Posted on 02/05/2009 12:54:18 PM PST by pgkdan
By Tim McGlone
The Virginian-Pilot
© February 5, 2009
CHESAPEAKE
The trial of Ryan Frederick in the shooting death of a police officer - a case that tore apart two families and a community - left all sides disappointed Wednesday.
The jury refused to convict Frederick of capital murder but recommended a maximum 10-year prison term for voluntary manslaughter.
Family, friends and colleagues of Detective Jarrod Shivers, shot and killed by Frederick on Jan. 17, 2008, wept in astonishment as the jury returned its verdict. Across the aisle, Frederick's family and supporters were relieved.
About an hour later, the jury returned with its recommended sentence, and the emotions turned.
"Yes!" could be heard from a number of people on the Shivers side.
Those on Frederick's side began to weep.
Sheryl Morales, an aunt of Frederick's, initially said she was grateful about the verdict.
"I knew he was telling the truth from the beginning," she said. "I was hoping for the best. An acquittal would have been better."
After the sentencing, she ran from the courthouse in tears. Only a friend of Frederick's remained to talk.
"I think it's a shame that a good young man like Ryan Frederick should spend 10 years in prison with a bunch of thugs," said the friend, who identified himself as Frederick Stump. "I feel sorry for the Shivers family, but I also feel sorry for Ryan."
Special prosecutor Paul Ebert said Shivers' family "was very upset" and did not want to talk afterward.
"I think it's just an extreme tragedy," he said.
Frederick could have faced life in prison for a capital murder conviction. Instead, the jurors opted for voluntary manslaughter, a charge defined as a killing in the heat of passion and one of the other options given to them by the judge before the deliberations began. Afterward, neither side said the verdict was appropriate.
"The people decided he was not acting in self-defense but in the heat of passion," Ebert said. "That's usually two people in a fight. There was no fight here."
Frederick's attorney, James Broccoletti, though grateful his client didn't get a capital murder conviction, agreed that this was not a "heat of passion" killing.
He vowed to appeal, saying the 10-year maximum sentence reflected the jury's "outrage and emotion" but ignored his client's clean record and character.
"This case isn't over by a long shot," he said.
The jury acquitted Frederick of use of a firearm in the commission of murder. It did convict him of misdemeanor possession of marijuana and recommended a 30-day jail sentence and a $500 fine.
The jury rejected the prosecution's contention that Frederick was growing marijuana for distribution, apparently disregarding the testimony of Steven Rene Wright, a police informant who turned in Frederick.
The victim's widow, Nicole Shivers, sat in the front row on each of the trial's 12 days. She testified at the start of the trial and wanted to testify during the sentencing phase but was too distraught, Ebert said.
As she waited for the jury to return with the sentence, she clutched tissues and wept silently into the shoulders of her family and friends. She left the courtroom before the sentence was read.
The panel also apparently rejected the testimony of jailhouse informant Jamal Skeeter, who also goes by Jamaal. He testified that Frederick said in jail that he saw the police outside his home before he fired.
That was the only evidence the prosecution presented to show that Frederick knew police were outside, but Skeeter's reputation sank after the defense discovered Skeeter's history as a frequent witness looking to shave time off his 14-year prison term.
Circuit Court Judge Marjorie A.T. Arrington set the formal sentencing date for May 8. She can opt to suspend some of the jury's recommended sentence.
For the Shivers family and the Police Department, the verdict did not provide closure.
"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."
After the verdict, Ebert, the special prosecutor from Prince William County, pleaded with the jury to give the family solace and "sheer retribution" by recommending the maximum 10-year sentence for manslaughter.
In tearful testimony during the sentencing phase, Shivers' father and sister described what the last year has been like.
Jennifer Shivers of Oakland, Calif., said Shivers' young son often runs to the front door wondering when his dad is coming home, and his oldest daughter still has nightmares of her dad trapped in a box.
"It kills me," she said.
James R. Shivers of Downingtown, Pa., told the jury about his son's childhood heroes, how he volunteered as a firefighter at 16 and then served in the Navy for eight years before dedicating a career to police work.
He recalled how, two months before he died, his son insisted on a family portrait with all four generations of Shiverses in the picture. He held up the picture for the jury to see.
"Everybody has been healing a little bit every day," he told the jury.
"We may never be completely healed," he continued. "I've never been through this before."
shouldn't it have been taken into account that this guy was doing something illegal and then compounded it by killing someone?.....
I made the mistake of posting a story about it here. Never again as you can see by your first reply as to why I know better.
but reply #3 is fine?
I'm not biting, I'll just lurk on this one
No.
Shouldn't it be taken into consideration that:
A. The accused had a clean criminal record?
B. The accused was a full time employed productive member of his community?
C. The accused was entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty and therefore should not have had his home invaded by police in the middle of the night?
Are you telling me that the police have the right in this country to storm a man's house in the middle of the night without warning?
Yeah, pretty much.
Sitting at home with some weed.
PERIOD.
And now a cop’s dead.
Maybe the cops and the people that order them ought to rethink their approach and tactics to this WO(S)D?
I think everyone in the chain of command in the Chesapeake Police Dept needs to be investigated in this affair. These tactics stink...this kind of an assault is a dead cop waiting to happen and in this instance it happened.
Seems to me that whoever ordered the cops to raid him, in plain clothes, at 0200, should be charged with reckless endangerment. At least.
I said it was an interesting one.
This story surprised me. When I first heard the details I thought "what a stupid way to serve a warrant". The citizens of Chesapeake obviously felt the same way and this guy has received alot of support from the community. They mourn the death of the detective but they also recognize that the tactics employed in this situation were way, way out of line.
Agreed.
They thought mere posession was enough to come in with SWAT.
That should say it all.
If the cops paid the man to break into the house, the charge should have been against the cops.
I’m all for a murder conviction.
For whoever it was that sent plainclothes cops to kick in a peaceful man’s door in the middle of the night.
Frederick had a day job. It would have been the easiest thing in the world to call them up, find out when his shift started, and send a uniformed officer to serve the warrant in the parking lot. No drama, no danger, and no oppurtunity for a bunch of shaved headed thugs to play Rambo on sleepy civilians.
If what you say is accurate, it would have been a not guilty verdict from me.
I’m sorry the cop lost his life and for the losses by his family, but that is not reason enough to convict a man of a crime for which he is innocent.
Any takers on a bet that his widow and his other relatives file lawsuits against the city? They will be filed by the end of the month and allege improper training and supervision. It will be a slam dunk case and the city will pay out big bucks, which will provide further evidence that the attempted service of the original warrant was FUBAR.
I’m not 100% sure that the guy who broke in didn’t plant the marijuana. If he was willing to go that far, why not one step further? Suppose he broke in and didn’t find anything? Better to come prepared.
“The accused was growing pot in his house.”
I’ve read it was alleged he was growing pot plants in his garage. I’ve not read it was proven. Do you have a source?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.