Ryan Frederick Saga Quote of the Day

Bill219014 gets the quote of the day with his response to this vapid and pointless rant written by Kerry Dougherty and regurgitated in the Virginian Pilot this weekend:

What’s cooking at the Chesapeake city jail?

Spectators couldn’t help but wonder about that last week as they gawked at Ryan Frederick during his capital murder trial.

I mean, how often does an inmate pack on about 60 pounds behind bars?

Umm…by spending a year sitting in a 9′ x 5′ cell for 23 hours of every 24 maybe?

On Thursday, prosecutors tried to focus attention on Frederick’s weight, hinting that the beefy 29-year-old might have kept thin in the past by abusing drugs that cause weight loss. The prosecution posed hypothetical questions to an expert witness about whether cessation of methamphetamines or cocaine might result in rapid weight gain.

I didn’t realize that hints were considered evidence in murder trials. I thought evidence had to consist of…well…evidence. Silly me.

The sheer stupid in this column was palpable.

But Bill’s response was priceless and earned him the coveted quote of the day award here at COACOO (as the eminent sayuncle refers to this humble blog):

Actually, the sad thing is that this column probably presents some of the BEST evidence against Frederick. Consider:

-The testimony of Det. Roberts, who either flat-out lied about what Stephen Wright told him, or is the most gullible cop to walk the face of the earth.

-Stephen “You Can Trust Me THIS Time” Wright’s own testimony.

-The ham-handed interrogation by Det. Winkelspecht, in which he provides more information to Frederick than he elicits from him, not to mention his self-justifying editorializing, which is always useful in an investigation.

-And of course, “I’d like to think his testimony is reliable” Skeeter, who has info regarding the JFK assassination and the faked Apollo 11 moon landing for anyone who cares to listen.

Heckuva job, Kerry.

Ouch. That’s gonna leave a mark.

Ryan Frederick Update

More from John Willburn, who’s been present at the trial the whole time.

Some very interesting stuff. First of all, it appears that the prosecutor, who I’ve contended all along was more interested in getting a conviction and avenging the death of a Police Officer than in justice, has been lying to the court.

Judge Arrington agreed with the prosecution that only those items listed on the warrant, measurements, drawings and pictures, were subject to discovery. There were none to turn over as the only record, we were told, was the video.

But in arguing against admitting the video, Prosecutors Ebert and Conway denied any still pictures had been taken. Willet said nothing to the contrary.

Surprisingly, today, the prosecution entered the video into evidence, with the consent of the defense. I was there to watch. As the video played, I noted flashes from a camera. As the video progressed, there were at least fifty of these flashes. A photographer in a yellow windbreaker was visible several times taking still pictures, once even moving Prosecutor Ebert aside so he could line up his shot.

So, twice, in open court, the Prosecutors looked Judge Arrington in the eye and denied still pictures, which were clearly subject to discovery, existed, finally delivering them to the defense only after it became obvious when they saw the video that they did in fact exist.

Today, he reports on yesterday’s proceedings where Ryan Frederick himself testified. I have to admit that some of my conclusions during the course of this case have been wrong. I never really believed that Frederick was growing pot. I thought that was nothing more than the Police misinterpreting the tools of a hobby gardener. I was wrong about that. Frederick admitted to growing small amounts of pot for his own personal use. He denies selling it and, from what I’ve heard about the cultivation of pot, I believe him. I don’t think it is reasonable to believe that he had nearly enough equipment or space for a commercial grow operation.

With that said, even though Frederick obviously is not a saint, I still believe that the Police raid was unnecessary and irresponsible, that accepting the word of a criminal for the basis for such a raid is unsupportable and that the Police are using tactics that are unethical at best and possibly even illegal, in employing criminals to “find” evidence for them. This type of “police work” is patently a violation of the principles of freedom. Unfortunately, most people either don’t care because they aren’t criminals and don’t think it could ever happen to them, or agree with the tactics because, as far as they are concerned, the Police can do no wrong and if people weren’t criminals they wouldn’t be subjected to these types of attacks. Because of the lack of public outcry about these types of tactics, they are unlikely to change.

At any rate, it is all up to the jury at this point and who they find credible. The account of Frederick’s testimony is a little long, but, for those interested in this case, worth the read so I’ll not excerpt it here except for the author’s conclusion:

He was an entirely credible witness – everything he said was obviously true.

Ryan Frederick Update

Radley Balko’s doing a great job of keeping up with this and I can’t improve on anything he had to say so just head on over there for his take.

I will add, however, that an article in the paper today says that the visit to Frederick’s home was not canceled, but delayed in order to give the judge, attorney’s and Frederick time to visit the home to:

determine if any items were lying around that would be inappropriate for the jury to see.

Probably a good idea for the defense. Frederick hasn’t been in the home for months. The Police have had free access to it and so have the prosecutors. I’m not [italicized word added as a correction after initial posting -ed] saying the Police may have planted anything, but they may have left something laying around that could impugn the character of Frederick while being irrelevant to the case (how many people have potentially embarrassing things…magazines, pictures, um…marital aids…stashed away somewhere that could be embarrassing, but have nothing to do with whether you are a violent drug dealer?).

With that said…based upon the conduct of the prosecutor so far (withholding evidence and lying about what it contained to justify withholding it, sending an officer who’s testimony directly contradicts the prosecutor’s opening statement off to Georgia for “training”, trying to get a change of venue to ensure that the STATE gets a “fair trial”, etc), it wouldn’t surprise me overly if they intentionally left anything embarrassing they may have found out in plain view for the jury to see.

The delay was a good idea.

More coverage of the Frederick Trial

A MUST READ account of testimony from Doc Tabor at Tidewater Liberty, who was present at the trial.

An excellent piece by J.D. Tucille at the Examiner regarding the reliability of “jailhouse testimony” claiming that Frederick was bragging about the crime afterward.

And Radley Balko’s take over at The Agitator.

Good stuff if you’re keeping up with this case.

What the…????

Can someone please explain to me the relevance of the testimony of the wife of Detective Jarrod Shivers to the Ryan Frederick Case?

In tearful testimony Thursday morning, Nicole Shivers told the jury how she met her husband on a blind date and they married in 1997. She described how he was always looking to better himself in his career and said t hat’s why he took the assignment in the Special Investigations Section, handling drug and vice cases.

Nicole Shivers said the final time she saw her husband alive was the morning of his death, Jan. 17, 200 8. He was sleeping, and she was rushing off to work. They spoke several times that day by phone, the last time about an hour before the 8:30 p.m. raid at Frederick’s home.

Nicole Shivers’ testimony was brief, and defense attorneys did not cross-examine her.

How, specifically, will hearing about how Detective Shivers met his wife and the last time they saw and spoke with each other help the jury determine whether Frederick premeditatedly killed Detective Shivers in cold blood as he is accused of doing, or was simply defending his home from what he perceived to be a criminal assalt?

It’s almost like the prosecution is trying to get the jury to let their emotions rule the day rather than the evidence and facts of the case.

Any trial lawyers out there? Why would the judge allow such obviously irrelevant testimony be presented?

Neither Detective Shiver’s relationship with his wife, nor even his character or conduct as a police officer are in question here. All that is in question is whether Ryan Frederick knew that it was police officers that he was shooting at when he fired the fatal shot.

That’s it.

I’m no lawyer, but that seems to me to be grounds for an appeal right there. Anyone out there have any insight into this?

Opeing Arguments in the Ryan Frederick Trial

Report in the Virginian Pilot.

No real surprises:

Ryan Frederick was “stoned out of his mind” and “in an angry, blind rage” when he killed a Chesapeake detective during a drug raid a year ago and later told a jail inmate that if he had more ammunition, “he would have taken them all down,” a prosecutor told jurors Wednesday.

Frederick’s attorney, James Broccoletti, told the jury a different version, saying there was no evidence Frederick was stoned that night and a detective will testify that Frederick was sober during questioning.

With his dogs barking and his television blaring, Frederick never heard officers yelling “police,” Broccoletti said. Officers pulled up in unmarked vans and wore dark clothing. Frederick also never saw any police insignia. The word “police” wasn’t visible on Shivers’ clothing, he said.

Update on Ryan Frederick

From Dr. Tabor at Tidewater Liberty.

The most telling revelation for me was this:

We then learned, in response to a question by the defense, that the alleged marijuana plants which were claimed to have been removed from the garage in the burglary were not turned over to the police, and have not been verified to have even been marijuana or even to have existed at all.

No plants were recovered at the time of the raid.

There’s much more, so read the whole thing.

I knew no plants were recovered during the raid, but a doubt about Frederick’s innocence was introduced when the Prosecutor and police revealed that the “burglars” had reportedly stolen half of the marijuana plants from Frederick before tipping the Police about the “grow operation.”

The implication was, of course, that the “tipsters” had turned over at least some of the marijuana plants to the Police. The implication, however, appears at this point to be false. No plants were ever turned over to the Police, which means we are back to square one.

The Police executed a dynamic raid on a citizen with a full time job and no criminal record on nothing more than the word of your typical street criminal who also happened to have a grudge against the victim of the raid. No investigation was conducted, cursory looks at the house before the raid identified no unusual activity and the warrant may very well have been (I would say “was probably”, but I’m trying to offer the benefit of the doubt) obtained under false pretenses.

I return to the contention that the tragic death of Detective Jarrod Shivers falls squarely at the feet of the Chesapeake Police Department and that Ryan Frederick is nothing more than a scape goat.

Dr. Tabor also reported a ruling that the prosecution does not have to show their tapes of the crime re-enactment over to the defense. I agree with his assessment of that action: Why would the prosecution withhold something like that? Could it be that the re-enactment doesn’t completely jibe with the charges being made? Like…for instance…Detective Shivers WAS actually in the act of crawling through the broken door when he was shot, versus standing on the front step or on the front lawn as has been contended in the days since?

There is no way to know, but the re-enactment is generally done fairly soon after an event like this so that the memories of those involved are as fresh as possible. The re-enactment should, therefore, logically be considered the most accurate representation of what actually happened. Why would that be something to withhold from the defense?

Anyway, it occurs to me that the Police and Prosecutor are not seeking justice…they are seeking vengeance…and they are seeking to cover their own butts.

One step closer to justice?

[Update] More info from WAVY TV 10. [/Update]

The prosecution’s change of venue motion in the Ryan Frederick Case was denied.

Judge Marjorie A.T. Arrington ruled this afternoon that the trial of Ryan Frederick – who is accused of killing a city police detective – will stay in Chesapeake.

Arrington said the Circuit Court will attempt to seat a jury in Chesapeake for the trial scheduled to start Jan. 20. If it is unable to, she will consider a change of venue then.


As far as I’m concerned, this is a very good sign that the judge is going to treat this case fairly. If the prosecution’s case is sound, there is no reason to suspect that a Chesapeake Jury won’t be able to evaluate the evidence and reach a fair decision. I believe that the Prosecution’s motion was nothing more than an attempt to go “jury shopping” and get the case moved to a location that is less apt to be sympathetic to the plight of this man.

This trial needs to be held here and it needs to be held publicly. We cannot let our employees in government get away with brushing this under the rug. There are still way too many questions about the tactics of dynamic entry and the policies of the Chesapeake Police Department in general and the conduct of the officers in this case specifically.

To donate to Ryan Frederick’s defense fund there is a link in the sidebar. For previous posts on this subject, click the “Ryan Frederick” label at the bottom of this post.