I understand that we haven’t heard everything the jury has heard – so maybe they really got a very different view of what happened that night than most of us have – but I find this very odd. I mean, this may not be the right interpretation, but I read their picking the maximum sentence in the range as the jury saying that they think RF committed voluntary manslaughter in the worst way he could have. Doesn’t that sort of imply that they lent almost no credence to the self-defense argument?
“Their verdict today has jeopardized the lives of police officers,” said Jack Crimmins, president of the Chesapeake Coalition of Police. “I think the jury failed. They failed the community. You’ve got a man involved in an illegal enterprise, the police come to his house and he takes the matter into his own hands.”
#2 freedomfan, I’m sure the jury is a bunch of drooling dullards who have no idea what’s going on, completely believe that the cops, judge, and State are right, and are happy to have the Nanny State take care of them…even when it comes to “taking care” of them (Pulp Fiction ref). They probably didn’t go for the capital murder sentence simply because the crime didn’t fit the definition of the law there. I’m sickened that in cases like this the judge can actually say “well, just in case the prosecution can’t prove what they charged, here’s some lesser alternatives that you can pick from.” Sick, sick, sick.
He’ll be free someday — he’s not like poor Cory Maye who might not ever see the light of day — but somehow now I am just mad. The moment they came to his door, there was nothing he could do right. He could have hid or not come near the door and it could have been someone coming to rob or hurt or kill him. He could have waited with his gun and been likely killed by the cops or the criminals.
Don’t defend yourself. Don’t trust yourself. Don’t have guns. Don’t enjoy your vice of choice. The messages here are very clear.
Nate Davis Wrote:
“I hope he never calls the police for anything. He killed a police officer. As a fellow officer I hope I have the chance to respond to him in a time of need. I will show him the same callousness, disregard, and recklessness he showed Officer Shivers. The Bible talks about a place for people like you Ryan. And it ain’t heaven!”
Balloon Maker |
February 4th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Crimmins is a disgrace. Let’s send a bunch of cowboys in to break down someone’s door in the middle of the night for growing a plant (3 days after we sent some lowlifes to break in when he wasn’t home), then act surprised when someone gets killed. Of course, if Frederick ended up dead, it’s a 1 day internal affairs “investigation” and medals of honor for everyone!
The cops feel cheated on this verdict. They’ve already utilized convicts to try to hurt him by lying on the stand. Prison guards are the scum of the earth. I’m not feeling good about RF mixed into a general population of a max security prison…
Officer Crimmins: “The credibility of the police was brought into question. The people that day were professional,” he said, even after seeing their colleague shot to death in front of them. “With minimal amount of force, they took him into custody. They questioned him professionally.”
Wow!!! Hear that everybody, if you do exactly your job by adequate standards in one given situation, violating people’s rights systematically through illegal activity can’t even be raised in an argument! Awesome!!
So I assume those on the other thread who thought there would not be an appeal will be rethinking that.
Also, this ludicrous recommendation does convince me that RF is probably lucky they charged the jury on lesser included offenses. A jury that would recommmend this doesn’t seem inclined to have let him walk completely, and it would be far worse if he was convicted of capital murder.
Let’s not forget to check in when the BART cop gets the min penalty for some dramatically plea bargained charge (I’m guessing probation) for shooting a guy in handcuffs in the back and then not doing much (with his 20 buddies) to save the guy’s life.
Parole eligibility? Anyone know?
I don’t understand how the family grief, while very sad, is at all relevant to how much prison time he should face. Did Frederick get to put his family up there crying for mercy over vengeance?
John Jenkins |
February 4th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Norm Stamper, what do we do here to win over the cops? You said our awful situation here isn’t the fault of the police – that it’s our fault. You said it is the WoD that causes the problem, not the officers.
This situation was the fault of the police. It was the fault of the individual officers in the raid. It’s the fault of the prosecution. At some point, we have to say “laws don’t hurt people, people hurt people.” So what do we do here?
If you want us to not blame all cops, I think we deserve an answer. Or at least some police need to stand up and say “this is wrong.” Otherwise, why shouldn’t we say “fuck the police”?
What’re the implications of the maximum sentence? He’s already served more than a year, does that come off the top? What about good behavior, all that jazz? Or is it straight up ten years, no wiggle room?
Gonzo – The time served is subtracted from the sentence, so worst case he has less than 9 years to go. Also, while VA does not have “parole”, I believe it still has “good time credits” that can accrue for the inmate on an annual basis. There is a cap on these, obviously, so I’m not sure of how much time it could shave off his sentence. I would guess somewhere between 10 and 20%.
Also, as I understand it, the jury’s sentencing recommendation is not binding, so there is at least the chance that the judge will sentence him to less time than the jury recommended.
From Crimmins:”“With minimal amount of force, they took him into custody. They questioned him professionally.””
I don’t know when the cops decided that two vans full of people in flak jackets with assault weapons was the “minimal amount of force”. It seems like two cops with holstered handguns finding Frederick at work could have done the job, and he would have no chance to destroy evidence or shoot cops.
#23 pointed out the proper link on how long he’ll actually serve, don’t know why he was kharma’d down.
On a 10 year sentence according to the web site the maximum number of credits he can earn is 1.5 years worth. So he’d serve a minimum of 8.5 years and a maximum of 10. Time already served assuming he was well behaved and got all his credits indicates a late 2016 release date.
That Crimmins fellow is a real DB. His opinion is essentially that somebody should pay with their life, freedom, or both for the mistakes of the police, but not by the officers who were in error. It renders one speechless. It’s a joke how entitled these jerks feel.
This is Virginia the state that gave the world the addiction and death of bright leaf tobacco (has the good stuff bred out to render something so unsatisfying that it must be inhaled deeply over and over, leading to more addiction-health problems-death but more Virginia profits).
Not to my above comment: not that you’d be better off with just a judge in most cases, but at least you can squint your eyes and pretend the judge actually will be unbiased. I’ve never understood how I’m supposed to trust my freedom before 12 strangers with zero training and minimal guidance.
“Officer Claude said: “I hope I have the chance to respond to him in a time of need. I will show him the same callousness, disregard, and recklessness he showed.”
I see we have some reading comprehension issues. No, that isnt my comment. Its a comment posted by a cop over on the virginia pilot website. I copied and posted it here so people could see the mentality of the CPD and that Ryan may not be safe. Im on Ryans side. Always have been.
This is the sort of trial where I would have loved to have been on the jury. 10 years is far too long. The guy’s house was burglarized just before the incident by the police’s own CI. The police also didn’t announce themselves as police, as neighbors testified. Finally, the police didn’t even find the (amount of) marijuana they were looking for. Now Frederick has to pay for trying to protect his property and for the lazy policework that led to the incident.
And the police wonder why it’s turning into us vs them.
Because it is.
Cynical In CA |
February 4th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
That is an excellent suggestion, Fritz.
Radley, would you please compile a complete Ryan Frederick link list and post it?
Like most everyone else, lots to get out but now I have only four words.
Death to the State.
Fuck Tha Police |
February 4th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Let this be a lesson to everyone. If you mistakenly kill a cop while he is breaking into your house like a burglar in the middle of the night, you are going to go down no matter what your previous criminal record is, so you might as well take out as many of the fuckers as you can.
Cynical In CA |
February 4th, 2009 at 10:57 pm
This case is so inflammatory.
Emotions are on full-tilt, they leap off the page as I read.
It feels like war must feel, I suppose — because I’ve never felt war and I’ve seldom seen such outrage.
There is a discernable chasm between law enforcement officers and the people.
Staggered suddenly by the reality, you and I (the people) appear to ourselves subhuman, as reflected in the eyes of law enforcement officers, and ricocheted in the words of embodiment of State Jack Crimmins, swearer of oaths of vengeance against the society’s embodiment the jury.
err i guess thats an opinion editorial piece but its starting to ask the tough stuff…
“The incident, however, must force police to reassess the value of drug raids based solely on the claims of informants. An officer is dead. Another man is forever altered by killing him. And a community and its police department must do everything they can to make sure this never happens again.”
Balloon Maker |
February 4th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
The only conclusion I can draw from all of this is that cops sure do like kicking down doors and waving their dicks around. There were a thousand different ways they could have arrested Frederick without someone getting killed, and they chose the most aggressive, violent method possible, then acted surprised that someone got killed (and ruined Frederick’s life in the process).
Cynical In CA |
February 4th, 2009 at 11:52 pm
You know, Balloon Maker, that’s a great comment. But I wonder how much choice police officers have (beyond choosing the career), and how much of their action is compelled by the State itself.
It is axiomatic that the State must defend its monopoly on violence, else it ceases to be.
The raid on Frederick’s house was a manifestation of the State’s exercise of the monopoly of violence — a full-dress demonstration of the superiority of the State over its subjects, one that must be repeated often enough to reinforce the concept.
While I hesitate to call them victims [the actual individuals who comprise the police], it strains credulity to attribute free will to these officers, who are compelled by their oaths of office and their loyalty to fraternity to execute these irrational demonstrations of State power, in preserving the institution of the State.
What little optimism I possess hopes that individual police officers still retain the minimum superego to control their violent instincts and keep the full power of the State at bay.
My skepticism demands that I defend myself, for the State crushes all. Especially police officers.
Balloon Maker |
February 5th, 2009 at 12:13 am
The policies in place allow such travesties to take place. That does not, however, take the responsibility out of the hands of the individuals carrying out those policies. If I don’t agree with something my boss wants me to do, you know, because I might get killed because of it, I tell him to shove it. I do not, OTOH, get all jacked up because it might give me an adrenaline rush.
Fuck Tha Police |
February 5th, 2009 at 12:13 am
Cynical in CA, the police are not saying no to the immoral orders that they are getting from the state, and as such they are complicit in the crime. It is like the Nazis who said they were only following orders after WWII. They were still guilty. In that situation the penalty for disobeying those orders would probably have been death or forced labor. The penalty for a cop to say no to an order is maybe to lose his job. Listen to the comments that they make about these events. They love what they are doing. They love to play with their new toys, and they’ll be damned if a silly think like civil rights is going to get in the way of their play time.
Any cop who doesn’t speak out against these violations of the rights of the citizens of this country is as bad as the rest. They are criminals breaking into someones house, and they get what they deserve. When they kill one of us (us being the citizens of the US) in a botched drug raid, they say that is part of the job. They have never apologized to the families of the innocents they have killed. They never show any remorse even when they are caught on camera commit heinous crimes, so why should we feel any remorse for them?
Cynical In CA |
February 5th, 2009 at 12:19 am
“That does not, however, take the responsibility out of the hands of the individuals carrying out those policies.”
We have reached the “just following orders” verse of the song.
History rhyming again?
Cynical In CA |
February 5th, 2009 at 12:41 am
FTP, as my posts demonstrate, I am absolutely not defending the individual police officers nor absolving them for their willing complicity with the State.
I am analyzing this from the wider perspective of history and human psychology, and offering an explanation as to how a human being (which police officers still are biologically) could be induced to behave so irrationally compared to your point of view and mine.
Much as some statists have a blindness to how State policy generates the terrorists it claims to suppress, a similar number of anti-statists fail to appreciate the seductive, manipulative and overwhelming power that the State exerts on its own agents, to the point of turning them seemingly inhuman.
I once read, specifically about the Battle of Gettysburg, a history whose focus was exploring the reasons why soldiers fought in the so-called Civil War. The conclusion identified as paramount the obligation to one’s fellow soldier, one’s brother. Fraternity is the strongest bond between men, magnified manifold by the severity of war.
This is the same bond among police officers. This is the bond that permits their consciences to “just follow orders.” This informs me that there is a war going on.
The police know there is a war on. The police know their enemy. The police consider their enemy subhuman. The police are brothers. The police will do ANYTHING to preserve their fraternity. Do private citizens know this?
Without us private citizens thinking of each other as brothers, you and I are doomed to lose this war, FTP.
Cynical In CA |
February 5th, 2009 at 12:43 am
Sorry about the hyperlink in the above comment. It was a quirk of the text and completely unintended.
Perhaps they are pawns that naturally get their kicks from waving their dicks, but ultimately the are still just little baby pawns sucking on nanny state teats such as Byrne Grants or equivocating pot with meth — brainwashed by the sick propaganda puked up by the likes of the ONDCP.
Our government has spent BILLIONS on this insanity. And while it’s helpful to blow of some steam here, we must face the sad reality that our government is more concerned with preserving government than they are with preserving freedom.
Terrible tragedy. Another casualty in a senseless, destructive war on the lives and freedoms of Americans everywhere.
Despite the fact that I think society would be a great deal MORE convivial if more cops were killed in the execution of raid-type warrants, despite the fact that I think anyone who knowingly and willingly participates in the drug war deserves everything that happens to them…
I think the jury came to the right verdict (although the totally wrong sentencing recommendation).
The right to bear arms in a free society (a right that I fiercely believe in) depends on some hard and fast rules regarding the use of deadly force. You can not, and should not, discharge a lethal weapon at a target you can not see nor a threat you cannot verify. Nonspecific fears and implied threats do not justify blindly unleashing a projectile that will destroy anything in its path. If it had been the neighborhood 13 year old having a prank at Mr. Fredrick’s expense, it would have been manslaughter, and we wouldn’t be debating it. Before firing, Fredrick could not discount such a possibility because he could not see his target, which is why such things are forbidden. No shooting through doors. Ever.
I think Radley’s rejoinder is petulant. If Fredrick had waited, he might’ve been shot- perhaps probably shot. In this case, the shoe is merely shifted to the other foot and the police the guilty party. The fact that the police are better-equipped to evade manslaughter charges does not excuse Fredrick. Allowing someone to fire off weapons blindly because they are afraid is obviously unacceptable no matter who they are.
The circumstances that brought Fredrick’s crime about are deplorable and tragic. The behavior of the State is nigh-intolerable. Fredrick was put in a terrible, impossible situation through no fault of his own- but in a moment of terrible pressure he made a deeply wrong, panicky decision that cost another citizen their life- that is a crime. I have no sympathy for the officer (but a great deal for his family). But you still don’t shoot through doors.
“With minimal amount of force, they took him into custody.”
Then why the @#$% didn’t they do it that way in the first place instead of busting a door down. Had they, the detective would still be alive and RF would be back at work with a minor drug charge over his head.
Sad thing is, the person with the least blame for this situation is suffering, and those whose head it should fall on think they did nothing wrong.
It’s times like these that make me truly hopeful that karma does in fact exist…
Wow, 26 F-bombs so far. Come on people, I was in the navy and I certainly THINK it a lot but it usually gets filtered out before it gets to my mouth or keyboard.
I wish RF would get off with time served.
I can kind of see a little bit of the point of not shooting at something you can’t see. But I am not sure what RF saw!
Unfortunately, RF’s best chance would have been to be so passed out drunk that he would have woken up in a hospital instead of by his dogs.
How did the dogs survive?
Helmut O' Hooligan |
February 5th, 2009 at 1:44 am
Cynical in CA: “Without us private citizens thinking of each other as brothers, you and I are doomed to lose this war..”
Well said. I must say, when I hear an anarcho-capitalist make a statement that seems to encourage “solidarity,” I makes me smile. I may disagree with you about many things, Cynical, but you don’t really fall into that whole “atomistic” stereotype attributed to radical libertarians, and I give you credit for that.
As someone familiar with law enrorcement, who may indeed join the ranks at some point, let me add to your comments. It is true that private citizens need to develop this feeling of solidarity, but I still believe that can be accomplished without fostering an “us vs. them” stance. To become a mirror image of what too many police departments have already become will only make matters worse.
Instead, citizens should express their solidarity by realizing the power they have as jurors (visit the Fully Informed Jury website for more on that). Radley recently posted a story about a possible case of jury nullification in my home state of Illinois (a marijuana case in Lasalle County). I think more of that is called for, fellow citizens.
Citizens should also become more informed about the futility of the drug war, and pass this information along to their neighbors (potential jurors!) and legislators. Federal raids on medical marijuana shops are continuing in spite of President Obama’s promise during the campaign to end this practice. Put pen to paper, Mr. President!!! It is also past time for the federal government to repeal the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (as the Cato institute recommends in its latest handbook for policy makers).
Supporting dissidents withing the criminal justice system (such as Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and independent actors) will embolden people who feel that they are alone and their careers are in danger. A groundswell of dissent from law enforcement could go along way towards ending prohibition. Persuading officers and departments to focus less on drug/vice work, and more on patrol and investigation of non-consensual crimes. Citizens may consider trying to pass ordinances that make marijuana enforcement the lowest department priority. There is so much more to policing outside of drug work. In fact, drug work generally degrades the quality of policing.
To conclude, shouting “fuck the police” or “fuck the judges” or “fuck the jurors” and lobbing red meat will only deepen the divide between the public and law enforcement. Encouraging those of us who straddle the now perilous line between peace officer and activist, will be much more effective. But the most important thing an officer of good will can do is to remember that he is a citizen first and a police officer second. Fraternity is great, and comes about naturally when you and your colleagues spend your days trying to deal with crisis (some of which, unfortunately, is manufactured by government). But loyalty is overrated, especially when your principles, and the safety of the public is at stake.
“I can kind of see a little bit of the point of not shooting at something you can’t see.”
That ‘something” was in the process of smashing down the door to his home. Whether or not that ‘something’ was covered with lame tattoo’s, green fur, or a cheesy black ninja suit with a tin star on the tit doesn’t really matter. That ‘something’ was obviously a threat to Mr. Frederick’s well-being. Mr. Frederick correctly identified the threat and acted accordingly.
The fact that he has suffered persecution at the hands of the state for daring to defend himself in the manner of a free man is the *real* issue here.
How long must this go on before we as a nation stop peering frightfully from behind our curtains whenever thugs – be they Crips or Blue Light Gangsters- threaten the life, liberty, and property of our neighbors?
At what point does it become prudent to throw the curtains aside, center the crosshairs, and proceed to nullify that which gravely threatens the life and liberty of both our neighbors and ourselves?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Dear LEO community,
If you desire to see many more officers dead on front/back lawns, please continue your current business as usual. CUZ those that pay your wages are totally fed up with your insane tactics and about to hand you some alternate walking orders!!
Though I can’t seem for some reason to find it tonight, we are actually required as citizens to end the realm of a repressive government.
” “America is at that awkward stage. It’s too late to work within the system,
but too early to shoot the bastards.”"
I’m beginning to think it’s now OK to “Shoot the Bastards!
How can we as a society allow some idiot, (retired), prosecutor to hold a man in jail for over a year and state outlandish charges, following up with a filed charge of Capitol murder, then at trial end offer the jury a menu of alternate charges? Especially when the defense asked for consideration of alternate charges, denied! I say either convict on the charge, or acquit!
I offer only this to those involved in the national LEO/Judicial system. Be fair warned, we the people are fed up with your shit! Shape up or ship out! If you are worth keeping around, your PUBLIC record will already speak out for you.
#65, very well said. I’m considering joining LEAP to formalize, somewhat, my position. Ultimately it’s up to the people to end this “war”. I wish them success. Maybe Obama is the right guy to make it happen. We’ll see.
To conclude, shouting “fuck the police” or “fuck the judges” or “fuck the jurors” and lobbing red meat will only deepen the divide between the public and law enforcement.
So, it’s true that LE is very separate from the public!
Seriously, anyone who becomes a cop or a soldier is implicitly agreeing with ALL laws, because eventually you’ll be called out to enforce them with a gun. This is why nine out of ten cops are jarhead idiots.
It’s very hard to feel sympathy for someone who loses his life while trying to take away the freedom of an individual who hasn’t violated anyone else’s rights. Any loss of life to violence is a tragedy, but I don’t buy the B.S. “cops are just enforcing the laws” argument either.
after sleeping on the verdict, I’m still as pissed. fuck the prosecution and the police. fuck the guy counting ‘f-bombs’ (because THAT’S profane…). Fuck the ‘forgot what they’re supposed to be for’ media.
I’m confused by the lack of organized opposition. LEAP? NRA? ACLU?
I think RF would’ve been far better off being black and from Watts, where people have always known the cops are gonna railroad you. People know they have to send an occasional ‘message’ by rioting and burning down the city. Their elected leaders fear what will happen every time cops behave badly…
You tempt me greatly to reply in kind but I will not.
I don’t like what has happened to RF at all. But I think more people than the usual crowd will be paying attention to the comments about this one. They will be deciding what kind of a place this is based on their first impression of this thread.
Great…. real mature. But, I will shut up and never make such a comment again. It’s Radley’s blog, if he doesn’t mind, then I guess it is none of my business.
Helmut, I understand, and agree with, your point about not furthering the divide between ‘us’ and ‘them’, but the problem that I, and probably many others, see is that it seems like the divide has been put there already without our opinion or consent. It wasn’t regular joes who started referring to non-police as ‘civilians’. It isn’t the non-police who are being listened to at all. The culture of the police seems to be turning itself more and more insular all the time, and more and more tone deaf. I point to the continual parade of ‘justified’ shootings, disbanded and ignored civilian review boards, videos on youtube of acts of indimidation, illegality, and ignorance and contempt of the law on the part of those in uniform.
Mainly, I continue to put the biggest blame on legislators. Really, they are the *only* people who can change anything about this, and they scurry away like cockroaches in the light any time anything controversial about the police comes up. I don’t know if it’s that they’re too enamored of police protection, if they’re scared of retaliation like the rest of us, or if they’re just too deep in the pockets of the unions, but they are non-existent on the issue, when they’re supposed to be the ones who are the voice of the people in the law.
What an oxymoron – “Criminal Justice System”. There is little justice in it when it rewards incompetence and police overreaching. It shows how poorly we have evolved in the court system, in large part to the imbalance of power due to the way it has shifted from defendants to the prosecutors and victims rights advocacy groups, and the seeming need in society for retribution rather than justice. I guess the cynic in me says when both sides are unhappy maybe the system is working, but that rings hollow. I grieve for the loss on both sides, and the devastation that has followed that incompetent raid leaves me sick. Good luck to the families left behind…
Lenny Zimmermann |
February 5th, 2009 at 10:08 am
Not a home invasion, but even the actions of police surrounding the incident (the treatment of the man’s father as the family tried to see what had happened after the shooting) are rather suspect. Obviously more information will be needed, but I would not at all be surprised if the NOPD was very much in the wrong on this (as they seem to be on so very, very many areas.)
Lenny Zimmermann |
February 5th, 2009 at 10:09 am
(Just noticed I typoed my email in that last post, so in case Radley needed it for some reason this one has the correct email.)
Does anyone know if there any plans to interview RF after the final sentence is laid down?
The support he’s gotten around here has been both personal and political. Ryan Frederick seems like a pretty simple dude, one more concerned with living his life peacefully than debating the perks of a minarchist society vs. anarcho capatilsm. In an effort not to use him as a pawn for my own political gains, I’d really like to know his side of the story, and how he feels about all the support he’s getting from a political group that he’s not really (as far as I know) connected to.
All that to say, I think we’ve done a really good job keeping in mind that RF is a real person and not just another statistic. I’m more outraged that this peaceful individual will spend the next 10 years in jail than I am that my personal political beliefs have been stepped on. I hope Ryan knows this.
Lorraine Sumrall |
February 5th, 2009 at 10:50 am
I’m glad Ryan Frederick doesn’t live in Mississippi where the maximum for manslaughter is 20 years. I wonder what would happen if the cops broke into one of the juror’s homes in the way they broke into Ryan’s and a cop got killed. Hmmm??? Nothing like being a defendant to change your perspective. Oh, and yeah, I do have to say it: fuck the police.
I don’t like the tie-in between the murder/manslaughter charges and the pot growing.
The fact that someone is growing pot, even if it’s for distribution doesn’t change the likely response you’re going to get if you break down his door scaring the hell of of the guy. Nor does it alter his right to defend himself. I wonder if the jury would have convicted him for killing the cop if there had never been any pot involved, such as would be the case in a wrong door raid. I don’t think they would have convicted him in that case and I don’t think they should have convicted him in this case for the very same reasons.
I think part of the reason they thought it ok to convict on the manslaughter charge was because of the pot charges. It’s easier to condemn someone once they’ve already been labels a criminal.
Sorry, the f-bomb is just a sign of a lazy mind. I mean, why stop there? The English language has many words that are appropriate. :)
Some suggestions from my influenza addled mind about the police in this case .
Lazy, Incompetent, Conspiratorial, Evil, Uncaring, Corrupt, Harmful, Vile, Wicked, Wrong, repugnant, pernicious, (Ok, I actually had to look up “pernicious”) but you should get the idea of how I feel about the cops and prosecutor/persecutors in this case.
But what the thesaurus has for synonyms of “pernicious” is pretty good.
“Criminal Justice System” makes perfect sense if you read “Criminal” as an adjective, rather than as a noun.
The first step towards defeating evil is identifying it. An f-bomb might be a lazy way of doing that, but it’s also succinct, and sufficiently forceful for the job. It might not be a particularly effective argument for convincing others of that evil, but we’ve had pages and pages, hundreds upon hundreds of comments going over the reasons and logic behind the RF case, and going over the fact that the police are now our enemies, and how best to deal with that reality.
And now we have an innocent man going to jail for a decade for unknowingly killing a member of their privileged group while they were breaking into his house for no good reason, and at least one of them bitching out the jury on TV because 10 years isn’t enough blood for his taste.
Excuse us for a minute while we express our unadulterated disgust.
Not all threads need to be an argument for our perspective. Some can be a simple outpouring of disgust, frustration, and anger. Some words express those emotions exceedingly well. However, under extreme circumstances, those words must be used multiple times to be sufficiently effective (at least until someone invents a word that is more powerful than the ones we currently have). The government could do it, of course. For example, banning a word makes it infinitely more powerful.
‘Sorry, the f-bomb is just a sign of a lazy mind.’
I must disagree. It’s a very appropriate set up for a fight. Effective cussing can be outstanding for stunning an opponent. Why do you think cops yell, ‘Get on the fucking ground before I blow your motherfucking head off!’
I agree that there are many other words that express rage more eloquently, but there’s nothing that expresses it more clearly.
Cynical In CA |
February 5th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Helmut, you are cagey, lying in wait, biding your time … :)
Great post from you as usual. While I would like nothing better than to be left alone to my own devices, this would-be atomistic individualist still enjoys fellow human company of a like mind.
I am finding that chipping away at the stone is not as futile as it first appeared. Progress is being made slowly, slowly, but surely. People are waking up to the realization that there is a war on — for the State, using the government as its muscle, makes war on its own subjects first.
History has demonstrated that the State can be relatively hypomalignant (just made that word up) and stable for limited durations, but when the balance is tipped too much in State favor, revolutions and upheaval occur.
Individual cases like Frederick and the others highlighted on this blog are the manifestations of the imbalance between the State and its subjects. I wrote it before — they are the new martyrs of anti-statism.
It is up to each of us to ensure that they have not suffered in vain. I applaud you Helmut, for offering suggestions of courses of action. Let’s keep up the pressure.
And please do not cross over to the dark side of law enforcement. If you have romantic notions of changing the State from within, let me dispel them and assure you that the State will change you first as surely as you cling to Earth and not vice-versa.
“Claude, I re-read your comment. Somehow I missed the quotes. If I have reading issues, then I’m not alone. People modded your entry down, and understanding it in context, I cannot understand why.”
Oh no worries, Mario. It happens. I got it on another thread for saying “Justice was not served”. I realized later that while the regulars here know my stance on this and know what im referring to, the average passer by may not and could read it as if i was against Ryan. If you thought it was me making that statement and downrated it for that reason, youre the kinda guy i like around here, so stick around.
I don’t think that the state changes everyone it employs, though it certainly does change many of them. It simply changes some and purges almost all the ones it can’t.
For example, what exactly do you think would happen if one of the posters here sympathetic to RF were revealed to be a police officer and his boss found out? Not even necessarily an officer in CPD, a police officer anywhere?
He’d be out the door, either on the spot, or after a month of making his job hell.
“Closure?” said Jack Crimmins, president of the Chesapeake Coalition of Police. “There’s no closure.”
“Their verdict today has jeopardized the lives of police officers,” Crimmins said. “I think the jury failed. They failed the community. You’ve got a man involved in an illegal enterprise, the police come to his house, and he takes the matter into his own hands.”
I found Jack Crimmins facebook page. The picture there didnt suprise me in the slightest.
Even if no “official” action was taken against a cop who was revealed to be sympathetic to Ryan Frederick, here’s what would likely happen. A critical mass of the cops he works with would brand him as disloyal to his cop “brothers,” or untrustworthy, or as someone who you couldn’t depend on to have your back, or a “rat bastard” — or some other such nonsense.
In short, he’d be a pariah. That’s how the “blue wall” works — you stick with cops for any and all reasons. The sane and decent cops wouldn’t come to his defense because they’d be bucking the culture and in danger of being ostracized themselves.
Im still reading different news accounts of this trial. I cant believe some of what im reading.
“Ebert went on to tell WAVY.com, “In some parts of the country Mr. Frederick would be dead now because police would not have tolerated losing one of their own. But, these fellas showed a lot of restraint that night I thought.”
“I am very disappointed in the jury’s verdict. I really thought they were going to find 2nd degree murder,” said Ebert. “Detective Jarrod Shivers lost his life for no reason.”
Yep, he lost his life for NO reason. Thats exactly right.