppress the warrant. Which if nothing else I guess gives Frederick an early issue to put in his appeal should he be convicted.
• There’s now more than enough evidence to suggest that Chesapeake police had knowledge that the probable cause for the search warrant to Frederick’s home was obtained illegally. Moreover, Turnbull’s interviews with me and with the Virginian-Pilot also raise the possibility that this wasn’t the first time a Chesapeake police informant burglarized a private residence to search for probable cause. According to Turnbull, this was common practice. And the police encouraged it.
It’s past time for an outside investigation, preferably from the Justice Department.
• Special Prosecutor Paul Ebert subpoenaed Virginian-Pilot reporter John Hopkins, the other journalist to speak to Turnbull. Ebert never called Hopkins to the stand. But the possibility that he could have caused Judge Arrington to bar Hopkins from the courtroom. Hopkins—who has covered this case as well as I’ve seen any journalist cover one of these raids—now won’t be able to attend next month’s trial, either.
• The plants the informant Steven claimed to have found in Frederick’s home were never turned over to the police, and thus were never tested to confirm that they were actually marijuana. For all we know, they could still have been Japanese Maple saplings. Turnbull says Steven turned the plants over to the police. The State is either arguing that the police didn’t know Turnbull and Steven removed the plants, or that they were aware, but never got around to asking Steven to turn them over. Again, the choice here is corruption or incompetence.
That also means that this entire raid was conducted solely on the word of the informant Steven, a shady character who at the time was facing his own criminal charges for credit card fraud. There were no controlled buys, and no significant surveillance. The only corroborating investigation the police did were a few drive-bys of Frederick’s home. According to the affidavit, that should have lessened their suspicion, because they noted no unusual activity.
Prior posts on the Frederick case here.
UPDATE: Chesapeake-area blogger Rick Caldwell writes:
Ryan Frederick is being harassed by the city of Chesapeake, through code enforcement. His sister has recently moved back to the area, having lived overseas for several years. Since her arrival, she has received numerous notices from the city’s code enforcement division, regarding siding in disrepair, the condition of the pool in the back yard, and demanding the removal of two signs expressing support for Ryan from the front yard. The city has been sending these notices to Ryan at the jail as well, and is even threatening to sue over the pool.
Nice touch.
Are you saying that Hopkins was banned, or could possibly be banned?
“There are two options here. The Chesapeake police are either corrupt, or they’re naive to the point of incompetent. The State apparently believes its case is better served by arguing the latter.”
They have to argue the latter. Incompetence isn’t a crime. Corruption is. Prosecutors don’t go after their cop buddies unless there’s absolutely no other option. In other words, the prosecutors are just as corrupt as the cops.
“Are you saying that Hopkins was banned, or could possibly be banned?”
I think hes a potential witness in the case. Radley would fall under that same catagory and would be booted as well. Witnesses cant attend the trial as spectators. It would allow them to mold testimony around what they have heard while spectators.
I found out last night that the city of Chesapeake is using code enforcement to harass Ryan and his sister. His sister has been living overseas for a number of years, and has just moved back to take care of the house.
John Hopkins was ordered removed from the courtroom yesterday, and won’t be able to attend the trial. He’s been actually banned.
Whether this “isolated incident” was caused by incompetence, arrogance, disrespect of the law, or purely evil corruption, the fact remains that a heavily armed, early morning raid was a very poor decision simply because you can’t FLUSH a grow operation!
The blame for the tragic and needless death of this police officer is squarely on the shoulders of the drug warriors themselves, and the incompetent and corrupt politicians that refuse to even discuss alternatives to the current strategy.
“you can’t FLUSH a grow operation!”
Especially one in the garage. Most people dont have a toilet in their garage. Was this garage a detached garage? Does anyone know? I cant remember any mention of whether the garage is attached to the house or not.
It’s a detached garage.
The denial of the motion to suppress is what happens when you take the “justice” out of the “criminal justice system”. We already know law enforcement can lie to the person being investigated (but don’t lie to them, just ask Martha Stewart!), but in today’s system the can lie to the court as well…
good link, Rick. I love how they’re ‘demanding the removal of two signs expressing support for Ryan from the front yard.’
Because of the Chesapeake government’s refusal to look for facts, this is going to be a tough fight. These clowns are only interested in winning. But, even if they lose, they’ll maintain a death grip on their belief that they’re right.
Hopefully, there’s a good housecleaning after they get their asses kicked.
This is true. But the cops in this case are really, really leaving the prosecutors no other option. This particular prosecutor won’t do it. But after all this is done, at the very least, Kiley Roberts will be charged with perjury. Believe it or not, there’s actually more perjury than what has already been exposed. It’s going to get ugly soon.
Whether Roberts is convicted will be another matter.
Who do I need to talk about getting this legislation passed?
“No-knock warrants shall not be issued for non-violent suspects, whose evidence cannot be flushed down the toilet.”
“No-knock warrants shall not be issued for non-violent suspects.”
Fixed it for you.
In some ways, I think the surpressing of the warrant might be a good thing (aside from Radley’s point about the appeals process). If the detectives (or whomever typed it up) have to go on the stand and talk about how they got the information, it’s should be the start of the collapse of this house of cards.
I would wager that if the Justice Dept. got involved in the prosecution of this case, it would ever see the light of day in a courtroom. I hope the citizens of Chesapeake are ok with the millions of their taxpayer dollars that are going to be used to pay RF when this nonsense is over.
I’ve said this a lot. I think entering the warrant into evidence in court will be a great thing for Ryan. The way the judge adjudicated this was that she wouldn’t suppress the warrant prior to the trial. Apparently, Broccoletti was supposed to do this at the last hearing, and this hearing was too late. However, she made a point that the question could be revisited during the trial, but only after it’s entered into evidence.
So the net effect if that were to happen, is that the warrant could be invalidated, but only after the jury gets to hear all the lies contained therein, and the illegal way it was obtained. The judge would then order the jury to unhear what they heard, but good luck with that…
Ginger Dan, unless the police’s conduct in obtaining the warrant is germane to the question of Frederick’s guilt, it will likely be excluded from his trial.
This is an issue in Cory Maye’s case. The prosecution kept out of his trial evidence concerning the validity of the warrant. On appeal, we have argued that the fruits of the warrant should have been suppressed, and that because the validity of the warrant bore on the officer’s “official capacity” at the time of the shooting, it was admissible at trial. (This is part of a newly-discovered evidence issue, because we didn’t discover that the warrant was invalid until we were able to locate the confidential informant.)
I would be surprised if the judge admits evidence that the warrant was dodgy now that she has denied a motion to suppress on those same grounds.
The case has legs that keep on growing.The police have noses that keep on growing. All this, because Ryan was supposed to be growing something. Stupid laws for the stupid citizens. Will true justice be served? And when?
“It’s a detached garage.”
Thanks Rick. Was it a heated garage?
“They said police learned months later that the parties involved included one of their informants.”
Right there, that says the police not only were aware of the break in, but who was doing the breaking in.
The only way they could be aware of the unreported break in 3 days after the fact was if the people doing the break in were known to them at the time AND they knew they were breaking in.
To have learned it from their ‘informant’ 3 months later would have required time travel to inform the officers at the scene of the arrest.
If the police/prosecutors were committing felonies by framing Ryan and illegally searching…etc., couldn’t they be charged with felony murder for actions that resulted in an officer’s/person’s death?
I think this fact is definitely sitting in the back of their minds at they try to pin it on Ryan. This is an absolute railroading.
I truly hope this is put on Court TV.
I rarely watch that channel, but would watch this case from beginning to end.
Thanks Claude for clarifying that for me I had read it 4 times, and my mind would just not wrap around the statement.
Alright! I’m linked by the Agitator!
~Pumps fist excitedly
I was at the hearing yesterday – a couple things:
(It was the detached garage that was actually broken into. Mr. Frederick did not report the break-in to the police – he DID go to a hardware store and obtained new locks, which he hadn’t yet installed, at the time of the police raid.)
At the hearing on 9/9/08, Mr. Conway (one of the prosecutors) stated that,
“burglar(s) had removed half of the plants in the garage.”
(No one seems to know where these plants are, or if they actually WERE marijuana…)
“The State is now conceding that the police informant in the case illegally broke into Frederick’s home three nights before the raid. Until now, they had either denied the connection or refused to comment.”
I don’t believe this concession was made – what Mr. Conway said was;
“nor is there anything that the Commonwealth is aware of, in the entire case, that would suggest that the police were aware that the informant, uh, mentioned in the affidavit, was involved in any way, in that, in the break-in of the defendants garage.”
(It was on this basis that Judge Arrington denied the defense motion to have a hearing to decide whether or not to exclude the warrant.)
A very cleverly worded statement - in other words, or as I understand this, the Commonwealth (represented by the prosecution team) is officially unaware of the informant and burglar being one and the same, since the CPD, OFFICIALLY, have not admitted it to them…
My read on this, is that the prosecution is showing signs of distancing itself from the CPD. When the truth comes out, at trial, that the police ROYALLY FUCKED UP, the prosecution will take the position that, “It’s not our fault - the police lied to us, too…”
(Proof positive that there is truth to the saying that, “there is no honor among thieves.”)
Before the discussion regarding the warrant hearing, Detective Roberts, and two other officers who had been present at the raid, were asked to leave the courtroom. Well after the discussion began, Mr. Conway realized that Mr. Hopkins, the reporter from the Virginian Pilot, was in the room (busily taking notes) and requested that he also be asked to leave. Mr. Broccoletti objected to this, since Mr. Trumbull (burglars assistant) & Mr. Hopkins were not named as witnesses, by either side. The Judge sided with Mr. Conway, and Mr. Hopkins was asked (politely) to leave. He switched places with another reporter, who was covering the trial in the next courtroom – and he was not real happy about it…
The good news is that he didn’t miss much…
Rick and Ben (the Other One),
Thanks for your insights. To your point Ben about the warrant being german to RF’s guilt, how does the prosecution get around telling the story of how and why the police came to be on RF’s property on the morning in question? I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t know the ins and outs of something like this, but couldn’t the defense get around the suppression of the warrant by asking the LEOs who were there the “hows” and “whys”?
The warrant is germane to Ryan’s guilt or innocence. The two main questions are:
Did Ryan know, or
should he have known,
that it was a cop serving a warrant that he was shooting at.
If he was growing something illegal, he should have known, whether he actually knew or not. Because growing a felonious plant is an invitation to be raided by the cops, he would then have assumed an expectation that the next battering ram that comes through his door belongs to a cop with a warrant, rather than an intruder.
On the other hand, The pot he possessed wasn’t even in one place, like a baggie. It was residue, dusted out of previous hiding places, like a well in the arm of a couch, or the angle of a shelf. And the bong was in the attic, covered in dust. That may be illegal, but it isn’t the same as a grow op, and doesn’t confer an expectation that sooner or later cops will be forcibly entering his home.
Since the product wasn’t there, the only evidence of probable cause is the warrant. It’s the cops’ only way of being able to say ‘hey, we were wrong, but this covers our asses.’ If it can be proven that the warrant was obtained illegally, it was a criminal enterprise, and further justifies the shooting.
A warrant obtained under false pretenses also demonstrates intent to deprive the homeowner of his fourth amendment rights, and makes it more believable to a jury that these cops were capable of whispering ‘police’ where a bullhorn was required for the announcement.
The warrant has everything to do with this case.
According to Barry Cooper, cops are allowed to use FLIR (heat) cameras without a warrant on detached garages. I don’t know if it’s true, but he said it on one of his “Never Get Busted” videos.
If it is true (and Frederick did was growing), the cops could have got a warrant and knocked on his front door without breaking in, and without incident.
As stated many times on this site, that wouldn’t be as fun as playing SWAT guy, violating people’s rights, shooting dogs, terrorizing families, and making guns go bang-bang!
It’s becoming rather clear that the wrong people are behind bars awaiting trial.
Good luck getting Specter,or anyone from the JD for that matter,getting involved.
Incompetance and ignorance goes all the way to the top!
CIII
Harassing family completely crosses the line.
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/
The warrant is germane to Ryan’s guilt or innocence.
IMHO, the government likes to suppress as “irrelevant” issues related to warrant justification and service, but IMHO the government often seeks to withhold such information not because they believe it isn’t relevant, but because they know it is.
If knowledge of a certain fact would cause an impartial jury to acquit a defendant, there are few situations where I would consider just a conviction that was secured by the concealment of that fact. If jurors were told that they should ignore any evidence secured in an unreasonable search, the government would have a hard time getting convictions unless it reformed some of its practices. Prosecutors would see that as a problem, but I’d see it as a good thing–if a jury of ordinary and impartial citizens would consider certain search practices “unreasonable”, then they are per the Fourth Amendment illegitimate and should be recognized as such.
…couldn’t they be charged with felony murder for actions that resulted in an officer’s/person’s death?
Were I to somehow acquire an office where I could do so, I would seek prosecutions against the murderers who receive government paychecks. If they can convince a jury that their actions were reasonable and legitimate, fine. I see no legitimate reason, however, why many such people should not be prosecuted, nor why an honest prosecutor should not be able to score convictions.
Nice work here (by many). I hope there’s growing public support for Ryan Frederick.
Boyd, I can assure you, the support for Ryan here in southeastern Virginia is huge. If you take a quick look at the profiles of the commenters on the Ryan Frederick stories at hamptonroads.com (that’s the Virginian-Pilot’s website), you can see their past comments on previous stories. You’ll find that most of those commenters supporting Ryan have a commenting history of supporting cops reflexively, and making these law and order type comments. The ones who have more of a history of questioning cops are kind of letting the more moderate sort of badge lickers do the light work, and only show up when the cops and more hardcore badge lickers repeat old statements that even the prosecution has abandoned.
Some of these moderate badge lickers were shouting for the death penalty the night the shooting happened, but they started switching sides about three days in, when local outlets other than me finally started reporting that all that was found was tomato plants, banana trees, and Japanese maples. That really turned the worm. The “cop questioners”, if you will, don’t even have to work hard on this one.
Pesronally, I knew it was all over for the CPD, PR-wise, when, about two weeks in, my dad was starting to question cops critically, on old controversies over police tactics. Now, he’s barely less cynical than me.
“#27 | nobahdi |
According to Barry Cooper, cops are allowed to use FLIR (heat) cameras without a warrant on detached garages. I don’t know if it’s true, but he said it on one of his “Never Get Busted” videos.”
I’m not sure on this, but my gut feeling is that it would not be allowed if the garage is within the curtilage of the home, but if far enough away to be considered in a field then yes.
Remember that curtilage is part of the home, such as a mow line or a fenced area. I like to think of it as the place you live when not inside your house proper.
If the garage was 30 feet from your home and you tinkered on your car in the garage on a regular basis I would consider that part of your home life, and so under the protection of the 4th Amendment.
We need the curtilage not just the inside of our homes to remain secure and safe. A policeman could stand in the road or any public place, and see you doing something illegal, and easily get a warrant because of what he saw. That same policeman could not stand in your backyard, and look into your windows to see if you are doing something illegal. Could you imagine if this was not the case? Just when you are about to reach the moon with your wife you notice a cop staring at you in your bedroom window, just waiting to see you were doing something he bust you for, that might ruin the mood.
I’ll look into this though, it is quite an interesting thought.
You’re 100% correct. But this case is different, because the local populace is watching this case like hawks. Local officials are actually talking behind the scenes about the political fallout from this case. Most cases where the legal “relevance” is decided by a judge, there aren’t any reporters or cameras in the courtroom. This time, if the judge and prosecutor start monkeying around, the public outcry locally, will cause people to lose their jobs.
The Attorney General, Bob McDonnell, is running for Governor next year, and he’s from this area. He was my delegate at one time. He went to law school less than a mile from where I live. And if this Commonwealth’s Attorney goes any further off the deep end then he has and McDonnell doesn’t, there’s a very real possibility he won’t win his own home district. He won’t allow that to happen.
This is exactly correct. And the garage is behind a gate,tucked into the left rear corner of the property, as you face the property from the street. The properties on this street are not large at all. Neighbors two doors down on the opposite side of the garage were able to hear Ryan’s dogs barking from inside the house the night of the shooting, if that helps you understand the size of the properties there. It’s a low income neighborhood, a few miles away from a heavily industrial area.
Another way to provide perspective on the proximity of the garage to the house is that if you look at the house from the sidewalk, directly in front of the gate, the right edge of the garage is concealed behind the left edge of the house.
Rick (#26): How does the validity (or not) of the probable cause for the warrant bear on the question of Frederick’s knowledge that he was shooting at a police officer bearing a warrant?
At the time of the shooting, Frederick had no idea the circumstances under which the officers obtained the warrant, so if one assumes that he knows (i.e., from an external announcement) that they are the police and that they are attempting to execute a search warrant, the police’s deceit of the magistrate to get it does not shed any light on what you say is the key question.
I am not a member of the Virginia bar, but the inadmissibility of the probable cause (e.g., the affidavits, oral statements, etc.) used to get a search warrant is pretty common. This rule usually benefits the defendant, who typically would be prejudiced by the repetition of the state’s justification for obtaining a search warrant. Since a warrant can be based on hearsay, admitting this evidence against the defendant can also raise substantial due process and confrontation clause concerns.
I’m sympathetic to Frederick’s case (as I’ve read about it here). The invalidity of the warrant might be quite relevant to the question whether the police officer was acting in “performance of
his official duties,” as required under the statute. Their misrepresentations to the magistrate might also be admissible for some other purpose (such as impeaching their testimony, or to establish a motive for them to lie after the arrest). But if he gets it in, I think it will be the exception that proves the rule.
I disagree with some of your premises, too. First, the statute appears to require actual knowledge (because the killing has to be for the “purpose” of interfering with the police officer’s performance of his official duties), and so I don’t think whether he “should have known” is really a question.
Second, Frederick’s knowledge of his own illegal conduct (i.e., whether substantial, if he were a grower, or minor, if he were just a casual user) is also irrelevant to his knowledge that the police were coming through his door with a warrant. (I think it’s safe to say that marijuana growers have a greater reason to expect criminal home invasions as well as a greater reason to expect a search warrant.)
Finally, even if the police lied to the magistrate in obtaining the warrant, that doesn’t make the shooting per se justifiable homicide.
From what I read on the links below the use of any technology that would enhance what a policeman could see beyond what a he normally could see could be a search and thus illegal within the curtilage. Another words if he used binoculars to more clearly see you watering plants that is OK so long as he could have seen it without them to begin with. He could not set up an Xray machine in the road, and look to see if you have gun in your sock drawer though.
http://www.totse.com/en/law/justice_for_all/curtilag.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2194/is_n4_v67/ai_20576402
That is true regarding the case being very front and center in that area. Ive also been following the stories at the hamptons road site. The staunchest of the “fry ryan/ pro LEO” crowd seems to have made themselves scarce over the last 2-3 stories and many others have come around to seeing this for what it really is. My biggest fear is that Ryan will get a jury of 12 of these guys (from the wvec site today):
“Toby Turner 12 hours ago wrote:
Regardless of whether the police screwed up or not, they would not have been there executing the warrant if the guy wasnt doing something illegal. Bottom line, he shot a cop, he should go to jail forever.”
Where is Darwin when u need him?
Here’s a picture of the house, with one of the signs that was removed at the demand of the code enforcement division. The other sign was just like it, and both signs were filled with signatures and short messages of support.
Immediately to the left of what you see in this photo is the driveway, leading to the gate, and the garage is behind that gate. The pool is in the right hand corner of the back yard.
On the right hand side of the photo, you can see the eaves of the house next door. That is exactly how tightly packed the homes are in this whole neighborhood. If you do a left face from this perspective, there’s a church at a cul de sac a block away. Do a right face, and the guy who was chief of police at the time of the shooting lives three doors down, from what I hear. Three doors further lives a city bureaucrat who works for the planning commission, or zoning board, or whatever. The prevailing theory is that she’s probably the complainant regarding the code violations.
I was at the hearing for TidewaterLiberty.com
The Judge’s refusal to reconsider suppressing the search warrant is a bit more technical than that. The request was for a HEARING on suppressing the warrant, in which Det. Roberts would be questioned under oath about when he knew his informant was the burglar.
In order for the judge to grant that hearing prior to trial, there must be substantial evidence before the court that a fraud was committed on the magistrate knowingly by the police. The evidence does not merely have to exist, it must have come before the court either as a statement by the prosecution, testimony at a prior hearing, or evidence already available to the defense and placed in evidence.
At some point, Roberts is going to have to testify, and it will come out then that he knew his informant was burglarizing houses to provide him information, but by then the search will have been placed before the jury and at most they can be told to disregard it.
But at this point, though we all know it to be the case, it has not officially come before the court.
I don’t know if Hopkins is banned for the duration. He’s not on either sides’ witness list for the trial, I think Ebert subpoenaed him for the proposed hearing that isn’t taking place. He really has no direct testimony to offer on the case other than hearsay from a witness who is available for direct testimony.
Logic and legal proceedings seem to have very little in common.
Support Ryan at http://www.myspace.com/ryan_frederick and http://www.meetup.com/freeryan
Nice trick, Ebert taking Hopkins out by subpoena as witness…
Finally, even if the police lied to the magistrate in obtaining the warrant, that doesn’t make the shooting per se justifiable homicide.
If the people who broke into Ryan’s house knew that there was not a legitimate basis for a warrant, for what reason should their actions not be regarded as home invasion robbery, with all the implications that entails?
The Chesapeake Police Dept. messed up. and is messed up. I had a woman chase my wife home from her job at high speeds to our neighborhood in Deep Creek. I ran out with a bat to try and stop the vehicle’s pursuit. The lady stopped and was completely incoherent(alcohol and pills, she said). When the police arrived to my house, I was treated as the criminal. The lady was told to go home and get some rest after attempting to commit vehicular homicide. I was told that if I didn’t shut up and go inside that I would be arrested for assault and battery. The officer(Officer J. Justice) refused to give me his card or to write a report(their shift was almost over) and even approached me as if he were going to hit me(keep in mind i was wearing pajamas and slippers on a cold january night). After all was said and done, my wife and I made complaints to the Dept., the state, and the news. But no one wanted to challenge the Police Dept.. But in the end, for my attempt at pursuing justice I was charged with assault after the fact. The Chesapeake Police Dept. is above the law. After serving several years overseas in the Marine Corps., I don’t feel safe in my own country.