@ElwoodBlues LOL, interfering with a lwaful operatin by uniformed officers, disobeying lawful orders, two officers down, deadly weapon aimed at uniformed officers, just the action every law-abiding citizen would take, eh

@sunsporter1649 says What the heck you talking 'bout, sunstroke?? Two officers down???

The deadly action was taken by Officer Jonathan Ross.

That's why the DoJ's own use-of-force policy says that agents may not fire at a moving car that is threatening them unless “no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

We know your reading comprehension is challenged, so I'm gonna say that again: ...unless “no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

..unless “no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

Now what did Officer Jonathan Ross do immediately prior to pumping three rounds into the 37 year old mother? What did Ross do?

Officer Jonathan Ross stepped out of the path of the moving vehicle.

Gosh, that's the EXACT means of defense the DoJ cites!!

@ElwoodBlues LOL, striking uniformed officers with a moving vehicle is not the use of force to avoid detention, eh

@ElwoodBlues LOL, striking uniformed officers with a moving vehicle is not the use of force to avoid detention, eh.

@sunsporter1649 The deadly action was taken by Officer Jonathan Ross.

That's why the DoJ's own use-of-force policy says that agents may not fire at a moving car that is threatening them unless “no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

We know your reading comprehension is challenged, so I'm gonna say that again: ...unless “no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

..unless “no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

Now what did Officer Jonathan Ross do immediately prior to pumping three rounds into the 37 year old mother? What did Ross do?

Officer Jonathan Ross stepped out of the path of the moving vehicle.

Gosh, that's the EXACT means of defense the DoJ cites!!

Officer Jonathan Ross utilized his means of defense, and then, as the vehicle was going past him, he fired three shots. First, he defended himself. Then he killed Renee Good.

Back to the topic of "officer created jeopardy." Turns out that was exactly the subject of the 2nd source I cited for you. We know your reading comprehension is challenged, but go back and take a look at https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-border-killings-20140227-story.html

The pattern of manufacturing an excuse to kill is well known to law enforcement leadership.

@ElwoodBlues LOL, striking uniformed officers with a moving vehicle is not the use of force to avoid detention, eh

@sunsporter1649 I don’t know that for a fact what would have happened, but I do know she could have recognized shit was going down and chosen to stay home.

@MayorOfCrushtown That is not a valid justification for the murder.

@JimboSaturn having been on both sides, i realize that there are some officers who are way more trigger happy than others. and if I am on the wrong side of law, i usually dont know the background of the officer. i do what I can to avoid being shot. and so far, i have been lucky.

@MayorOfCrushtown I understand you point of trying not to be killed by police in the US (which is ridiculous), but that is the fault of the police, not you .

@trollslayer and made the wrong decision.

@Hatt94 instinct is not a conscious decision.

@trollslayer true. But if you know they are agents, and they tell you to stop. Why flee?

@SumKindaMunster does that justify murder? If so, you need to change the flag you fly above your house.

@saragoodtimes Name the case. If, as you claimed, the SCOTUS ruled on it, then you should have no trouble whatsoever naming the case.

@KunsanVeteran 2014 Plumhoff v Rickard and the same ruling in 2025 in Barnes v Felix

@saragoodtimes Plumhoff v Rickard: very different circumstances. In that case the offending driver had been stopped by police and refused to exit his vehicle and engaged in a high speed chase which endangered other drivers and officers, they attempted to stop him using non lethal methods and were unsuccessful. This was clearly resisting arrest and reckless endangerment.

Barnes v Felix: the moment-of-threat rule requires asking only whether an officer was “in danger at the moment of the threat that resulted in [his] use of deadly force.” 91 F. 4th 393, 397. Under the rule, events “leading up to the shooting” are “not relevant.” Ibid. Here, the “precise moment of threat” was the “two seconds” when Felix was clinging to a moving car. Id., at 397–398. Because Felix could then have reasonably believed his life in danger, the panel held, the shooting was lawful.

The circumstances of this case are quite different. There was no legal stop, there is no reason that the agents even legally approached the victim, she was not resisting arrest (she was fleeing), if the agent was actually in danger then he placed himself in danger, she attempted to avoid him and posed no threat to him. Any claim that he had limited immunity does not apply.

Trump’s and Noem’s “official statements” (they weren’t really official statements BTW) were packs of lies which misrepresent the video evidence.

This incident is materially different than each of the cases you cited. Indeed, this case may find it’s way to the SCOTUS if the agent tries to claim limited immunity.

@JimboSaturn yes she was. But really, that has no relevance.

@Carla No but we know that the MAGA types will say she was an undocumented immigrant without even checking the facts. Hell the president of the US said someone was run over without checking the facts.

@JimboSaturn absolutely. they're giddy about it. they now have a new george floyd poster child.

@boudinMan Nope. Officer Jonathan Ross violated DoJ guidelines and his own agency's handbook

There is a law enforcement pattern known as "officer created jeopardy," which is way too common in vehicle stops. It involves an officer intentionally stepping in front of a moving vehicle to create an excuse for deadly force. It's been affirmed as a defense for drivers in SCOTUS Barnes v. Felix 2025.

This pattern is why the DoJ's own use-of-force policy says that agents may not fire at a moving car that is threatening them unless “no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

In this case, Officer Jonathan Ross first stepped out of the path of the moving vehicle -- the EXACT means of defense the DoJ cites -- and then, after defending himself, fired three shots as the vehicle was passing by.

Ross was SAFE. He shot a fleeing "suspect." That's in direct contravention of ICE rules, not to mention common sense.

Here's the 110 page ICE Firearms and Use of Force Handbook
https://imlive.s3.amazonaws.com/Federal%20Government/ID255426897069329047495080324203699905714/2.2.1_Attachment%2021%20-%20ICE%20Firearms%20and%20Use%20of%20Force%20Directive%20and%20Handbook.pdf

Page 12 includes the following:

@boudinMan Maybe they will put on her tombstone "I KAN'ST BREEVS."

@JimboSaturn Not very closely

@trollslayer Murder!There was no murder. That is saying that the ice agent knew her and had some kind of plan. If she had minded her own business and stayed at home taking care of her kids. None of this would have ever happened

@Slicker24 her wheels were pointed at the officer when she was backing up. She then put the car in forward and turned the tires right.

@trollslayer …Sharpie in the hands of a wannabe dictator Dullard!

@trollslayer True, but it’s important to realize that Demented Donnie doesn’t realize how easily and how often he is manipulated by the likes of Miller, Putin, KJU, MBS, etc.

So he’s a “wannabe” and being a dictator is just one more item to add to that very, very, VERY long list of his failures…

If there were a Nobel Prize for “Failures” he’d be a shoo in!