Below is my column in The Hill on the refusal of many to consider all of the facts in the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis. The myopic analysis of press and pundits shows how the tragedy is being weaponized for political purposes.
Here is the column:
In a famous Indian parable, five blind men are brought to an elephant. Each feels a different part of the animal, and they come to radically different views of what an elephant is. It depended on which parts they touched, from tusk to tail.
The controversy over the shooting of Renee Nicole Good, 37, is a type of political elephant parable. People focus on only certain parts of the story to support what they want the case to mean.
Critics and supporters of the responsible officer have slowed down videotapes that last, in critical part, for only a few seconds.
The only difference is that, in this modern parable, many are just willfully blind, choosing not to see beyond their own rage.
This week, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) became the personification of rage, spewing profanities about ICE while declaring, shortly after the shooting, that the ICE officer was a murderer.
After immediately declaring the officer’s guilt, Frey spent day two lambasting the federal government for rushing to conclusions and demanding that his people play a role in the investigation.
As for his unhinged, profane diatribe, Frey mocked critics if he “offended their Disney princess ears.”
Frey fulfilled the parable most clearly in his use of statistics. He declared that fifty percent of shootings in the city this year were committed by ICE. He then later admitted that, since it was only Jan. 9, there had been only two shootings. Indeed, he could have argued that ICE was responsible for 100 percent of the shootings in the city on Jan. 7.
Again, the trick is to examine the smallest part of the animal and extrapolate to draw sweeping conclusions.
The recently released videotape from the responsible officer also shows how people will focus on insular elements rather than the “totality of the circumstances,” the standard for such cases established by the Supreme Court.
For example, many supporters of the officer are citing the obstruction and taunting by Good and her wife, who were reportedly working with an anti-ICE group. At one point, Becca Good dares the officer to do something as they blocked the road, telling the officer “Do you want to come at us? I say go and get yourself some lunch, big boy.”
For critics, they have focused on Renee Good’s last words: “That’s fine dude, I’m not mad at you, I’m not mad at any of you.” Whether Good was being peaceful or passive-aggressive, others are clearly very, very mad. They are using her statement to push protesters to the brink of violence.
Democratic leaders declared ICE to be “terrorists” and called for mass protests in the very same city that burned in 2020 after the George Floyd riots. Right on cue, one Black Lives Matter leader suggested that the prosecution of officers in the George Floyd case only occurred because protesters burned down the city. She told protesters to ignore pleas not to do it again. “Let me tell you this. We need justice and we need it now.”
Protesters in other cities chanted “Kristi Noem will hang” and “Save a Life, Kill an ICE.”
In the same presser where he condemned federal officials for jumping to conclusions, Frey not only reaffirmed that Good had been murdered but added that the officer was not actually injured as claimed. “The ICE agent walked away with a hip injury that he might as well have gotten from closing a refrigerator door with his hips,” he said. “He was not injured. Give me a break. No, he was not ran over. He walked out of there with a hop in his step.”
Few of us have been in Frey’s kitchen, but the latest videotape seems to show something more intense than an encounter with his fridge. The video shows the agent being hit by the vehicle as Good ignores orders to get out of the car, as Becca Good is screaming, “drive, drive, drive.”
Reasonable people can disagree on whether the officer should have discharged his weapon. Flight alone is not grounds for the use of lethal force. However, Good’s actions could also be interpreted as an intentional endangerment of the officer.
At a minimum, it was clearly reckless, as another officer was trying to reach into the vehicle and Good refused to yield to the effort to place her into custody. The Goods forced the confrontation, and Renee Good then escalated the level of danger by speeding toward an officer.
This is why the legal standard requires you to take in the entire elephant, not just insular parts.
While there may still be countervailing facts emerging from the investigation, the governing legal standard clearly favors the officer. It is Good’s actions, not her motivations, that are critical to determining whether excessive force was used. The officer’s cellphone video shows he had a fraction of a second to decide and fired after being struck by the car. (The same officer had been seriously hurt previously after being dragged by a car.)
The Justice Department’s guidances incorporate the standards outlined in past Supreme Court decisions, such as Graham v. Connor (1989). Again, individual elements can be viewed in isolation as favoring or disfavoring the use of force, including the severity of the crime at issue (in this case likely a misdemeanor) and whether the suspect was “attempting to evade arrest by flight.” The guidelines stress that “[t]he ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.”
This tragedy shows that people watching the same videotapes can come to diametrically opposed conclusions. Take the speed of the vehicle. Some have noted that the car was traveling less than 10 miles per hour before it collided with another vehicle. However, the speed after the shooting of Good is immaterial. The relevant question is the distance and speed with reference to the officer. It was clearly speeding up and immediately struck the officer before Good was shot.
The same is true of those who note how the wheels appear to be turning toward or away from the officer. The fact is, Good struck the officer. That does not mean she intended to do so, but that does not matter. From the officer’s perspective, Good was ignoring orders while speeding toward him from just feet away.
There will likely be civil litigation. Democrats have also called for criminal charges. The arguments on both sides of this controversy show, at most, that the issue is debatable. The officer could be viewed as wrong and still be found to have acted within the scope of his discretion in responding to a threat. Any state effort to charge the officer will be removed to federal court, where he will likely have immunity based on this evidence.
The public would be wise to ignore conclusions reached blindly by either side. In an “Age of Rage,” we live in the land of the blind, where the one-eyed man is king. The public must remain clear-eyed and calm as the investigation proceeds in Minneapolis.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Bias does have a profound impact on how information is processed. Ignoring inconvenient facts as “irrelevant” is the zealot’s main defensive coping tool. Activist journalists qualify for the z-word.
It makes me appreciate the genius of our British-descended legal system, which overcomes bias-blocking by inviting adversarial presentations, and requiring a Jury of 12 ordinary citizens to unanimously decide fact from falsehood, all while a powerful referee/process manager (Judge) keeps the sparring litigants in line. Moreover, pre-trial due diligence breaks through the wall of concealment with subpoena and compelled deposition. These combined features flush out the objective truth despite the two conflicting accounts being riddled with self-interested bias and cover-up.
Thank God we have this brilliant architecture for exposing truth. We should be using it more. We could be expanding its use in combatting inauthentic, deceitful infowarfare.
Those who distrust a Jury to get it right because of the city where they live don’t appreciate what the Founders gave us. That ingratitude and cynicism turns my stomach.
It appears both Renee and Becca Good are incompetent. Renee should not have been driving in the presence of law enforcement. Attempted escape from lawful arrest resulted in reckless disregard for life as a hit and run after the fact but we’re talking about a minute period of time of less than 1 second as officer reacts to hit by a two ton weapon commandeered by an incompetent person with malice.
Need to burn the whole state down then give it to Canada. Let them deal with it.
I don’t think even Canada would currently take Minnesota even if it were given to them outright, unburnt.
sadly Jon still thinks Democrats are anything but Fascists trying to destroy America
Importing illegals is a CRIME…Helping Illegals is a Crime
Why aren’t 1000’s of Democrats in jail? STOP pretending you can “convince” a Democrat
They are Germans 1930’s or Democrats 1860…. So the question is you fight them now or later. I prefer NOW!
Time to take-off the tinfoil hat sir.
Minnesota has claimed its territory and if it were principled would refuse all federal aid. Give them a fed tax break.
Assess the fraud payback to the 49 States from every adult in Minnesota. States should be held responsible for electing incompetence unless they can produce a ballot showing an alternate vote. 😏
blocking law enforce, assisting criminals is a crime
Just Round them up….and process them at the new ICE crime detention center in the Aleutian islands. Leave them to find their way home. Blocking law enforcement with your car is a CRIME, harassing law enforcement is a crime. STOP PLAYING NICE with Democrats trying to DESTROY America!
The Left sure had no problem with Michael Byrd shooting an unarmed, averaged size Ashley Babbitt. He was protected, promoted, and somehow making a lot of money today, from owning a Day Care center with his wife. Hmmm.
Yes, we have zero problem with that. She was a direct and immediate threat to Members of the House. She was also a traitor who participated in an attempted coup.
Where she once went, we went all.
Those Spartacuses looking for civil war would lose that civil war in less than 30 minutes.
I don’t get the Spartacus reference, but law enforcement & US military swear allegiance to the Constitution, not the current head of state. So, the militant zealots who want to settle political differences using guns and violence would be crushed in 24 hours — whether they self-ID as left or right. The center holds. Civil society with its boring, slow, judicious processes endures. Because it’s better than any other (romantic) alternative.
Wacky Dem Leftists DON’T NEED NO STINKIN FACTS!!! They only need one brain cell to support the Soros Chaos Mantra – Orange Man and Popo BAD!!! Waiting for them to start burning their Blue Cities again – Fiery but mostly peaceful, right? Bah haha!!!!!!!!
“The public must remain clear-eyed and calm as the investigation proceeds in Minneapolis” – Well, I suggest that the public can answer the following question right away without having to wait for the results of the investigation, namely: Do you think these thugs with their masked faces who, after killing a person, walk around and give orders like nothing had happened and don’t even go to the crashed car to see whether there might still be a need for first aid – do you really think that these thugs should be entrusted with executive responsibilities in the United States of America?
Yes, undoubtedly! 100% Full steam ahead. Arrest and detain for trial in a federal court all those obstructing or interfering with a lawful operation. The people idiots like you are supporting are Criminals.
But—> the dems falsely accuse Republicans and arrest them and prosecute and tainted judges and juries asses impose excessive fines.
Mrs. And Mrs. Good are dangerous people. Loons are dangerous.
Klaus: The real “thugs” here are the ones who arrogantly think that they have a right to interfere with and obstruct lawful arrests by federal agents. While protesting is fine, illegal conduct is a crime.
“after killing a person, walk around and give orders like nothing had happened and don’t even go to the crashed car to see” Um… wanton murder of course All a setup. Yeah, the other cop ordered Good to target the cop in front, and skim him. Ever so lightly, so she could later prove the vehicle did it, not her. And then pretend nothing happened by ignoring the crash. Brilliant analysis Klaus.
So, how’s it going in Germany nowadays. Any new rapes, robberies or murders by Arabs to report? How’s Herr Merz? Is it true you guys want to resurrect the NSDAP?
Herrlich!
My dad taught us it was essential to comply with any police command, to put him at ease. Renee Good chose NOT to comply, so the ICE agent could not afford to give her the benefit of the doubt when interpreting her actions.
Just to tease you, you’re indicating your Dad had a lot of experience dealing with cops? Was he a criminal or a cop?
He drove for a living, so he was often pulled over. But he couldn’t afford to get any tickets. So he learned how to present himself.
His assessment was looney and dangerous. A correct assessment as witnessed by her string of crimes leading to her death.
**** Don’t forget this is George Floyd territory. Did George Floyd die 2 miles away?
Check your emotions at the door, read the law and engage brain before putting mouth in gear. You will get a more harmonious outcome.
turley speaks with logic and here you are screaming for people to react!, emote!, rage!. Your comment appears to exclusively focus on rage and incite action based on a vague and atomistic frustration with masks. Grow up.
Two things if I am not mistaken.
1.They are wearing masks because of the threats to their lives by the politicians and anti-ice groups. You could also say it was cold.
2. I believe they went to the car but with a head would there was nothing to be done. A person wanted to help but they said medics were in the way. If that person had involved himself in any way of treating her he/she could have contaminated the crime scene for proper analysis.
I am not sure where you are from but here in the orders are given to protect the crime scene from contamination by people not involved.
Someone claimed to be a physician, but provided bo evidence. Minnesota uses an online verification system.instead of a physiccal license card.
Klaus Kastner lied: Do you think these thugs with their masked faces who, after killing a person, walk around and give orders like nothing had happened and don’t even go to the crashed car to see whether there might still be a need for first aid
The problems with your Democrat lies are extensive.
1. Some video angles show ICE officers running to the felons vehicle after it hit another vehicle. You pop up here to lie nobody did that.
2. Multiple officers immediately both called and used ICE radios to request EMS.
Do you pathologically lying Democrats believe that Lyin’ Like A Biden here is going to change anybody’s mind to vote Democrat in November?
1. Officers ran to the vehicle to check on the driver immediately, but the one clip that the media is showing does not show that, however other videos do show it.
2. She was not obeying the lawful instructions from a federal police officer and was attempting to flee. As Professor Turley points out, that is not justification, however, she hit a law enforcement officer and we do not know her full intention but we do know her actions.
3. ICE agents are masked because of left-wing activists who are taking videos and pictures of them to have them identified, so that others can go after them, their families and their children. I am willing to wager that you do not call protestors who cover their faces thugs? Do you?
In a previous post I confessed that as a trial lawyer, I have no soul. Perhaps for this reason, the solution to this situation seems simple. I would gather the “news media” together and through them announce to all the world that from this day forward ICE will not arrest any illegal aliens in Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle or New York, regardless of the crimes they have committed. I would then reassign all of the ICE agents to cities and states where the citizens believe in a society based on laws. My hope would be that this would serve as a magnet for all of the criminal illegals Biden let into the US, drawing them away from states and cities in which they face the prospect of arrest and into their blue heavens where they will be treated as victims by the authorities as they have been in Minneapolis. The death of Renee Nicole Good, as with nearly any person’s death, is sad, but I think it is time we stop spending limited federal resources trying to save people from their own intentional bad decisions, including the politicians they elect.
Spot on. If only it were done. I’d add one more final touch. I’d cut off all financial aid to police departments not enforcing the law.
Honest lawyer, you might be surprised in about 4 years that your solution was not a solution at all. During the Biden administration, somewhere between 10 and 20 million people were allowed into this country without any vetting or control. This obvious violation of our laws and breach of our national security continued throughout the 4 years of the Biden term despite the clear political price to the administration. The administration aided by their allies in the media tried to hide it but there was no way to hide it from citizenry. The question that comes to mind is why would they do this? It was a major factor in their loss of the presidency. What was worth the cost? Blue states are losing population and red states are gaining population. The census will be coming in a few years. The census counts every person, citizen and non-citizen alike. The census is the basis for apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives and the number of electors in the Electoral College. Ca and maybe other blue states lost seats in the H of R while TX and Fl gained some. The only way to counter that loss is to add population in such numbers in blue states that it would add seats and swing control by to the Democrat Party. It is not necessary they vote, only that they be located in the blue states when the next census comes around. This explains more than anything the effort by the Dems to do everything they can to thwart the deportation effort. You can look at Michigan and Minnesota as well what is happening in Europe to see the future the Dems are planning for us. As always, they camouflage themselves as being motivated by altruism, but I haven’t seen any evidence that they give a whit about anyone but themselves and their own power.
So you’re saying Frey planned it all?
So you’re saying Frey planned it all?
So you’re celebrating this Marxist performance by Frey? Why? Think you’ll get another election season of a repeat of more George Floyd riots?
You believe it’s even better than his previous performance, where he collapsed to his knees sobbing uncontrollably in front of George Floyd’s casket?
The vulgarity makes this performance a winner – even if he had to change his script multiple times as more facts emerged?
Democrats operating theory: A lie can travel around the world before the truth gets its shoes on.
Your move, Tovarisch.
I agree with all you said. Opening the borders had nothing to do with human compassion. It was nothing more than a way to pad population numbers. That is about as cynical as anyone can get, knowing full well that human trafficking was part of the process. The thinking behind my solution is that at some point things would get so bad that the “silent majority” of Democrats (assuming there is such a thing) will rise up and regain control of the party so that the anti-Americans currently in control are overruled. Probably, that’s wishful thinking.
My reply was directed to Tubwater.
Could Becca Good be charged as an accomplice? The six year old needs support from someone, but Becca burned cigarettes on the arms of Renee’s older children. I think any funds raised should go to the children. Can they?
The girlfriend is responsible, it/they/them ordered the hit.
Drive, baby, drive!
When Cuban refugee boy, Elian Gonzalez, who lost his mother in the Caribbean Sea while bringing her son to Florida on a boat that sunk at sea, was raided by Federal officers, as ordered by Bill Clinton’s AG Janet Reno, the Left cheered. The Miami Herald, CNN and Democrats across America proclaimed the taking of the boy at gunpoint justified. He was hiding in the closet in the arms of a friend of the family, on Good Friday in Little Havana, before dawn, the most holiest day for Catholics. It was sinister and evil beyond compare for Janet Reno to choose that day for her vile deed. I was one of those who took to the streets of Little Havana and protested loudly with friends. So what did Cuban-Americans do besides protest? They called the Florida Child Abuse hotline because it was indeed child abuse. See video.
Your question about Becca’s children is valid. Frankly, both mothers abandoned their children to illegally block, stalk and harass ICE Officers. Children Protective Services (CPS) would have adjudicated them with child neglect at a minimum. Becca’s decision making as a parent should be questioned, not to mention her mental capacity. Who in their right mind, never mind as a married lesbian couple with children, would leave St Louis, MO for Canada just because their presidential candidate lost the election? Wealthy they are not. Then they crossed the Canadian border back into the US and took base in Minneapolis to join the anti-ICE agitprop groups. These chicks weren’t fit mothers. CPS should investigate Becca and if necessary, place the children with adults who will protect them from Becca. As for Renee’s death, no sympathy for her, but sorrow for the children. Renee was 37 and the dogma lived loudly in her, to quote Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein.
Putting children in harm’s way is never to be tolerated. Elian Gonzalez’s mother lost her life in trying to rescue her son from Communism. Renee Good walked away from her children in order to defend Communism.
All of these people are obstructing justice and should be rounded up. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
On the other hand, if she had simply complied with the officer’s order and turned off the car and got out, she would have been arrested, probably charged, given bail and then released and no shot would have been fired and she would be alive. She and her wife started a cascade of events that left her dead and the officer struck by a car. People pull stupid things all the time and fall off cliffs, wreck cars, and a litany of other actions that will leave them dead or injured. Not complying with police is an almost sure way of getting hurt or dead. And most fatal stupid choices never even involve the police.
But the girlfriend wouldn’t get the $1.5 million.
GEB, there were conflicting orders. One officer was telling her to get out of the car while another was telling her to leave. “Simply complying” is not simple when you have conflicting orders. She chose to leave, and Ross chose to put himself in front of vehicle when he had no reason to. Trying to stop a vehicle by putting yourself in front of it is not and is never justification to shoot if the vehicle is expected to move forward AND the officer has plenty of options to avoid it.
Blaming the Good for not “simply complying” avoids the simple fact that officer Ross had no reason to be in front of the car in the first place. Especially during tense confrontation. Good was already waving ICE to get past her. They chose to stop and confront her instead. If the simply moved past her none of this would have happened. She wasn’t obstructing their way out and she was not interfering with their duty. She has as much right to be on the road as they were.
“Ross had no reason to be in front of the car in the first place. ” It that your justification? You should be a defense lawyer.
So you’re saying, she suddenly showed up there, idled a few seconds, that he intentionally stood (confronted) her, stop her, although as a cop he had no such power and didn’t follow the rules, so he could murder her?
Ross had no reason to get in front of her car. Even their policies tell officers not to do that. They also point out that if they shoot into a moving car it won’t stop it. Makes sense since shooting at the driver while the car is moving is not going to stop the car if the driver is killed. Cars don’t just automatically stop when a driver dies. Right?
She had every right to be there. She was on a public road where she was NOT impeding traffic. Two cars went by before the ICE truck decided to stop and confront her. They could have driven past her. Nothing stops her from following them if she wanted to. It’s not a crime.
As a cop he should have known better than to stand in front of a car during a tense confrontation when he had every option to stay away from it. Nearly every police department has a policy about not stepping in front of vehicles and firing onto moving vehicles.
So he had to have a reason to be there? Good to know.
So maybe he had a death wish, is that what you’re implying?
Verbal commands from cops are to construed as nonobligatory?
Again, good to know.
He had no reason to be in front of her car. Especially during a tense confrontation. ICE policy requires officers to avoid such situations. Ross clearly did not follow policy.
She was not under arrest nor was she committing a crime.
X says: Ross had no reason to get in front of her car.
X now adds self-identifying expertise in law enforcement to his already existing expertise as a virologist, immunologist, psychiatrist, civil engineer, counterespionage expert, Constitutional expert, and the remainder of his life’s accomplishments!
PLUMHOFF v. RICKART (2014), X/Anonymous/George/Svelez… it’s a unanimous decision that absolutely shreds all the Lyin’ Like A Biden BullSchiff that you’re posting today.
354 more days still remaining in 2026 for your daily performances of communist clown show abject failure.
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm”
Why don’t you have works by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this: (1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and (2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also, (3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
354 days left in 2026 for daily cringe-worthy personal failure from X.
“while another was telling her to leave”
I thought I had seen all the videos, but I never heard that. The ICE agent at the driver’s door was telling her to get out of the car, so who was telling her to leave? Not the agent standing in front of the SUV, surely.
“while another was telling her to leave”
First I’ve heard of this. Who told her to leave? Not the agent standing in front of the 4600 lb SUV, surely. And not the one at the door.
And I know no one who has the right to randomly stop a vehicle in the middle of the road. Why didn’t these “legal observers” simply park the SUV and observe from there?
X hopefully lied: GEB, there were conflicting orders. One officer was telling her to get out of the car while another was telling her to leave.
Her homosexual wife yelling at her to leave is not employed as an ICE officer, or a LEO with any other agency. In fact, she’s an unindicted felon who harmed the children under their care by burning them with cigarettes.
Communists’ lying to defend their fellow communist Democrats defending Democrat criminality to protect criminal Illegal Aliens. It’s the Marxist way…
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm”
Why don’t you have works by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this: (1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and (2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also, (3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
354 days left in 2026 for daily cringe-worthy personal failure from X.
I still fault the governor and mayor for not deploying a large state and local law enforcement police presence at this demonstration, not so much as to cover and assist ICE, but rather to protect the citizen protesters from the possible results of their bad decisions, such as this one. Because he is an imbecile, Governor Walz has an excuse. Mayor Frey does not.
Yes, it’s wrong to leap to conclusions but why do you ignore the worst offenders—Trump, Noem, Vance, etc.? Their blind insistence that Good is a “domestic terrorist” who absolutely tried to kill the ICE officer is absurd based on the available evidence as of now and wholly irresponsible since they have the duty to seek the truth here. Clearly, they have prejudiced and undermined the credibility of the FBI investigation.
“Yes, it’s wrong to leap to conclusions but why do you ignore the worst offenders—Trump, Noem, Vance, etc.? ” Um… maybe because the protagonist of the story is Jacob Frey.
As for the rest, Turley describe you’re type – willfully blind.
Why do these protesters not want ICE to rid our country of criminal illegal people? I don’t get it, the list of the people being arrested are rapists, muderers, child molesters, drug traffickers, organized crime figures. Who in their right minds would not want these types out of our country? What politicians would stand for these scum of the earth types? It’s insanity.
Performative rage. Still waiting for news report describing a Democrat being raped, robbed or killed by an illegal. Maybe they have some sort of immunity to violence.
Naaa… they got some kinda invisible forcefield that wards off illegals.
Shortly after the Biden Administration opened the floodgates to indiscriminately allow one and all to enter our country, Senator Durbin said that the goal was to increase Democrat votes. As it happens, our country has paid a high price for this decision in terms of both crimes (including murders and rapes of both women and children) and “free stuff”, (including food, shelter, medical care, education). At this point, every illegal alien who is deported can be measured in terms of lost votes by Democrats. While illegal aliens cannot legally vote, they do count toward number of Representatives per district. And, some states allow illegal aliens to register to vote as recipients of SNAP or Medicaid and / or as part of motor-voter registrations.
Professor Turley,
This whole article assumes that Good hit the officer with her SUV. That is still an open question as multiple videos suggest otherwise. You should heed your own advice and not jump to conclusions by relying on the single grainy low resolution video submitted by the government.
When multiple videos are synced, it actually looks like the officer was not hit by the SUV. This is a close legal issue and ultimately comes down to minutiae in the details.
In the video of the officer walking away after the shooting, there is no indication that he was nursing any injury whatsoever. Hard to imagine that he was even slightly glanced by a vehicle, as he walks and raises his mask.
Deduced from a 2 second portion of a video?
You lie.
As other ICE agents were running toward her car he was limping.
You need some glasses.
Oh yeah, dustoff was there – saw it all.
Watch the video fool. It’s really that easy.
The video you took?
But you’re a certified idiot dustoff.
DustOff never claimed to have taken the video. There are multiple videos online, from different angles and time lines.
If anyone is a certified idiot, it is you, as you just proven yourself.
You like dustoff are truly challenged. Can’t you understand dustoff is being trolled.
I too wanted to call you an idiot, but I think “challenged” fits nicely. Wouldn’t you say?
“You should your own blog.” Is that English? What college did you go to?
Nope, not a genius. Just using logic, critical thinking, reason and common sense. Traits that continue to escape you.
So, who is challenged?
https://jonathanturley.org/2026/01/12/the-ice-elephant-why-the-law-requires-all-the-facts/comment-page-2/#comment-2594127
I have been run over by an automobile. I am one of the lucky survivors. Crushed and rolled hurts and leaves you dead or disabled, so shut your pie hole spinning about something you know nothing about. It’s a justified shooting initiated by a couple of people that are so lost they are never to be found.
The videos show him being struck. Although it is actually not relevant under the law. He did not need to be hit, that’s just icing on the cake.
If even Jacob Frey can acknowledge that the agent was hit, how can anyone deny that reality? it is crystal clear in the videos.
4,000 lbs. steel pointed at you is enough to make anyone wary.
Adrenaline allows people to do a lot of things they could not have done had they not recently faced death
Like stopping an accelerating 4k lb SUV with one’s hands?
Just kidding dude.
Um… the vehicle did luge in his direction, enough that any reasonable (not you course) person would believable it intended to target him. It’s girlfriend gave her orders to target him. And admitted it publicly and took responsibly – I killed her.
What if an ICE vehicle did that? Would the protestor also believe that it/they/them was targeted and then used whatever was at hand (a hidden gun , brick, knife) to defend it/they/them?
Since he was not it struck, then no self defense argument?
Like I said above, this is a close issue and I don’t believe we have enough evidence to definitively conclude one way or the other. It may be that a reasonable officer would conclude that the a vehicle with wheels turned away from the officer would be lunging at him.
But the focus of the above point was that Turley’s article takes as a fact that the vehicle hit the officer. That is not certain.
“a reasonable officer’? You mean the one sitting at a desk in DC directing events? And then in a split second those wheels, oriented right, the officer must have known that she was leaving, and without waiting to be struck to confirm her intent, as she accelerated in his direction, tires right, knowing she was leaving, but there was 3 plus feet of space between them, again not knowing which direction (hopefully he watched her hands and eyes), and ordered by her “life partner” to drive baby drive (target him) , just fired for the heck of it? He knew he was safe no matter what she did.
Good put her 4600 lb SUV in Drive, and stepped on the gas. That would have been enough for me.
Look at what happened to Officer Amy Caprio, who did NOT shoot the driver of a stolen SUV.
“This whole article assumes that Good hit the officer with her SUV. That is still an open question as multiple videos suggest otherwise.”
The ONLY angle where it isn’t clear that the officer was hit was the initial released one from BEHIND the SUV, which you can’t see all that much. EVERY SINGLE OTHER ANGLE MAKES IT CLEAR HE WAS HIT! You have the wide angle one that the left dismissed as “too grainy”, even though you can clearly see the officer being hit, then we have the officer’s cell phone recording in high-def we can see the hit. Heck, even that one from behind the SUV shows the officer’s leg being pushed back without him taking a step. That could only happen if he was hit.
The officer was hit. End of story.
No, not “end of story”. Ross had no reason to be in front of the vehicle at all. Policy required him to avoid being in front of the vehicle. He had plenty of time and reason to stay away from the front. Then we have the problem of conflicting orders from officers. One told her to get out of the car, another told her to leave.
ICE was not blocked in. They had plenty of space to drive past her. They chose to stop and confront her after she tried to wave them through. THEY escalated the situation and Ross chose to get in front of her vehicle to prevent her from moving which he is NOT supposed to do.
ICE already tried shooting at a driver and she survived. She was tried and acquitted of all charges when it was shown they lied about the situation and it was they who rammed her, not the other way around. DHS has been caught lying to judges and now to the public. They have no credibility left.
BTW X, ICE officers get bounties for shooting protesters. How could you not know that.
X says No, not “end of story”. Ross had no reason to be in front of the vehicle at all.
X, another day of Lyin’ Like A Biden… while multiple SCOTUS and other decisions shred his lies while he now claims to be an experienced law enforcement expert as well as Constitutional expert.
Three SCOTUS decisions illustrating the extent of X/Anonymous/George/Svelez’s lies – one unanimous, the other two 8-1
GRAHAM v. CONNOR (1989)
SCOTT v. HARRIS <2005)
PLUMHOFF v. RICKART (2014)
The question every day… why does X/Anonymous/George/Svelez come here daily to lie?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm"
Why don’t you have works by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this: (1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and (2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also, (3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
354 days left in 2026 for daily cringe-worthy personal failure from X.
The officer’s ED medical record should describe the injuries he incurred, and maybe even include photos.
Frey’s actions and comments are the same as have been used by other fascists throughout history. Frey is using lies, hyperbole, misstatements, and half-truths while stirring up his crowds of brownshirts. Frey’s own words led to the confrontation. Frey is as much to blame for what happened as anyone else. He should go find a beer hall to rally in.
Ah yes that classic fascist anti-government trope! Come on man
Surely you’ve figured out that to a progressive, democracy is what happened when they got what they wanted. Fascism is what happens when they don’t.
What would the reaction of the Anti-ICE protesters be if the ICE agent had instead been run over and died? Would they continue to protest against the ICE agent or protest against Good and declare her guilty of murder? Ron P.
Oh, they’d cheer Good, pin a medal on her, and continue calling ICE murderers.
And give the lesbian girlfriend a nice reward.
Jonathan Turley, you write that “Democrats” call for criminal charges. I was never a Democrat, but I found the death wrongful. I believe that if the officer hadn’t been dragged the previous year, Ms. Good would be alive today. We’re in an era where people who question anything are accused of TDS. I understand that from a legal standpoint, if the officer was justified or not, is a complicated issue. However, this is more than politics and law, it is our humanity.
Mikey
Ms. Good would be alive today if she had stayed home and minded her own business. Ms. Good would be alive today if she had obeyed the lawful orders to stop her obstruction actions. Ms. Good would be alive today if she had not tried to drive through an ICE agent. So stick your humanity BS arguments up your bum.
FREE Derek Chauvin!
Good made a long list of bad choices that resulted in her death. Exercising bad judgement, by definition, often results in bad outcomes. The conduct she exhibited as a result of her poor choices is the proximate of her death. She chose to not comply with lawful orders to exit her vehicle. She chose to try to recklessly escape.
I am not saying she deserved to be killed. I am saying the shooting was justified. The officer should NOT be charged, let alone forced to defend himself, for a justifiable shooting.
That said, my own view is the officer should probably be reprimanded. Just not for shooting of Good.
He should be reprimanded for discharging his weapon in the direction of the officer practically hanging on the door of Good’s vehicle as she tried to escape. The bullet missed him by what, about a foot? He narrowly avoided a “friendly fire” incident. In that regard, his judgment was almost as poor as Good’s.
Some observations: 1) Renee Good was a 37 year-old mother of three minor children – two teenagers and a six year old. Her death is tragic. Turning her death into a political circus is gratuitous at best. 2) US jurisprudence is based on the assumption that all suspects are innocent until proven guilty. Proof of guilt requires examination of all relevant factors, and in the case of murder, a verdict rendered by a jury of the suspect’s peers. The ICE agent who fired the kill shot has the same rights as any other citizen to the presumption of innocence. 3) It is reasonable to have impressions, opinions, and hopes, but trying to pass these off as settled facts is premature.
Michael M: And what part of the officer’s order to “get out of the car” do you think she didn’t need to comply?
michael molovinsky says: Jonathan Turley, you write that “Democrats” call for criminal charges. I was never a Democrat, but I found the death wrongful.
Mikey: you never once wrote here or on your failed blog that Ashley Babbitt, unarmed and awkwardly sprawled over a window sill she was climbing through, was wrongfully executed at point blank range by the Capitol Police officer twice her size. Didn’t post about that a few days ago while the Democrat trolls here spent an entire day on the anniversary of her death justifying her extrajudicial execution/murder.
Now there’s some Democrat Different Double Standards on display with your assessment of Babbitt’s death and this felon’s.
You also claimed to be a conservative Second Amendment supporter who wrote that Hillary Clinton’s intention to ban and confiscate all “assault weapons” was ‘pragmatic gun control that honors the Second Amendment’.
Mikey… your historical double standards and hypocrisy leaves you with the credibility you deserve as a Cheap Fake American Conservative.
Are you now or have you ever been a card carrying Code Pink Republican? Diagnosed with TDS?
If our news media were truly interested in serving the public interest then they would publish articles like this one.
The Hill is part of “our news media,” and they published it.
Speaking of having all the facts before coming to a conclusion. Turley never mentions the fact that Good was getting conflicting orders. One officer was telling her to leave while another was telling her to get out of the car. Professor, if you’re going to argue about having all the facts before making any assumptions perhaps you should start with your own omissions of fact.
Frey was clearly justified with his characterization of the incident. He had every right to express his view. Criticisms of his presser are fair, but I did not see any criticism of Noem’s blatant lying about officers being stuck and Good deliberately attacking them and calling her a domestic terrorist. Clearly that should have been called out by the professor and should have included the President’s own false statements.
As to the issue of the officer likely not being charged. That is not really the case. ICE’s own policy and training requires officers to avoid getting in front of a car. Police departments around the country and the majority of federal law enforcement require officers to approach cars at 90 degrees. Not from the front. Plus shooting at a moving vehicle is not allowed unless officer has no clear escape route.
This is not going to end well for ICE. They are already seen as too aggressive and eager to use deadly force for the most benign reasons.
“ICE’s own policy and training requires officers to avoid getting in front of a car.”
Oh? Even when the car’s sudden lunge was in his direction (after 4 minutes idling in street), he was required to jump out of the way? Of course he wasn’t going to be hit but shot anyway?
Brilliant analysis X.
Yes, he was not supposed to get in front of a vehicle at all. Good allowed two cars to get through and she was waving the rest of the ICE vehicles to get through. But, they chose to stop and get out to confront her. She was getting conflicting orders from two officers. One was telling her to get out of the car and another was telling her to leave. Ross deliberately got in front of the car to justify the use of deadly force. This is a tactic that was used as far back as 2012. The first shot was from the corner of the front of the car where Ross was able to get out of the way. The last two shots were from the side into the open window AFTER he moved out of the way. Those two shots were unjustified and excessive according to their own policies.
Then there is the issue or Noem outright lying about what happened. You can’t claim self defense or fear for your life if you deliberately put yourself in front of a vehicle that can be used against you. Especially when you have the ability to get out of the way and avoid harm. Ross was already planning to use his gun before she moved forward.
Whether she was idling for 4 min or not is irrelevant. She had every right to be where she was and she was allowing ICE to get through. Two went through already one chose to stop and confront her after she tried to wave them through. She had been following them before and I assume she was going to follow them after they passed her.
“he was not supposed to get in front of a vehicle at all.” That settles it. He wanted to kill a protester and waited 4 minutes to do so. And damn those conflicting orders. Maybe she thought they were illegal orders? I’m a legal observer, they can’t tell me what to do.
Brilliant analysis again. I wish I was as deluded as you. Life would be so much easier.
george
One officer was telling her to leave while another was telling her to get out of the car.
___________________
Give it a break. The first office who got out of the truck after she blocked the lane. Told her she was under arrest. He then walked up to the car and tried to open her door.
She failed to listen.
Failing to listen is definitely a reason to shoot.
Officer Michael Byrd was rewarded for shooting Ashli Babbitt for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and Babbitt was not armed with anything, not even a 4600 lb SUV.
Like Ashli Babbitt, she failed to listen and she got shot.
The first officer who got out told her to get out of the car. He never said she was under arrest. Another officer can be heard telling her to leave. She chose to leave.
Now I’m definitely convinced, should I ever get pulled over by a cop, to ignore all commands. X said so.
Wasn’t it her wife that was shouting for her to “go, go, go”?
Drive drive drive.
Hey, maybe X thought Becca Good is an ICE agent, and that’s where he got the notion of “conflicting orders.”
X, you are trying to propagate the newest “hands up. don’t shoot” lie. Hands up was a lie from the get go and it has been proven so and your claim that she was was given “conflicting orders” is another lie. The officers were trying to pull her out of her car so why would they be telling her to drive? Would they risk their own arms and lives?
The left lies with impunity. See when they say she was killed thru the side window. See when they say she was dropping off her kids at school. See when they say Maryland Dad.
We now have Ilhan Omar saying that we are wasting tax payer money by spending all this money in MN. The woman who gave us the Somali fraud squad that stole billions of tax dollars is worried about tax money? It is laughable.
Got the facts twisted again. It was the Dems who ordered the hit on her.
Hullbobby, one officer told her to leave. Another told her to get out of the car. None said she was under arrest. She chose to leave once one of the officers tried to open her door. Ross got in front of her car which is not what he is supposed to do to prevent her from leaving. He chose to put himself in danger. He decision to move forward and bump the officer was still not reason to shoot including shooting into her open window when he was already out of the way. Three shots.
Officers are not supposed to get in front of cars to stop them. They usually use their own vehicles to block any way out. ICE did not do that in this incident. Ross was already committed to pulling his gun before she started moving.
ICE has been using the tactic of getting in front of a car to justify a “defensive shooting” whenever the option to get out of the way wa always there.
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20260108/118805/HMKP-119-JU00-20260108-SD003.pdf
And ICE officers get bounties for shooting liberals. Minimum of 3 shots expended to qualify. Head shots is a dbl. bounty.
Thanks X, you’re the best.
X no ice officer at the time of the incident told her to leave
Ice did tell her to leave some time before
She failed to do so
And that is why the officer ordered her out of the car
And when she refused was seeking to remove her
Lots of others including her spouse were telling here to leave
But the only LEO giving her directions was the on at her window
The officer she struck was clearly not speaking to her or to her spouse despite taunts he was behaving professionally
John Say,
She didn’t have to leave. Her car was positioned in a way that allowed any other car to get past her. Two cars went past her before the last ICE crew chose to stop to confront her. They could have just driven past her.
Ross had no reason to get in front of her car. ICE policy states officers are not to get in front of vehicles to stop them or shoot onto moving vehicles. They could have taken a picture of her license plate and arrested her alter. But they chose confrontation over arrest later.
Good waved them to get past her, but they chose to confront her instead.
“ X no ice officer at the time of the incident told her to leave
Ice did tell her to leave some time before
She failed to do so
And that is why the officer ordered her out of the car
And when she refused was seeking to remove her”
So which is it John? Did ICE tell her to leave or not? You’re giving contradictory statements.
She had no obligation to leave when they told her to leave. She was not impeding them or preventing them from leaving. She had as much right to be there as they did. Ross had no reason to be in front of her car and getting bumped by the corner of car is no reason to shoot. Much less shoot into the window when he was clearly out of harm’s way.
He was violating policy by getting in front of her car.
Frey had every right to express his view
I have no idea what Justified speech is
His remarks were wrong stupid and dangerous
But they were also protected speech
Just as Turley’s criticism is free speech
You are incorrect about policy
And obviously so
First the policy is to avoid stepping in the path of a moving vehicle
You are not allowed to create the threat to yourself
Both from the use of force perspective and because ICE does not want injuries
But even the policy against getting in front of moving vehicles has myriads of exceptions
An LEO can step in front of a moving vehicle to stop someone who is an immediate danger to others
But the exceptions do not matter
The officer stepped in front of a stationary vehicle where the driver had been lawfully ordered to stop and exit
Policies are not designed to make evading arrest trivial
John Say,
In this none of the exceptions applied.
The policy states officers should avoid getting in front of a vehicle whether it’s moving or not is irrelevant. The whole point is to avoid being in front of a vehicle at all. Especially when there are other options like staying to the side. Ross chose to get in front and he put himself in harm’s way. Ross created the threat himself by placing himself in front when he had no reason to.
“ The officer stepped in front of a stationary vehicle where the driver had been lawfully ordered to stop and exit
Policies are not designed to make evading arrest trivial”
Whether the vehicle was stationary or not he is not supposed to get in front, period. The policy was there to ensure officer safety. Ross ignored that at his own peril.
She was not ordered to stop. She was told to get out. She was NOT under arrest either. Nobody said she was. She had every right to leave. She did not commit any crime or moving violation. Remember, she was positioned in a way that clearly allowed any vehicle to get past her.
There is already evidence of DHS and ICE outright lying to judges and the public. They already tried to BS their way out of an unjustified shooting in Chicago where the woman who was accused of ramming ICE was acquitted of all charges after she was shot 5 times.
Ross had no reason to be in front of her car and he had plenty of opportunity to avoid being in that position.
She was not obstructing or impeding ICE. She was certainly following them and observing which are NOT crimes. They chose to confront her and they escalated the situation. Good did nothing wrong.
X
Contra your claim this is going fine
The protests are weak and fizzling
Outside of the far left most people recognize this as a tragedy of goods own making
Even the ice watch group she was apart of is stressing that they teach observing and recording from a safe distance not obstructing or taunting or making yourself part of what you are observing
I am surprised turley is still covering this
Because the attacks on ice over this are on life support
While turley is correct that many things such as Rene or Rebeca remarks or intentions are irrelevant with respect to the use of deadly force
They do impact all of us
The goods prior interference with ice that day as little as 5 min before the video is irrelevant to the use of force
But people understand why she was being arrested
Rebecca behavior is irrelevant
But it paints both of them in a bad light
Rebecca’s drive drive drive remarks are relevant because they create a reason for the officer to fear for his life
Regardless they also create a bad public impression
More information is coming out indicating that the goods are carpetbaggers and possibly professional agitators – the real “jobs” may be left wing agitators
That does not play well publicly
Regardless outside of the far left you are losing the PR war and you lost the legal war
It did not help you that almost the same day two TDA thugs tried to mow down an ice agent in Portland
Nor does it help having the Portland police chief tearing up over openly tda members involved in shootings and prostitution
Regardless this is fading fast and very close to an own goal for the left
I do not understand why turley is still wasting time on it
Yes far left idiots are still trying to push it
But people are not buying
The Ice shot a mom dropping her kids at daycare lie is DOA
You do not understand how the constant lying has destroyed your credibility
X says: This is not going to end well for ICE. They are already seen as too aggressive and eager to use deadly force for the most benign reasons.
This is already not ending well for X’s fellow Democrat felons like this homosexual female from their Alphabet Sex Pride Tribe, who are obeying the Democrat leadership’s call to sacrifice themselves on kamikaze missions to prevent law enforcement deporting their criminal Illegal Alien guest Democrat voters.
The hajji Hamas terrorists X and the Democrats support call on their faithful hajjis to become martyrs for the cause on suicide missions. The Democrat felons that X supports similarly obey the call to become martyrs for the Democrat cause of keeping their criminal Illegal Aliens in America – no matter how many Americans and legitimate immigrants die as a result of the crimes they commit while illegally in America.
X will be bitterly disappointed that the Democrats will fail to whip up another election season of George Floyd 2.0 political riots for the 2026 election.
Communist revolutionaries never stray from the path that Marx, Lenin, Mao, etc laid out for them…
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm”
Why don’t you have works by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this: (1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and (2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also, (3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
354 days left in 2026 for daily cringe-worthy personal failure from X.
“Speaking of having all the facts before coming to a conclusion. Turley never mentions the fact that Good was getting conflicting orders.”
Some advice for the fool GSX. When a police officer approaches you while you are in a car, he may be looking for a serial murderer. He must protect himself. Therefore, it is up to you to help keep the situation safe. Make your hands visible and place them on the steering wheel. Do not move the car, and do not make any quick movements.
The only difference is that, in this modern parable, many are just willfully blind, choosing not to see beyond their own rage.
The worst kind of ignorance is willful ignorance. That describes these so called protesters.
The other thing is they would have cared less if Renee Good had been killed by an illegal alien and her GoFundMe account wouldh’t have gotten one cent from these people.
It’s all about creating chaos and destroying the United States so they can install their Socialist paradise.
So true.
I don’t think they care whether the facts support them. They have their theory, and if the facts don’t agree, the facts are irrelevant and evil tools of white supremacy/fascism/sexism/racism/homophobia/transphobia/whatever.
Who is “they”? Your parents?
Martyrs death entails a big jackpot in 2025. It used to be sainthood.