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?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.