Posted on 04/05/2002 8:59:46 PM PST by freespeech1
Frank Zito says he shot police because they broke his door
* Outburst comes during evidence suppression hearing; ruling due today
By: BRIAN HAAS, Staff Writer April 04, 2002
FRANK ZITO ... faces death penalty
SALISBURY - "If they didn't break into my door, I wouldn't have shot them," Frank Zito blurted out Wednesday at a hearing to suppress evidence in Zito's murder trial.
Attorneys for both sides argued in Wicomico County Circuit Court whether several pieces of evidence, including several alleged admissions by Zito, should be allowed in the jury trial. Circuit Judge Donald C. Davis said he should issue a ruling on the motion to suppress evidence sometime today.
Zito, 41, of Centreville, faces the death penalty on two first-degree murder charges and several other felony and misdemeanor charges.
Police allege that he shot and killed Centreville Patrolman Michael S. Nickerson and Dfc. Jason Schwenz, of the Queen Anne's County Sheriff's Office. The two officers went to investigate a noise complaint in February of 2001 when police say Zito shot both officers with a shotgun.
Zito has pleaded not guilty and not criminally responsible to the charges against him.
Judge Davis heard testimony from several police officers and Wicomico County Detention Center employees as to what happened Feb. 13 and Feb. 14, 2001.
Maryland State Police Trooper Corey Skidmore was the first officer to testify and the only witness to the shooting. Skidmore said he arrived to back up Nickerson and Schwenz who were trying to get Zito to come out of his house.
After being threatened, the officers got a key to Zito's trailer from his mother, Betty Zito, who was also Zito's landlady, Skidmore said. He said Zito's mother told the officers to get Zito out "by any means necessary."
After the three officers broke through a storm door and entered Zito's screen porch, Schwenz opened the front door with the key, Skidmore said.
As the door opened, Schwenz was hit with the first shotgun blast, followed by Nickerson, who was thrown backward, Skidmore said.
Skidmore said Zito had not seen him on the porch, so he waited for Zito to come out, sprayed his eyes with pepper spray and arrested Zito.
Maryland State Police Tfc. Brian Fisher was the officer who officially arrested Zito after the shooting, Fisher said. He testified that he took Zito away from the shooting scene and back near his patrol car.
Fisher said Zito was yelling "Nazi Gestapo" at the officers and complained that someone broke into his home. Fisher said Zito also told him he had put a shotgun under his couch.
At that point, Fisher said, he arrested Zito and read him his Miranda Rights. Though one of the Miranda Rights is the right to keep silent, Fisher said Zito kept talking.
"'I thought I was protecting my home,' " Fisher quoted Zito as saying. " 'I didn't know they were police until I got outside.' "
Robert E. Williams, an investigator for the Queen Anne's County State's Attorney Office, formally interviewed Zito for about an hour that night, Williams testified. Again Zito was told he could remain silent. But Zito "just started talking," Williams said.
Williams said Zito complained that police were trying to "beat (him) up" and threaten his mother. Then, Williams said, Zito described the events leading up to the shooting.
"'When they went to the second door, I got the 12-gauge and took the safety off,'" Williams said Zito explained. Then, as the door opened, "'I just shot.'"
"'I know I snagged that bastard,'" said Zito, according to Williams.
Williams said Zito talked with very little questioning by him or two other officers present at the interrogation.
Several other officers testified that Zito admitted shooting the two officers with no questioning. Two officers at the Wicomico County Detention Center also testified that they overheard Zito admit to the shooting while talking on the jail's telephone.
Defense lawyers later called Betty Zito to the stand. Wheeled into the courtroom in a wheelchair, Mrs. Zito was too weak to hold up her right hand to be sworn in. She lifted her right hand with her left hand as high as she could while being sworn in.
She testified that her son has his own trailer, which he rented from her. She said his rent is no different from the rent for the eight other trailers on her property.
She said Frank "wasn't so good" on Feb. 13, a condition made worse by the police breaking his storm door. She said police threatened to "tear gas" Zito's home unless he came outside.
She sobbed lightly as she described her frustration that day, trying to get someone on the telephone to help her and her son.
She said the only reason she gave the officers the key to Zito's trailer was so they wouldn't break his door and "tear gas" him.
Then she said she went around the side of Zito's trailer to peer inside and find him. That's when Mrs. Zito heard the "pop, pop" of the shotgun blasts, she said.
As defense lawyer Patricia Chappell wheeled Zito's mother past him and out of the courtroom, he gently put his hand on his mother's knee.
"Goodbye," she said as she passed from the courtroom.
In their closing arguments, defense lawyer Brian Shefferman argued that Zito's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure was violated by the three officers. He said Zito did not consent to the officers coming on his premises even though they entered his enclosed porch.
Shefferman argued that all evidence that came about because of the "illegal" entry to Zito's trailer should be suppressed during the jury trial. Most of the testimony that would be lost if this motion were to be granted would be Trooper Skidmore's description of the shooting and the events leading up to it.
Shefferman also argued that statements that Zito made to officers throughout the night should be suppressed because Zito was injured when he made them. Officers testified earlier that Zito was bleeding from a cut on his face that night. >{?
Nah, I still would have, so just keep moving along you self-deluded phony.
Word has it that Frank Zito is quite a patron of fine arts, maybe you can compose a little bagpipe ditty or write him a poem to show your love and support during this difficult time.
Still, the fact remains that even an obnoxious slob like Zito, or even you Arne, enjoys the same 4th amendment protections as anyone else, and a warrant is still required to break down the man's door, now matter how flimsy and tho' the winds may blow through it.
Any magistrate would have rubberstamped a warrant for the police, had they been threatened, but because they chose to ignore the law, a poor cop is dead, and a poor slob of a man is on murder charges.
Cops are not above the law.
Recently I was on patrol in a high crime area. A detective, who had been watching a drug dealer from down the street watched me approach in my marked unit. When I got near the drug dealer, who was standing on the corner, the detective told me to 'check that guy out, he's been flagging down cars.' So, I stop my cruiser and tell the guy I want to talk to him. He takes off running, while reaching in his waistband and throwing something, that was not found afterward. The guy (17 year old) runs inside a house next door. I catch him inside. The people that live there say they don't know him.
I charged the kid with obstructing and burglary. We go to juvenile court. The judge says it's not a crime to run from the police and finds the kid not guilty of obstructing. But he does find him guilty of the burglary.
Recently I found out the judge told the prosecutor in the case that I was a "cowboy" for chasing this poor youth.
So, a detective sees a kid engaging in selling drugs in a known drug area, he runs, gets caught, goes to court and now I'm a "cowboy" for doing my job.
I should'a been a brain surgeon.
You must be new and didn't realize that an unwritten rule in Free Republic is that the first person to call America Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia loses.
While I would probably not disagree with the judge's decision (since the thrown object was never found, there's no way of telling whether it would have constituted evidence of anything illegal), his comment is way out of line. That the person was willing to commit burglary in an effort to avoid talking to a cop would suggest strongly that he was up to no good. Whether or not such evidence would constitute probable cause for anything [other than the burglary arrest], it should at minimum be recognized informally.
What's unfortunate is that thanks to jury brainwashing it's often easier to convict law-abiding people of unintentional 'crimes', even felonies, than to convict real criminals. After all, since the law-abiding people aren't seeking to hide anything (having no reason to do so) it's much easier to gather adequate evidence against them. And if the judge can convince the jury that abbreviating the name of one's state of residence on a 4473 constitutes a failure to properly fill one out, it will be easy to come up with all the 'evidence' needed.
BTW, I'd like to see an attourney general announce that police officers who go after the law-abiding rather than criminals will have their cases thrown out. To my knowledge, at the national level Ashcroft has never said such a thing; at the Illinois level, the current attourney general spent considerable effort on a 'sting' of law-abiding gun dealers, and the Republican nominee sought, as state's attourney, to prosecute someone for unlawful use of a weapon because he was carrying a pistol in the manner specified by statute (in a case, within a backpack, unloaded, and while possessing a FOID card).
- Did you know Adolf had a irrational hate for women, arne? Well documented. At times, he ranted, - just like you, -- about them being tramps & sluts. Strange fella, adolf, -- He also did a lot of personal violence threats, but to all accounts, never raised a hand to another man. - Just to the sluts & tramps. -- Like you.
"Nazi" was first used in paragraph 13 of Post #1. It was used subsequently in posts 36, 37, 48, 78, 86, 127, 149, 151, 190, and 222 ... before I used it. I didn't even make the top ten ... sigh.
The point being made by many posters is that there is a fairly narrow, but well-defined boundary between proper police protocols, and police abuse. When the police (be they local, state or federal) overstep their bounds (for instance, at Waco and at Ruby Ridge) you see the spector of something not too different from the authoritarian European states of the 1930's and 1940's. Whether you call them jack-booted nazi thugs, or jack-booted fascist thugs makes little difference.
I responded to a comment that suggested in some locale the police would just "take care of the problem" (or something like that) - the suggestion being that they would not be bound by legal or Constitutional requirements ... they would be a law unto themselves. In my book, that's Nazi-ism. I hope I explained it a little bit better. I meant no personal offense.
-- But in any case arne, stop swaggering about FR like some demented litte dictator, and you won't be compared to one. -- Get it?
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.