South Carolina v Rye--This Juror is Horrified by Police Thuggery
CNN’s In Session this week is covering the retrial of a South Carolina man named Grover Rye for the murder of an off-duty policeman. Even the South Carolina Appellate Court called the case “bizarre.” The retrial took place in October, as John Monk reports in The State, “Dead cats’ owner cleared of killing deputy.”
When I heard In Session’s Ryan Smith interview pet lovers about the case, I was struck by two things: 1) pet murder is a crime, a form of vandalism, and 2) the idea of an off-duty cop trespassing on my property with a loaded gun is horrifying—why didn’t Ryan Smith interview people about that?
The Crimes
Mr. Rye owned property where he kept pet cats and had off-site storage for a business. He often spent the night there, although it was not his primary address. He reported numerous instances of trespassing and vandalism to the police, who repeatedly ignored his complaints. One day a neighbor and his friend, a cop, trespassed on the property with loaded weapons and fired several rounds of ammunition. The defendant discovered one of his cats had been shot. He left the property to call the police, and when he returned found himself confronting the two armed men. His initial conviction came as a result of the surviving, armed trespasser’s testimony that the victim was killed after he lowered his weapon—and only that testimony.
Mr. Rye won his appeal on the grounds that the judge had not properly instructed the jury on the law of “defense of habitation.” No mention is made in the decision of the fact that the trespassers were not charged with crimes or that a police officer clearly was using his skills as a law enforcement officer to break the law.
Police Thugs
I don’t think I’ve ever heard a more chilling tale of police misconduct than this. It reminds me of the Gestapo.
Consider this: Your neighbor is in law enforcement. Every day you see him come home from work wearing a sidearm. Then one day you discover your pet cat shot dead in the backyard. What do you do? You call the police. Who responds to your call? Either your neighbor or one of his buddies, who says there’s nothing he can do about the dead cat.
What if your disputes with your neighbor continue to escalate? Then someone steals the plates off your car. A crime is committed, and witnesses identify your license plate number on the getaway vehicle. The DMV suddenly sends you a notice that you owe hundreds of dollars in traffic tickets.
What if you come home from work to discover your house has been broken into and your personal identity information has been stolen? After that, someone uses your credit cards to buy expensive items; someone takes out a loan or a mortgage. Your credit is ruined. After that you go to a polling place on election day and are turned away by an election judge, because someone else has already voted in your name. You apply for a passport, but the State Department tells you it has already issued you a passport.
And all the while, you feel certain the culprit is your police-officer neighbor.
The situation Mr. Rye faced was truly Kafkaesque.
The Jury to the Rescue, Once Again
South Carolina v. Rye is the reason the Bill of Rights puts strict limits on police power—not only because the power of the state must be kept in check but also because of the thin line between the rule of law and the rule of the cops.
dangerous to be confronted by a crazy cat man. people know of the crazy cat woman, but they don't realize that there are just as many crazy cat men. and living next door to one would be beyond annoying.
i think the deputy probably was trying to do his relatives a favor by downing the numbers a bit. what he didn't know was that cat hording people are truly crazy & dangerous.
very sad story
Reply to this
I know what you're talking about. I had a crazy cat couple living in the house behind mine for years. My husband had to rescue some of the cats who were hanged by their necks from the front porch. Eventually, the city condemned the property and the crazy cat people moved away, leaving the poor cats and a yard full of junk behind. Then mysteriously the house burst into flames, threatening all its neighbors.
Fortunately, though, the off-duty cops where I live did not trespass on the property, break down the doors, and shoot the cats.
In South Carolina v Rye, however, the sad story did not involve crazy cat people, and it did involve a police officer who repeatedly broke the law.
You should listen to some of the testimony, rather than assume that this is a typical cat-person craziness story. The defendant is far from crazy. He doesn't even seem to have a neurotic anger-management problem. He spent his lifetime caring for injured and stray animals. The property in question was not his domicile, but his rural property which he used as storage for a heating/air conditioning business and which was a sort of old family "seat" where he raised his now-adult kids. He visited the property frequently to care for the cats. He began to have a problem with vandalism and break-ins. Over a period of weeks he began to find cats shot dead. He called the cops over and over again, and they refused to do anything about the trespassing and vandalism. If it had been kids with spray paint cans, it would have been different. But he had evidence that someone was bringing firearms onto the property and shooting things up.
Is this really what you think an off-duty cop should do in his spare time?
Reply to this
I saw a couple of hours of the prosecution's cross examination of Mr. Rye, and I was struck by how credible he seemed.
When a prosecutor cross examines a defendant, the defendant almost always looks pretty bad. This was not the case with the SC v. Rye case and I think that the right decision was to exonerate the defendant.
Reply to this
I think you are missing the point. Who cares about the cats. This was a police officer trespassing, and vandalizing someone else's property. If you wanna talk about the cat's -it terrifies me these men were shooting them in their spare time-hello? Serial killer?
Reply to this
I think you are missing the point. Cat's aside, this was a police officer trespassing and vandalizing this man's property on a regular basis. If you wanna talk cat's-it terrifies me these men were shooting them for sport. Hello? Serial killer?
Reply to this
Everyone now thinks they are an authority on hoarding since it's on t.v., and since when did enjoying animals become such a crime? I know people that have too many kids, I call them breeders....now what?
Reply to this
This isn't about a cat. This is about a man trespassing and firing a gun off in the night on his neighbors property. If this man is found [guilty] of murder the people of S. Carolina should all wear Nazi uniforms.
Reply to this
The simple FACT of the matter is that if the Odam had NOT been trespassing he would NOT have been shot by Rye PERIOD. IOW, Odam got HIMSELF KILLED & his family & friends have NOBODY to blame BUT HIM, PERIOD.
BTW, Odam's buddy in the trespassing did not die that day b/c apparently Rye did not feel physically threatened by him (IOW he apparently didn't raise a gun toward Rye) but I guess the local LEO's & DA CHOSE to decide to ignore that little fact...IOW Rye might have been better off shooting BOTH of the TRESPASSERS dead. Also, I guess the IDIOTS of the 1st jury (yes I consider them idiots for NOT using common sense regardless of the idiot judge b/c they should have at least come back w/ a NG based on SELF-DEFENSE regardless of the 'defense of property') did not take that into consideration or at least not enough.
Maybe KARMA was in motion re Odam since he slaughtered cats dead w/ guns & he was shot dead...something others (including Vick) should keep in mind for the future. I am NOT a member of that idiot org PETA but I do know what Odam did to the cats was WRONG (if not out & out evil) & that his trespassing was wrong too.
Beside the 1st jury verdict & the fact that it took the 2nd jury way too long to come back w/ a NG verdict (5 hrs should have been 1 hr) the other thing that bothers me is that "Tim" seems to be justifying Odam's trespassing AND the slaughter of the cats (evidenced by his loathsome "down the numbers a bit" comment)...IMO his local LEO's should keep an eye on him.
Reply to this
you are right on.but i would add if it was my property and cats i would have shot both trespassers.they both need to be droped from the gene pool.
Reply to this
I can tell you from experience that in court the prosecution can portray a defendant in any way they want, evidence and records can disappear, and an innocent person that has been victimized( mostly by deputies or officers of the law) can be portrayed as "crazy". U.s.history proves it. Look at what the LAPD did to cover themselves by sending a woman to a mental institution to get her out of the way. This happened in our town, except after beatinng a man in his jail cell they sent him to a mental institution to cover up the abuse!!! One day I am going to write a story about police coverups in our county. I have lots of proof and continue to collect it. People need to wake up to corruption in our police departments, and D. A. Offices!!!! I think it is sad that the south Carolina DA used " cats" as an excuse to try and cover up for theives. I would have done the same thing as mr. Rye. And tried everything to protect my property. it's Unfortunate a murder occured, but if the victim and his friend had not been up to criminal activities there would have been no murder!! I am appalled that a jury found him guilty the first time, but I am also aware of how lawyers and judges can change instructions for jurors in the middle of a trial, so I understand about the jury not being instructed properly. If you are ever charged in a small town with a felony , and you are innocent , Do Not Let them drop it to a misdemeanor. That is a trick a lot of District Attorneys use!! By changing it, they no longer have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Just a tip. Take care out there we are facing a major change in our country, and the people running our towns are more crooked than ever. Go to your local Law Library and stay up on rights. Law enforcement is not always bad, but there is a lot of bad people in law enforcement. Make sure you know how your local Law Enforcers are, and keep up with sheriff department policy, each policy for each sheriff is different in how they run and instruct their officers. They are elected to protect and to serve. Make sure they are doing that. Don't just rely on how many arrests were made or what your local paper says. News only REPORTS WHAT THEY ARE TOLD... Not exactly what happens.
Reply to this
Thank you for this detailed comment. I'm particularly struck by your assertion that a prosecutor can often convince an innocent person to accept a "lesser" charge, such as a misdmeanor, in order to avoid being charged with a felony case. I'm sure this happens all the time. In the trial in which I served as a juror, I now believe the prosecutor grossly over-charged a man with poor English language skills, based on a "confession" one of his staff wrote "for" the defendant. He pled innocent, but his public defender sold him out and actually told us (the jury) that he was guilty. Instead of felonious assault and kidnapping he probably ought to have been charged only with simple assault.
Reply to this
It is about the cats as much as the rest of the evidence. Serial killers have been known to harm pets of neighbors as young adults .(state of mind)And would you like your daughter to be in the middle of a divorce with this copwhere he could loose half of his pension? I wouldnt sleep at night.
Reply to this