Informant: Detective told him to look for plants at house

We can of course argue the point but it really doesnt matter to me what he was wearing under his properly marked light green tactical vest that plainly diplayed "POLICE" all over it w/ a Badge in Plain view and a helmet with "POLICE" written on it in a similar fashion. The evidence has been presented. Everyone has already seen what he was wearing. The Jury has seen the vest and the helmet so lets move on.

But, yes, I have tried criminal cases in 6 of the seven cities in Hampton Roads. Trying to interpret the code online without years of study and practice is an enormous undertaking sierra.

You need to get the facts right. ONE. There is no evidence, other then the jailhouse snitch, that RF looked out the window and saw a marked police car. In fact, one of the detectives involved in the Raid, stated he saw movement at the window and a dog's head. TWO. Were you inside RF's home the night of the Raid, becuase unless you were, there is only one person who can say if the CPD's announcements were heard and he was in a back bedroom asleep when it started and then the dogs were barking, so it is highly probable that RF never heard the CPD's announcements. THREE, as mentioned numerous times, Det Shivers was wearing a hoodie and the vest shown only had a small patch on the front. Although there was a large POLICE patch on the back, he was facing the house and it would not have been visable. And this was 8:30 at night in January so it was dark. I have not heard what the lighting conditions were in front of RF's house other then one Det used his light to help the officers assisting DET Shivers after the shooting. When you start yelling for a conviction at lease have the facts right.

Siera159,

You are wrong- Det. Shivers was wearing a hooded Quiksilver sweatshirt.

By the way this raid was carried out you would of thought a major player in the local drug world was being busted not some skinny little pot head!

"Even if he doesn't meet the criteria for self defense (someone posted the Virgina code for that)?"

Someone posted it incorrectly.

I suggest you refer to the VCDL dot org page and look at their explanation. There is no specific code, only interpretation of case law.

I was wondering when the defense will start making their case and how long will that last? Anybody have a feel for that

Respectfully, I think you left out the part "or should have known". The reasonable person knew or should have known it was the police is probably what you meant to say. In short they have to prove that RF is the "reasonable person" the Law is talking about. Aside from the fact that they have to overcome all the pot smoking, growing and selling. He has to also overcome the fact that he looked out the window where a Marked Police car was sitting. He has to overcome the fact that they were yelling "Police Search Warrant" while they were hitting the door with the ram no doubt. And he has to overcome the fact that all the Officers, not just Detective Shivers, were in fact wearing clothing that has "POLICE" plainly visible all over it. I think you would have to agree that the reasonable person standard is pretty high in this case.

Just currious, does CPD have a physical agility test that their officers have to take each year? I've notice what seems to be a lot of CPD uniform officers looking kinda heavy. If you look at the pictures from this article, there are two detectives with RF as he is coming out of his house. Can these guys pass an agility test? Just wondering what the weight restrictions are, I don't mean any harm it's just something that poped into my head when I saw the picture.

Why is it that no one as been brought forth to say he was growing and selling and that he was out to shot a cop, that did not have a record, and that is not in jail as we speak. Yeah lets believe EVERYTHING that they have to say..I bet if you ask more people in jail and let them know that they will get a break if they say they knew something about Ryan, I bet a lot of CRIMINALS that will jump on that..

I would love to see your Bar card. Do you practice Criminal Law in the City of Virginia Beach???

Just food for thought,, yes it is sad, that A man lost his life a wife lost her husband and children lost there father. But as someone who knows Ryan, he has lost his life too, because even when and if he gets out he will not be able to go on as if nothing has happened. He is not that kind of person. And just a thought, what since does it make to know that the cops are coming and know that your are going to shot on, but go through the trouble of getting rid of all the drugs.. Yeah go to jail for life for murder, but don't go to jail for a few years for drug.. yeah that sounds smart..

"then if the jury believes someone breaking through your door constitutes a reasonable belief of danger of serious harm, self defense applies."

Even if he doesn't meet the criteria for self defense (someone posted the Virgina code for that)? Can a jury make that determination?

I'm asking because I don't know the law and I know you've done research, also it appears we have at least one attorney on the forum.

You are correct about the remaining issues except for the standard of proof.

The prosecution must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that Frederick willfully, deliberately and with premeditation, killed a police officer in the lawful pursuit of his duties. That will be a high hurdle.

Self defense is an affirmative defense, in that the burden of proof that it was self defense as he saw it, is on the defense, but not beyond reasonable doubt. He must only prove that a reasonable person, in his situation, would believe he was in peril.

If it cannot be proved he knew it was police, which is the prosecution's burden, then if the jury believes someone breaking through your door constitutes a reasonable belief of danger of serious harm, self defense applies.

Lying to police, burglary, conspiracy to manufacture marijuana, conspiracy to distribute marijuana and he has not been charged for these crimes. Motivation enough to lie again.

The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt right? Is that what you were saying? I hope so cuz a few jurors got that wrong during jury selection.

This case is full of reasonable doubt.

There is proof that he was growing marijuana. His own attorney has stated as such. There's the equipment and books, and while legal, the equipment had marijuana residue. If that's not evidence, I don't know what is. If I were a juror, I'd find him guilty of manufacturing.

They have NOT proven, as far as I can tell from these reports, that he was selling it, nor have they proved how much (or how significant) of an operation he had.

This is the least of his worries anyway.

The major crux of this trial is whether he knew it was the police at his door, that he was shooting in what he felt was self-defense, and proving it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Were I able to pick and choose who would be on my side of this debate, in many cases I would choose otherwise. There is no need to be insulting.

Frederick, through his attorney in his opening, has already admitted to using marijuana and having grown some for his own use. The remaining question is whether his efforts were sufficient for a commercial operation. I have no personal expertise in that matter, but some who apparently do claim it was not even close.

There is nothing magic about a door. Self defense is valid is there is a reasonable perception of peril from the point of view of the defendant. An EXTREME example would be a threatening person in your front yard with a bazooka pointed at you. Would you still claim it was necessary to wait for him to come inside before defending yourself? Does a broken out panel with something that might be a hand sticking through meet that test? I would say that when you have only seconds to decide, yes. A few minutes delay would change everything.

Some of the comments are so ignorant and misinformed that it is frightening. No arm ever came through the door! This has been established over and over again. Det Shivers was on the lawn. Please don't bother posting unless you know some facts. Hopefully the jury will rely on facts and we will get a murderer and dealer of the streets. I had no idea that there were so many in favor of drugs in this area. I guess the Police have a lot of job security here.

So Ryan Fredrick is the only one telling the truth and selling pot is a good character reference compared to everyone else's stories. To argue character is small minded and ignornant