Scott’s Morning Brew » Blog Archive » Cop Killer Ryan Frederick guilty of manslaughter

»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«

Cop Killer Ryan Frederick guilty of manslaughter

February 5th, 2009 by Scott

Comments Feed

Ryan Frederick will forever be known as a cop killer. He shot and killed Detective Jerrod Shivers in January 2008 while the Chesapeake Police Department was serving a search warrant at his house. He is a cold blooded killer.

Our justice system, however, has seen fit to convict this… Frederick of Manslaughter and recommended a sentence of 10 years, the maximum. Frederick faced capital murder.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury? You have FAILED MISERABLY. You have failed the family of Detective Shivers, police officers, the City of Chesapeake, Commonwealth of Virginia and this nation. Failed. Failures each and every one of you.

The next time you need police, please be sure to tell them you were on the Frederick jury. While that is an emotional statement, I do know that no matter what, the officers will still be professional. But I bet it made you stop and think didn’t it?

Just like all the people who have voted in the polls on PilotOnline. Voting for acquittal. The next time YOU need police, be sure to tell them you think that Frederick should have been let off for killing a cop.

Do you agree with the voluntary manslaughter verdict for Ryan Frederick- - HamptonRoads.com - PilotOnline.com_1233826941734

If the tables were turned, and it was a cop who shot blindly through a door, killing a civilian, I wonder how that would have turned out at a trial?

This is a complete and utter failure of our criminal justice system, and the jury in this trial has caused damage beyond measure.

HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

Share and Enjoy:

56 Responses

hoobie writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 09:06 am

Your poll indicates that 75% of the respondents disagree with you.

I believe that the actions of Chesapeake Police are most responsible for this tragic incident.
John Doe writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 11:05 am

Oh, spare us the uninformed emotionalism. I’ll bet you didn’t follow the trial and have absolutely no clue what the evidence was. The cops were breaking down the door of a man who had been dozing on his bed. His house had been recently broken into (well, his garage, same thing in my opinion). He lived in a community that had a high crime rate near his house. When his wildly barking dogs awakened him, he grabbed his gun and headed to the door. When a cop outside saw him headed to the door he yelled “Eight Ball”–their phrase that meant the person inside is not cooperating so go ahead and break the door down. Other cops outside didn’t hear the one breaking the door yell “Police”! When Frederick got to the front door he saw someone breaking a hole in his door trying to gain entrance into his house. He fired through the door and it struck the unfortunate victim. If the cops had just waited for the guy to answer his door instead of breaking it down nobody would be dead. I would have done the same thing if I didn’t know who it was. You would have to be an idiot to believe that he intentionally shot at the cops.

We need to change our police procedures. Why do we need to do a forced entry without even giving the person a chance to come to the door and let the cops in? Was he suddenly gonna flush 3 marijuana plants that used to be hidden in his garage down the toilet? If so, who the hell cares? Get a grip man. We don’t live in a police state.

John Doe’s last blog post..Chesterfield County holds teacher without bond
John Doe writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 11:13 am

Ha. I didn’t know you were a cop. If so, I should have expected you to be biased. But take off the blinders for a minute. You assume that this guy just for the heck of it shot some cop. He had never been in trouble with the law. He was a pot head, for cryin out loud. ANYBODY who is a cop should know that they don’t go around with a death wish. “Oh, wow, man. The man is at the window. Better let him in.” NOT “Oh, wow, man, Pigs are at the door, better blast them to smithereeeeens!”

You ASSUME all the worst, even though the evidence was in sharp conflict. You ASSUME that he heard the cops announce themselves–despite the fact that OTHER COPS outside never heard the announcement. You ASSUME that he could have seen it was the cops, even if he hadn’t heard them announce, even though the cops own experiment performed afterwards proved that he couldn’t have told who it was. WHAT THE HELL WOULD YOU DO if somebody was breaking down your door? Wait until they get in, wait until you are sure it ain’t the BANG BANG BANG! Ooops. Sorry. You are dead. At least you didn’t mistakenly kill a cop who should never have been breaking down your door anyway…

John Doe’s last blog post..Chesterfield County holds teacher without bond
Sailorcurt writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 12:22 pm

If the tables were turned, and it was a cop who shot blindly through a door, killing a civilian, I wonder how that would have turned out at a trial?

Yea…I wonder how THAT would have turned out at a trial:

Jurors on Monday acquitted Sgt. Joseph Chavalia on charges of negligent homicide and negligent assault in the death of Tarika Wilson seven months ago. Her year-old son also was injured.

…

He said he saw a shadow coming from behind the partially open bedroom door and heard gunshots that he thought were aimed at him.

It turned out that Wilson didn’t have a weapon and that the gunfire Chavalia heard was coming from downstairs

…

Citing a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that set guidelines for use of force by police, the jurors were told they could only judge Chavalia’s actions based on what he was aware of when he fired into the bedroom where Wilson was with her six children.

Too bad Frederick wasn’t only held accountable for “what he was aware of” when he fired “at a shadow” THROUGH THE HOLE that the UNKNOWN ATTACKERS had just battered through his door.

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

be sure to tell them you think that Frederick should have been let off for killing a cop.

I certainly hope that the rest of our employees on the Police Department are more professional than you are. So, you’re saying that you won’t do your job when it involves interfacing with a citizen (who pays your salary) that doesn’t agree with you?

It’s a good thing I don’t have an attitude like that…I’d have been fired years ago.

‘course then we get back to that whole “some animals are more equal than others” thing.
Fritz writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 14:41 pm

Thank you for pointing to that case, Sailorcurt. It’s a very good example of how lopsided these cases are. IMHO, the police should be held to an even higher standard since they are the ones trained, prepared and initiating the force.

Scott, I believe the following statement of yours is correct, but for far different reasons:

This is a complete and utter failure of our criminal justice system, and the jury in this trial has caused damage beyond measure.
John Doe writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 15:06 pm

Sailor Kurt, you reminded me that we had a similar incident in Richmond Va when cops killed an innocent visitor during an attempted breach. In 1998 a swat team was attempting a forced entry, and the cop used a shot gun with “breaching rounds” that are supposed to be shot into the metal of a door latch in order to force it open. Cop shot downward several times, and it turns out a woman was laying on the floor covering her 3 year old daughter from being shot, but had herself been killed. In that case, the cops were sued and they were entitled to “Sovereign Immunity” and the woman’s estate could only recover upon a showing of “Gross Negligence” on the part of the cops. Green v. Ingram, 269 Va. 281, 608 S.E.2d 917 (2005), it is reported, where the trial judge threw out the case against the cops but the Supreme Court reinstated it).

Scott, I AM NOT anti-cop. I am terribly upset that the officer died! Cops have a thankless job, and are reviled by too many (as are lawyers, usually for good reason). Nobody whom I would ever associate with is happy the officer was killed. But we think the police policies should be fixed. This case was not a case where anybody should have been breaking down the man’s door in the first place. Nab him when he goes to work, or gets home. Or give him enough time to answer the door, and LOUDLY announce it was the police. How about a loudspeaker? No bad guy is gonna use a loudspeaker, so that would eliminate the problem of bad guys imitating cops by saying police softly while battering down the door.

John Doe’s last blog post..Let us hope He changes
- Scott writes:
  February 6th, 2009 at 00:01 am
  
  I know you are not anti-cop. I don’t think anyone who has commented here is “anti-cop”. Just differing opinions. Which is kind of the whole point of blogging, to spark conversation.
  
  I don’t apologize for my opinions, and don’t expect anyone else to do so either. You’ve stated your argument and supporting cites. I appreciate your visit to my site even if we don’t see eye to eye. I am sure we will at some point, and I am sure we will disagree again.
  
  My hope is that no one feels bashful about their words and opinions here. It is the point of having an open comment section.
Sailorcurt writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 18:56 pm

Oh…there’s plenty more where that came from.

How about this one:

Deputy Christopher Long stood so close to Peyton Strickland when he fired his submachine gun through a door at the unarmed teenager that gunpowder peppered Strickland’s chest, according to an autopsy report released this week.

Wonder how that one turned out?

After more than two hours of discussions, a grand jury refused to indict the former sheriff’s deputy on manslaughter charges for the Dec. 1 shooting death of Peyton Strickland, a college student from Durham. With that, state Attorney General Roy Cooper declared the case closed.

Incidents like this aren’t as uncommon as some would seemingly think.
Archie writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 19:44 pm

Frederick should have been acquitted, no doubt in my mind. The officers breaking through his door were like lambs led to the slaughter; their superiors need to be drummed off the force; the top decision maker should be prosecuted.

The door was breached; someone was entering his home at night. He had committed no crime warranting such drastic measures. He had the right, the obligation even, to protect himself.

Frederick’s story was consistent. The prosecution’s stories went slip-slidding in numerous differing directions.

Archie’s last blog post..Volunteers gear up to offer free Tax-Aide service
- Cipher writes:
  February 8th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
  
  Let’s see:
  
  No one hears the police announce.
  Informant broke in and presumably stole half the illegal plants.
  These plants are never found.
  Informant says police never asked him to break in. (wink)
  Another prosecutor does the right thing, making the ones on the case look shady.
  Police officer sent out of town to avoid testimony prosecutor didn’t want heard.
  
  Not guilty would have been my verdict. Cops and prosecutors probably broke the law themselves on this one.
Archie writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 19:50 pm

Also, the performance of the Chesapeake Police reminded me of a gang of vigilante cowboys out for a lynching.
PrivatePigg writes:
February 5th, 2009 at 22:47 pm

“If the tables were turned, and it was a cop who shot blindly through a door, killing a civilian, I wonder how that would have turned out at a trial?”

Of course, there is a big difference between a cop entering someone else’s house and shooting blindly through a door, and a man who is in his own house that has just been recently burglarized and hears people entering his house (no knock and announce to let him know it is cops) and shoots into a door.

If I woke up tonight and heard someone in my house without a knock and announce (I would assume the police would knock and announce as they constitutionally must), in considering my sleeping children and my wife, I would not hesitate to put lead through the door, either.

Oh, and you sound like a moron when you tell a jury they have failed. Unless you sat in the courtroom and actually heard all of the evidence, viewed all of the witnesses to independently judge their credibility, and read all of the pleadings and jury instructions, you can consider yourself ignorant. Everyone knows that. Appellate judges often see cases with which they disagree but they refuse to overturn because they will not substitute their judgment for that of the people who sat through the trial. What good is a jury if you know better by reading the newspaper?

And everyone in your little poll disagrees with you. God, that must suck. 24% said it was the right verdict, and a whopping 56% said it should be less. Only 20% thought as you did.

And the jury, who clearly knew more than you, also disagreed with you. Hey, maybe you should call up the prosecutor’s office. They probably have a job for you.

First rule of blogging: don’t be dumb and pretend you know more than the people who were actually on scene.

Second rule of blogging: don’t put up a poll that proves you wrong.

Third rule of blogging: don’t ban people from your comments. It makes people like me come and leave comments, knowing you are trying to silence dissent.

Fourth rule of blogging: … well, I think three is probably enough for now. You’ve got your hands full.

PrivatePigg’s last blog post..Abortion Clinic Murders Live-Born Baby
- Scott writes:
  February 5th, 2009 at 23:34 pm
  
  PrivatePigg;
  
  Don’t assume things.
  
  Your rules of blogging:
  
  1. Are you sure I wasn’t on scene? Or not in the courtroom?
  2. Not my poll. HamptonRoads.com poll. Pay attention. That was a screenshot graphic not a poll which I created.
  3. Ban people? Who exactly has been banned? No one is banned from this blog. There are a couple of IP addresses based in Denmark or somewhere that are banned. No one else is. It is possible a comment was trapped by the spam filter. If you left one and it didn’t show up let me know and I’ll see if I can recover it.
  4. Couldn’t come up with anything witty to say?
  
  My rule number 5. Make sure YOU know what you are talking about before you spout off. I enjoy dissenting opinions. Archie, for instance, and I disagree on several things philosophically and politically. Yet we remain cordial and quite friendly.
  
  You on the other hand come on here with your sarcastic “Rules of Blogging” and attempts at sounding more than you actually are. Don’t do that. You look like a mental midget, though I doubt you are.
Sailorcurt writes:
February 6th, 2009 at 01:18 am

Ban people? Who exactly has been banned?

I’m afraid that was my fault.

The first comment I posted went right up. When I posted the second one and it didn’t come up (and I waited a couple of hours just to be sure) I thought you had banned me and posted about it on my blog.

Good on you for proving me wrong. Sorry I wasn’t patient enough.
- Scott writes:
  February 6th, 2009 at 07:00 am
  
  Ahhhhh… ok. Let me explain what happens. You have commented here before. Your first comment on this blog is held for moderation. Once it’s approved any future comments go right through.
  
  UNLESS, they have 2 or more links embedded in them. If that is the case, and is the case with your second comment on this thread, it is held for moderation.
  
  The justification behind this is most spam contains a multitude of links.
  
  Normally I check my email 3 or 4 times throughout the day but this week has been really really busy and I didn’t get to it till late.
  
  Two things.
  
  1. I am a sworn officer who happened to have IT skills the department needed. So I am flying a desk in our IT section.
  
  2. Thank you for being who you are and correcting and standing up about the banning. That is a character trait I admire in anyone, regardless of where we agree or disagree. Awesome!
  - PrivatePigg writes:
    February 6th, 2009 at 11:54 am
    
    Apology accepted.
    
    So were you in the courtroom? Did you see and hear all the jury did? Were you privy to all the evidence?
    
    PrivatePigg’s last blog post..Abortion Clinic Murders Live-Born Baby
Sailorcurt writes:
February 6th, 2009 at 09:01 am

1. I am a sworn officer who happened to have IT skills the department needed. So I am flying a desk in our IT section.

Roger that. I have read and commented on your stuff before. I tried to be clear that I was going from memory and, so could have been wrong.

The details really weren’t important because all I was trying to say is that I can understand where your sympathies come from being that you work with Police Officers, whether you are one yourself or not.

No offense intended.
- Scott writes:
  February 6th, 2009 at 09:35 am
  
  And none taken.
Broadsword writes:
February 6th, 2009 at 09:50 am

All this quarreling and bickering about who killed who, who shot who first, who should have or should not have opened fire at someone, or if only someone else had or had not shot some other person some other time would all have been avoided if only the police had simply set fire to Frederick’s house to burn up the pot inside, and shot him as he tried to flee. This should be obvious to all sensible, progressive people.
- Andy Black writes:
  February 6th, 2009 at 18:07 pm
  
  Ahhh, for the good ole days….
John Doe writes:
February 6th, 2009 at 14:41 pm

Scott, perhaps my problem is I watch too many “Cops” (and the like) videos. I’ve seen in actual real life that the cops knock on the door and yell “Police” about 5 seconds before they bash the door down. If somebody is in the washing machine room, or a basement, or DOZING ON THEIR BED WITH THE TV ON as in this case, they might not hear the police announce, and thus not know that it was cops (as opposed to druggies) who were bashing down his door.

And even the most hardened police/ex-police should admit that if Mr. Frederick did not know it was the police, then he had an absolute right to shoot through the door to stop whoever it was who was breaking in. In my opinion, either Frederick KNEW it was the cops, in which case he committed murder, or he DID NOT KNOW, in which case it was self-defense. If it had been actual druggies breaking in his door and one of them had been killed, there would have been no charges.

John Doe’s last blog post..Senator Stabenow has an ulterior motive for re-enacting the Fairness Doctrine
- Andy Black writes:
  February 6th, 2009 at 19:29 pm
  
  With all due respect, Mr. Doe, NO ONE has “an absolute right” to fire a weapon at an unknown target – not even the cops. All these folks spouting home protection are forgetting the word “responsibility” in such protection. The cowardly little sh&t should have waited until he saw who he was firing at before he squeezed-off a round!
John Doe writes:
February 7th, 2009 at 11:26 am

Sure, Andy, sitting behind your typewriter in the safety of your mommy’s home, you are a brave computer warrior. But with somebody seconds from busting your door down, and only a puny .380 between you and whatever big gun they might have, you would sing a different tune. People have an “absolute right” to defend themselves from reasonable fear of death or serious injury. What, is he to think that the people breaking in only want to be his friends? Hmmm. Mebbe it is the girl scouts breaking in to sell cookies? Or just a friend playing a prank? You either have rocks for brains, or yer a cop with so much bias that it interferes with what one hopes is otherwise usually a rational way of thinking.

John Doe’s last blog post..Senator Stabenow has an ulterior motive for re-enacting the Fairness Doctrine
- Joe writes:
  February 7th, 2009 at 11:56 am
  
  Uh oh… I know Andy. The man has more hours “under fire” than one man should have.
  
  Be careful. You know nothing about which you speak, especially from behind a John Doe moniker.
  
  Chicken shit.
  
  Personally, the professionalism of the CPD in this case is awe inspiring. From my Vietnam days, we would have burned that scrawny cop killing piece of shit to the ground with more automatic gunfire than anyone in CONUS has heard in many years.
- Andy writes:
  February 7th, 2009 at 17:54 pm
  
  This from a guy who’s afraid to use his real name, Mr. Doe? Perhaps Mr. Ho would be more appropriate…
  - m.d.murray writes:
    February 8th, 2009 at 09:46 am
    
    Yeah! Be careful Mr. Doe. Andy worked for years for a Sheriff accused of gun whipping and sexually assaulting a young African-American boy at the oceanfront. He was from Chesapeake too, right Andy?
    - Andy writes:
      February 8th, 2009 at 10:56 am
      
      Yes, he is from Chesapeake – and he was acquitted! But of course, giving a LEO the same benefit as you’d give the little Frederick puke would be too close to fair for your world wouldn’t it. m.d.?
Scott writes:
February 7th, 2009 at 11:59 am

Joe

Keep the language civil and at least PG. I don’t appreciate the foul language. We’ve had a heated debate here without much of that entering and I would prefer to keep it that way.

That being said. John Doe, trust me when I tell you that sitting behind a keyboard in “mommy’s” house is not something Andy does. And while I disagree with “Joe’s” language, his evaluation of Andy is dead on.

Andy has been in law enforcement for a long long time. His keyboard days are only lately after many many years in the badlands.

Scott…
Andy writes:
February 7th, 2009 at 18:00 pm

Joe and Scott,
Thanks for coming to my defense, but engaging in a duel of wits with John Doe is like shooting an unarmed man (of course, that would be cool with John if he was afraid…)

Andy (from mommy’s house)
Joey Aitken writes:
February 8th, 2009 at 08:33 am

Are you a complete idiot???? A nighttime raid for a marijuana growing operation with no marijuana. That was worth guns, death, and a media circus.. What if Frederick didn’t shoot, what did the police get? His house was in crack town. They have meth houses. Drugs on every other corner and this was the cops big bust… They got their own killed by shading, unwarranted, dangerous police work. Why not knock on the door in broad daylight with a warrant and tell him why you are there? That’s not tough enough for inadequate police officers that did everything wrong by the book. From the informants to a bothced raid. Remember there was NO BUST!!!!! Good job. The cops are so far from the bad guys as you are from the truth.

P.S. Sorry an officer got killed, but the police should punish their own. WAS it worth it???? WE The PEOPLE think not!!!!!!
- Andy writes:
  February 8th, 2009 at 10:32 am
  
  Well, Joey, I had no idea that we had such an expert on police procedure at our disposal. By, “crack town,” do you refer to South Norfolk? If so, I’m a bit confused. The retired chief of police lives less than a mile from Frederick’s house, as do many, many blue collar, hard working folks. But, I’m sure you know better, given your expertise in police matters (which I assume includes crime demographics).
  
  The cops “got their own killed,” by doing exactly what incorrectly? While it’s true that Frederick had disposed of his drugs, are you forgetting the drug growing paraphernalia that was seized? Why not knock on the door in broad daylight with a warrant, and tell him who you are and why your are there? Hells-bells, why not go even safer, and send him a registered letter asking him to please bring his pot and his growing gear on down to the PD when it’s convenient?
  
  I may not may not agree with current drug laws. I may think that the courts are farcical in way they decriminalize drugs once an arrest is made (by turning a crime into an illness by judicial decree). I may even think that legalization makes more sense in today’s climate of bailing-out everybody on God’s green earth. But I don’t think the cops should be blamed for the errors of the legislature and the courts – and I certainly don’t think the untrained masses are qualified to judge execution of police procedure. I haven’t seen a one of you self-professed experts recognize that the cops did not blow this little coward out of his socks after he killed Shivers. If these are the unprofessional rogues you all say they are, why was Frederick alive to stand trial?
  - m.d.murray writes:
    February 8th, 2009 at 10:53 am
    
    Joey and Mr. Doe, you guys are wasting you’re time with these guys. They’d fall on their swords before they would ever cross that blue line that separates us from them. Andy actually believes that they should be commended for not committing murder. WOW! Okay Mr.Black here it goes, thank you CPD for not committing murder on a homeowner defending his property. To bad VA doesn’t have Castle laws, we wouldn’t even had to worry about a trial then. Personally I believe Frederick when he says there was a hand reaching for the dead bolt. That’s most likely how the bullet got passed his vest. Or maybe that puny 380 packs that much punch when its shot thru a door.
    The best part is that Mr. Frederick will probably be out of prison in about 5 years and still be young enough to have a fruitful life.
    - Andy writes:
      February 8th, 2009 at 11:04 am
      
      Well, m.d., I’m glad you believe Frederick – everybody except cops needs somebody to believe in them. Of course, one problem with the premise “Poor Little Ryan” presents is that Shivers wasn’t even on the porch when he was killed! That makes your explanation somewhat absurd, and it totally fails to explain that – if there was someone reaching through the door – how the coward’s shot passed by him and hit Shivers. Maybe it was the same “magic bullet” that killed JFK??
      
      Also sir, even Castle Laws place the onus on the homeowner to know what he is shooting at – obviously the jury didn’t feel your boy met that burden…
      
      One final matter – the “thin blue line” separates you from anarchy. Not from cops.
      - m.d.murray writes:
        February 8th, 2009 at 11:41 am
        
        I guess that all depends on whose version of events one believes. You’re the expert Andy, please explain how a small caliper handgun was able to penetrate a bullet proof vest. Talk about a magic bullet. Didn’t I read somewhere that it entered in the arm pit? You tell me.
      - Andy writes:
        February 8th, 2009 at 11:50 am
        
        As I understand it, m.d., the bullet hit Jarrod in the upper arm/shoulder area (no vest protection there), traveled through his arm into his torso and struck a major artery and possibly his heart and lung(s). Vests are not total protection by any means – 2 of the last 3 officers killed in the line of duty in this area were wearing vests.
Jack Crimmins writes:
February 8th, 2009 at 09:35 am

Scott, saw the quote in today’s paper. Thanks for coming to the defense of the CPD.
m.d.murray writes:
February 8th, 2009 at 14:03 pm

I find it interesting that no forensic evidence was introduced at the trial especially by the prosecution. Which leaves me wondering, what are they hiding? Was an autopsy preformed? Are autopsy results available by FOIA requests?
Face it gentlemen, the majority of the public thinks CPD messed up and apparently the majority of the jury thought so too or they would have come back with something more punitive than voluntary manslaughter. There are no more William Randolph Hearst around to sell John Q Public a bill of goods on how dope smokers are a huge threat to society. This is just one of many nails that will go in the coffin on this so called war on drugs. The public supports you no longer when it comes to pot. The prosecution couldn’t even get a conviction on the intent to distribute charge. Pitiful.
- Andy writes:
  February 8th, 2009 at 14:47 pm
  
  m.d., your comments directed toward the “war on drugs” aimed at the cops is akin to that mental midget cindy sheehan aiming at the troops regarding the war policy in Iraq. What part of’ “the warrior doesn’t start the wars,” is unclear to you?
  
  How do you know that no forensic evidence was presented at trial? It would be the first murder trial that I ever heard of where the state didn’t introduce proof that the perp’s gun killed the victim. It’s called an element of the crime. Of course, the defense could have waived the presentation of that evidence if they conceded that it was frederick’s gun that killed Shivers.
  - mdmurray writes:
    February 9th, 2009 at 09:45 am
    
    Those warriors weren’t drafted. Thats a bunch of volunteers going into battle for a public that doesn’t give a rats ass about their lives. No warriors-no war.
    
    BTW, I meant the forensic evidence concerning where the bullet entered Shiver’s body. I never read anywhere that it came up during the trial.
John Doe writes:
February 8th, 2009 at 19:06 pm

Oh, so Andy is a cop and therefore we should bow down and worship what he says? I’ve encountered many cops, and they all seem about the same. They are Know It Alls, Perry Mason and Sherlock Holmes rolled into one. Take a few comments by the Genius formerly known as Andy. “He wasn’t even on the porch when he was killed.” So? Somebody was breaking down the door, and if Frederick didn’t know it was the cops, and was trying to defend himself, who cares where the guy was who was killed? I’m not dissing the officer, I’m saying it doesn’t matter. A bullet out the door, trying to defend yourself, hits somebody, terribly unfortunately, but that is not relevant. What is relevant was what the shooter knew and when he knew it.

“The cowardly little shit should have waited to see who he was shooting at…” Sure, tough guy, somebody is breaking down your momma’s house, you sit there and wait until you find out who it is, wait until he can see you and see what he is aiming at before you do anything. Yeah, right. Maybe, if you had your bullet proof vest on. Maybe, if yer a big tough cop. But Frederick was a 120 lb weakling. Get a freaking brain, stop talking from your heart, and put yourself in his place. All you can see is “one of us got killed.” That is a terrible tragedy. But sending somebody up the river for 10 years is a tragedy, too. I’d be right in there defending the cop if under the circumstances he had mistakenly, tragically, killed a citizen but if under the circumstances it was not his fault.

Let’s have a little test. We’ll let big man sit inside his house, WITHOUT his bullet proof vest, and let some dopers with automatic rifles break in his front door, and some cops break in his door. He won’t get to know how many there are, and what they are packing. He won’t get his usual .40 cal auto or whatever he is used to, he gets a little peon .380 and we won’t let him be used to it, instead it has to be something he isn’t used to because he is just an ordinary citizen. Let’s put it just out of reach, like under the couch, to give him a little handicap like the rest of us are used to. He won’t be allowed the hindsight to know which is which. Guess wrong, yer dead, big man. Oooops. You thought it was the cops. Instead, it was 3 guys with sawed off shotguns, Glock 9 mms and a plain old revolver. Hey, but at least you “waited” until you could see who they were. And guess what, big man? If you guessed wrong, and thought they were bad guys instead of cops? Sorry, big man, yer in jail! Come on, which is it gonna be, big man. Make your choice, dead or alive?

John Doe’s last blog post..Dork in Chief: I WON but it should have been I LIED and VOTERS WERE DUPED
- Andy writes:
  February 8th, 2009 at 20:01 pm
  
  You really are sad, Doe. Perhaps counseling may help? Nope, I’m sure you would know more than the counselor…
John Doe writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 08:09 am

Since we have all these so called experts on this board, how about you put your heads together and come up with better procedure? What is wrong with announcing the cops are at the front door with a bull horn. Several times? What is wrong with having all the cop cars lit up, sirens blasting? If the object is to have the man come to the door and let the cops in, how’s about waiting long enough for him to get to the front door and actually answer it? Or, you could all sit back and act like the know it alls you have so far–TRUST US, we are the cops, and we know more than you do–swagger, swagger. Sorry, Andy, I don’t defer common sense to anybody. Neither does our legal system. That’s why we have a jury sitting in judgment on Frederick instead of a bunch of know all cops and ex cops.

John Doe’s last blog post..Dork in Chief: I WON but it should have been I LIED and VOTERS WERE DUPED
- Andy writes:
  February 9th, 2009 at 08:18 am
  
  …and the jury, despite believing the little puke’s story about not knowing it was the cops, still said he didn’t have the right to fire indiscriminately – which brings us back to your original inaccurate premise. Look in the yellow pages under “mental health counselors,” John Boy.
Joey A writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 09:27 am

I have lived in Chesapeake my whole life. I know there are plenty of drug dealers in THE SAME neighborhood. Not Pot, but CRACK!!!!!!! I challenge anybody to ride a mile radius around the Frederick area at night. Nobody heard them yell cops. Its a sad case but a huge error on the incompetent police department. They should publish every successful raid in Chesapeake, because I never see the scumbags get busted. Sorry if I affend anybody living in that area, but the cops would focus on the crack and meth epidemic in SOUTH NORFOLK or URBAN CHESAPEAKE we would all feel safer even FREDERICK. His surroundings were more dangerous at night, the same time a marijuana raid was ordered. I guess the cops thought he was going to flush the lights, plants, and marijuana down the toliet in about 10 seconds. They could have cut the power off, the water off in broad daylight and knocked on the door. Oh that would not be exciting enought since they NEVER have any significant raids.
mdmurray writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 09:56 am

Andy starts losing the argument and has to resort to insults. Whats a matter old man? Is the world passing you by? Changing a little to fast for you now? Juries ain’t what they used to be, are they? Well hell, back in your day I bet juries were made up of just good christian white men that all believed everything that came out of a cops mouth. But these days, oh noooo, they let women, homosexuals, and even black people sit on a jury. I bet that just rocks your little narrow world, doesn’t it? Especially when a jury gives a guy that killed a cop only voluntary manslaughter.
- Andy writes:
  February 9th, 2009 at 16:51 pm
  
  md, look-up “bigot” in the dictionary (that big book you are sitting on reach the keyboard) – is there a picture of you there?
- Andy writes:
  February 9th, 2009 at 18:04 pm
  
  One other thought for you to ponder, md” Did I get this old being stupid or wimpy (I use my real name, piss-willy!)?
Scott writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 10:08 am

The comments on this article are going to expire today and they will be closed.
Stan writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 11:53 am

It seems pretty simple to me, don’t bust down peoples doors and you won’t get shot at.
John Doe writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 12:27 pm

All I can say is that I am so sorry for the widow and children. It was a tragic event, and I wish that it would never have occurred. I would love it if the police would learn from this event, but from the tone of the comments, I don’t see much chance of that occurring. Instead of trying to prevent it, the police are probably trying to prevent the next homeowner from “only” being convicted of manslaughter.

John Doe’s last blog post..The Messiah can walk on water
Andy writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 17:51 pm

There’s an old saying in the justice system (you “experts” won’t get it): “Often a jury is composed of 12 people too stupid to get off jury duty.”
John Doe writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 19:58 pm

There is an old saying. Those too stupid to become Judges, lawyers, and politicians become police chiefs. And they make stupid rules that get good cops dead.

John Doe’s last blog post..The Messiah can walk on water
- Andy writes:
  February 9th, 2009 at 20:24 pm
  
  How old are you, you infantile dipsh*t???
Jumbo Jim writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 23:44 pm

Scott,

Your article states that Ryan Frederick is a “cold blooded killer”, making it sound like he took Det. Shivers hostage and shot him execution style in cold blood. Obviously that was not the case. Your attempted smear of Frederick greatly diminishes the weight of your argument and any respect I may have had for you when I entered this blog.
Then you go on to berate the jury! Citizens, tax payers, and voters of Chesapeake who held fast to their duties of attending the trial, listening to all the testimony, taking notes, weighing the evidence, even requesting additional opportunities to review parts of the evidence. . . and you attack these citizens with claims that everyone one of them “FAILED MISERABLY.” Your crass opinion that they “failed the family of Detective Shivers, Police Officers, the City of Chesapeake, the Commonwealth of Virginia and this Nation,” is beyond belief!!! Personally, I applaud them for taking their duty seriously and being able to get 12 people to agree on a verdict. And to the other posters who ridicule them as “too stupid to get out of jury duty” – again, beyond belief. I guess it goes to show how much patriotism and sense of duty you have for your community and country. Personally, I would be proud to serve on this or any other jury. . . of course, unlike you, I am proud of my country – as my 26 years in the military may reflect.
Scott, you also question how this case would have turned out if it had been a cop who shot blindly through a door and killed a civilian. Obviously, from the other cases pointed out in these comments, we all know there would have never been a trial. If that had been the case, I’m sure you, and Andy, and many of Chesapeake’s citizens would have read a short article in the paper about it and just thought to yourselves, “Well, just another drug-crazed lawbreaker biting the dust – good riddance” Right? Can you even name a case where a cop actually went to prison for wrongfully/negligently shooting a citizen? (Other than the Border Guards who were railroaded for shooting an illegal drug smuggler at the border, I only know of one such case involving police – Atlanta).

I think the failure of this particular raid and court trial lays at the feet of the CPD brass and their warrant policies, the detective in charge of this case/raid (Rogers?), police officers and detectives who either feel like a badge is a license to play Rambo/SS/Billy-Bad-Ass whenever they want or blindly follow what they know are poor/dangerous policies without raising questions/solutions for improvement, and people like Jack Crimmins and Andy who perpetuate Chicago-style corruption in police departments. Those are the people who are just as responsible for Det. Shiver’s death as Ryan Frederick. I wonder how that detective (Rogers) sleeps at night and lives with the knowledge that he went to the magistrate for a warrant with bogus, unsworn testimony from a liar snitch (Wright) knowing in the back of his mind that Wright HAD IN FACT gathered that evidence illegally by breaking and entering… and that warrant, combined with cowboy police work led to the failed raid. Do you think Detective Rogers (or the Police Chief for that matter) can sleep well at night, knowing he put people like Frederick and Shivers into that fateful position that night when the whole operation could have been done during daylight hours as Frederick was either going to or returning from work, without a weapon drawn nor shot fired? Or if he’d have held back on ordering the Rambo/GI Joe/SS tactics on that front door and allowed Frederick enough time to answer it. How does he cope with what he really knows about this entire case? I wish him God’s Blessings and Forgiveness, and the ability to forgive and live with himself.

Jim
Jumbo Jim writes:
February 9th, 2009 at 23:52 pm

To correct my statement above, I believe that it was Detective Roberts (not Rogers) who was in charge of this raid/case.
Jumbo Jim writes:
February 10th, 2009 at 00:25 am

My deepest, heartfelt condolences to Mrs Shivers and her children.
May God bless them with love, understanding, healing compassion and the ability to forgive, as He embraces Detective Shivers with eternal life in Heaven.

» Substance: WordPress » Style: Ahren Ahimsa