Monday, February 02, 2009

Audio of Police Interview with Ryan Frederick

This is the audio of the police interview with Ryan Frederick taken 30 minutes after the raid. It was played at Frederick’s trial yesterday. [More]
Via Billy Beck, who writes:
They're going to drill this kid.

The *principal* problem here is that they cannot or will not think. That should be the most horrifying fact of all, because that's why this shit will not stop.

My god.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

And the cop is now another JBT with F-Troop, eh?

Anonymous said...

I cannot bear to think that any jury could convict this man. But we have seen it happen again and again.

This may not be a welcome observation from the dead cop's family's viewpoint, but he got exactly what he asked for. That should be the end of it.

Anonymous said...

Oh yeah, and describe ample. People at my front door cannot be heard in my bedroom, whereas my door bell can.

me said...

I have a computer running, and a radio going most of the time. I can hear the neighbors garage door better then I can hear someone knocking at MY door.

And to have the gigantic, I'm talking Colossus of Rhodes type brass balls to say that the fact that only ONE panel of a door was kicked in isn't the same as kicking in the entire door. They had better be thankful I'm not on that jury foreman.

Anonymous said...

Where is Gerry Spence when you need him?

Anonymous said...

One part of the door was kicked in. So are they saying that a citizen in their own home can't shoot without the full door being kicked in by criminals. Through giving the criminals a clear and direct line of sight to shoot. I don't think so. This is nothing but revenge by the system. Look at all the fat parasites in that courtroom. Yes, the video is playing a crime in progress.

Anonymous said...

David, I can not find Billy Beck's story: They'er going to drill this kid.
His search engine for the site will not pull it up, what about a link.

David Codrea said...

I just gave him a credit link because he sent me this--the quote is form his email. When I give you credit links it goes to Avg Joe on WoG. When I give others credit links who have websites, it goes to their site. Sometimes they'll have a related story in which case I'll link to that post.

Anonymous said...

Police and informants. Too chummy by far. If there's not a problem, the boot-licking pet informant will create one and report it.
I was thinking just this morning: the exterior walls of most people's homes aren't bulletproof -- in either direction. When they kick in (part of) your door, shoot them through the wall. That's where they stack up, on both sides. .223 or better should save a lot of time in court when they would have been defending their execrable acts.
IF you insist on letting them make it to your door.
I write the laws that make the whole world cringe;
I leave your door to hang by just one hinge;
I get awards for making widows cry;
I write the laws I wrAAAAGGH...

Anonymous said...

I really hope he is let go. The circumstances are tragic to say the least, but from the looks of it, the fault does lay with the Police.

The thing that comes to mind is what would I do in the same situation. I might have ordered the guy to halt where we was first before firing, but in the split second he had to make the decisions....

All in all, my thoughts and prayers go out to the officers family and to the defendant.

Anonymous said...

Thanks David, I somehow got the idea that the guy had something to say with some information posted on this sight under, "They're going to drill this kid".

Anonymous said...

I can follow the logic under the letter of state law, if the standard is imminent danger, someone still outside the door might not yet be a threat. Not morally, and not under common law, but under statutory law I can follow it.

The obvious lesson then is to know your state's laws, and especially in castle doctrine states to wait until home invaders cross the threshold. And practice at the range, and do dry runs at home.

The less obvious lesson, and the part that police departments and holster-sniffers haven't thought through, is that if a person knows he'll be sent up for a good-faith error he's got no reason to lay down his gun and surrender. When the end result is the same, the only question is how and when you want to go out. I agree that "they're going to drill this kid" to send a message, and that will work in the short term, but a few more of the same and people will start to get the wrong message.

Anonymous said...

Actually I want to modify what I wrote about following the logic above. I was working only off of the recording when I wrote that, but I've been reading up since. Tidewater Liberty reports from the trial that Frederick fired through the door when he saw an arm reaching through the hole to open it. Not blindly as implied by the questioning officer.

I still think it would be practical to be more conservative, if only for any subsequent trial, but unless there's a moral obligation to let home invaders into your house and inside your 21 foot zone to see what they really want I think that's justified.

Some other interesting stuff at Tidewater Liberty, such as that, according to police testimony, there was 25 seconds from the first knock and announce to the use of the battering ram. And the gunshot was so muffled by the walls that police weren't sure that's what it was, so not hearing police over the barking dogs is entirely plausible.