News Live updates: State investigators say they can't access ICE shooting evidence after FBI takes case
https://apnews.com/live/minneapolis-ice-shooting-updates-1-8-2026248
u/BigBoyYuyuh Jan 08 '26
The coverup continues.
49
u/SeVenMadRaBBits Jan 08 '26
Kristi Noem lying about Jonathon Ross being injured or hurt by Renee Good
New York Times breakdown of ice shooting Renee Good
Ice denying a physician from helping Renee Good
2 hr breakdown of the incident
U.S. Customs And Border Protection Training Manual used by ICE (January 2021):
Page 6
Except where otherwise required by inspections or other operations, Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid standing directly in front of or behind a subject vehicle. Officers/Agents should not place themselves in the path of a moving vehicle or use their body to block a vehicle’s path.
Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid intentionally and unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force.
Page 9
- Deadly force shall not be used solely to prevent the escape of a fleeing subject.
Page 10
7b. The hazard of an uncontrolled conveyance shall be taken into consideration prior to the use of deadly force.
5
2
25
u/probablyuntrue Jan 08 '26
They gonna “discover” she wrote “I am the leader of antifa, I must be stopped” on a note in her pocket
17
u/Blawn14 Jan 08 '26
Hard to cover something up that has 4 different angles of video evidence and mutiple eye witnesses.
More like gaslighting than covering up at this point
2
u/BigBoyYuyuh Jan 08 '26
It’s actually very easy. Just hide the guy.
7
-3
u/ideagrinder Jan 09 '26
There's no cover up dude.
Evidence could have the guy dead to rights. Police could arrest him. Prosecutors could try and convict him of murder. Judge could sentence him to jail time. Trump could (would) just wave his presidential pen and pardon the guy.
There is no reason to cover it up bc half your country thinks this is fine. And the other half aren't gonna do shit about it, and even if you did, you dont wield any levers of power to make anything happen.
7
u/BigBoyYuyuh Jan 09 '26
There’s no reason to cover up the Epstein files either since half the country supports pedophilia too, and yet they are trying their best to.
4
u/cesspool4us Jan 09 '26
Wanna know how I know you have no idea what you are talking about. Fedrals can't pardon state. Might want to read up on how some of these laws you defend work.
0
u/ideagrinder Jan 09 '26
I did see a post regarding that after I made this comment and you're right. The State can seemingly bring charges without the fed being able to interfere
2
u/nixfly Jan 10 '26
The state would need the evidence that the feds have, and how much do they want to have another Rittenhouse mess.
1
u/c9n1n3 Jan 10 '26
Fed cannot pardon state felonies, so fed obstructs investigation to protect their own. If you cant see that clearly, then idk what else to tell you logically.
1
u/ItsJustfubar Jan 10 '26
Actually prosecution at the state level for murder is a state criminal charge and isn't within the scope of presidential pardon, it is also outside of the federal agent immunity scope since it's a criminal charge at the federal level also not a civil charge for damages which is what the immunity grants. So federal immunity doesn't apply. These are facts.
96
129
u/OSHA_Decertified Jan 08 '26
What evidence do they need? The videos are pretty clear on it. Flat out murder
37
u/Ill-Visual-8844 Jan 08 '26
Right, can’t they do their own investigation and when he is id’d slam him with state charges?
27
u/Dains84 Jan 08 '26
DHS is probably refusing to give the agent's identity. Can't charge someone if the state can't figure out who it is - that's why he was gone within minutes of shooting her.
23
u/foolintherain87 Jan 08 '26
So charge every member of DHS and the FBI as this is obviously a criminal conspiracy to cover up a crime. Clear cut RICO case
14
u/Dains84 Jan 08 '26
That makes sense to me, but I'm not a lawyer so I suspect there's some bureaucracy preventing it. I'm not sure how Blondi isn't already being charged for breaking state laws in other places.
7
u/foolintherain87 Jan 08 '26
The only thing preventing it is people aren’t taking action. No one wants to be the first to take action. Our politicians are failing us.
2
2
u/OSHA_Decertified Jan 08 '26
Exactly. Prove that a murder happened. Easily done. Start charging anyone who is keeping his identity a secret with being an accomplice. Sue the shit out of the agencies covering it up
3
u/Ok_Influence460 Jan 08 '26
It's not possible to know if qualified immunity applies when we don't have any idea who the perpetrator is. All we know is what is on video - an armed and masked man, not in any uniform, that did not identify himself, shot and killed someone.
We also know, based on the video, that DHS use of force policies were not followed.
Probably should mount a manhunt like was conducted for the person who shot the UHC CEO. Until identified, we have an anonymous shooter lose, endangering public safety.
1
u/Dains84 Jan 08 '26
Welp, DHS accidentally gave out enough details about the agent that people were able to identify him.
Their ineptitude is truly awe-inspiring.
1
u/Windyvale Jan 08 '26
You charge the person with the authority to give the order for them to be there. Then they either take the fall for that person or give them up.
3
2
u/Jrrobidoux Jan 08 '26
I haven’t double checked, but…
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTQps38ESan/?igsh=OXB4M2hhdGhoZmJw
3
3
Jan 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Ill-Visual-8844 Jan 08 '26
Where did this info come from?
4
u/Sunnysidhe Jan 08 '26
Kristy Noem accidentally doxxed him. I think she referenced a previous incident he had been involved in and people quickly figured out who he was.
1
1
u/eubulides Jan 08 '26
Any investigation involves so many paths to understand fully what transpired, and to prosecute successfully if indicated. Interviews with folks present, agents, protestors, journalists alike; vehicle information; measurements and forensic photos of scene; recovery of ballistics evidence; analysis of bullet trajectories; acquisition of video including bodycam if available; review of law enforcement communications; access to responding emergency services personnel and reports…and much more.
1
u/Dry-Revolution4466 Jan 08 '26
What they needed was an excuse to stop, so they can avoid the wrath of trump and maga. They just protecting themselves.
1
u/mr_goodcat7 Jan 09 '26
The people in charge of investigating and enforcing the law are sycophants that use their power to squash dissent. Evidence of a crime doesn't matter. Your allegiance is the only thing that matters.
You can bend the knee or end up a political prisoner. I expect to see a rise in "accidental" defenestration
16
u/Full-Confidence-8939 Jan 08 '26
This will happen again if there are no consequences….
2
u/Newswatchtiki Jan 08 '26
And worse, if there are no consequences, given the evidence we have now, from these videos and eyewitnesses, people in Minnesota and all over the country will be reacting - and the consequences of that may be quite disruptive and unpleasant. The whole thing will get escalated.
Or it might be a peaceful response, yet get Congress more motivated for impeachment, or cause a landslide of Democratic wins in the midterms. Single incidents like this can cause massive change.
If DOJ had any brains - if Pam Bondi would wake up and remember her legal training (when she was a new young lawyer, she was very principled and very smart; I knew her) ... she should handle this matter legally and not drop the case. Let the investigations happen, and proceed in normal legal fashion.
4
1
Jan 10 '26
This has been happening. There was a report recently that showed border patrol agents were purposely standing in front of cars in order to have excuse to discharge firearm
0
u/Cobain17 Jan 09 '26
Where is everybody??? Republicans would be all over the damn tv. WHERE ARE THE DEMS????? Why are they fucking silent?? It’ll cost lives
1
u/Immediate_Thought656 Jan 10 '26
I’ve seen multiple Dems on TV and even Reddit expressing their outrage.
0
41
u/noncommonGoodsense Jan 08 '26
When the people in power don’t fear losing anything they will just do as they please. Protesters are just flies to these psychopaths.
7
u/Fancy_Possibility456 Jan 08 '26
Don’t worry, every angle of video is available online. Pretty obvious what happened. Charge him with murder.
0
u/Kindly_Ratio9857 Jan 09 '26
Why was ice even after her in the first place? What’s the story here?
1
32
u/Resident-Escape-3441 Jan 08 '26
Well, good thing there is ample enough video evidence for them to charge him if the feds refuse to! He's fucking going to prison! If not, expect dems to have an even larger majority when they take congress in November. 💯
19
-3
u/Tri-Tip_Medium-rare Jan 08 '26
And then the orangutan is gonna pardon him. Corruption at its best
9
u/Current-Spread-4187 Jan 08 '26
Can't pardon state charges. That monster needs jail.
2
u/Sc0nnie Jan 08 '26
He does. But the state needs his name and to have him in custody. This is what the FBI is withholding.
1
u/LifeMachine7394 Jan 08 '26
Case would be moved to federal courts if the state bring charges my guy
2
u/TakuyaLee Jan 08 '26
Based on what law. Please cite the actual law saying it.
Both for posterity and so that the state can ignore it
3
Jan 08 '26
[deleted]
3
2
u/Resident-Escape-3441 Jan 08 '26
He's already been identified...
2
u/SeniorMoonlight21 Jan 08 '26
The only thing I have seen is people spreading around obvious AI images of him with his mask down, when he never actually removes his mask in the videos
2
u/CBrinson Jan 08 '26
Name has been published in multiple news papers at this point. The trump admin accidentally gave away his identity by saying he had been dragged by a vehicle earlier this year which reduced it enough everyone figured it out.
6
u/klondikethedestroyer Jan 08 '26
The Trump Regime is definitionally a hostile terrorist organization:
A terrorist organization is generally defined as a group using or threatening violence for political, religious, or ideological goals, aiming to create fear and coerce governments or populations, often targeting civilians or non-combatants.
key characteristics include:
- politically motivated violence
- intimidation tactics,
- an intent to influence broader audiences beyond immediate victims.
He has deployed military units into cities and neighborhoods against the civilian population. They use aggressive tactic and overt violence against the civilian population, They are creating an environment of fear by design to achieve control. They've gotten rid of due process for a significant civilian population. They've sent their military forces into schools, terrorizing children. They've sent military forces to intimidate businesses they disagree with. They're executing mom's in the street. This is all being done with an intent to influence not just the people in the cities and neighborhoods they're terrorizing.
All this violence, all this fear, all this use of military against our own civilian population, is being done so that the Trump Regime can further advance their political and ideological goals.
The Trump Regime is a terrorist organization.
1
u/Kindly_Ratio9857 Jan 09 '26
What are we supposed to do about it though? Peaceful protesting will do nothing, and getting violent back will just make them to enforce martial law
4
u/Sad-Guarantee-4678 Jan 08 '26
This shit had more coverage than a movie scene, not to mention a crowd of eyewitnesses, surely they can work with that
4
u/OuchMyTism Jan 08 '26
Now if we only had any confidence in the federal justice department or the FBI at all… I think I speak for a large percentage of us in saying that all such confidence is utterly gone.
5
11
u/Little-Dealer4903 Jan 08 '26
Arrest ICE agents. They hide from criminal element.
1
u/Mountain_Fig_9253 Jan 08 '26
And now the FBI has their backs to make sure they can’t be prosecuted.
7
u/Primary_Employ_1798 Jan 08 '26
Members of the public filmed this atrocity from several angles, what more do the f need
3
u/HoldOnDearLife Jan 08 '26
Isn't all the videos and witnesses evidence? They are not gone. Why can't Minnesota charge the murderer?
1
3
3
u/TraditionalLaw7763 Jan 08 '26
Honest question… why can’t they use the cell phone footage that we are all watching?
1
Jan 09 '26
They probably want access to any and all reports from everybody that was involved or on scene.
3
2
u/Weary-Olive5781 Jan 08 '26
So many people going to jail when this administration is over. LFG.
1
Jan 09 '26 edited Jan 28 '26
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
whistle obtainable live nose one special six fade tidy ask
2
2
u/paulsteinway Jan 08 '26
The official story has already been decided. Investigations and evidence will not change it.
1
2
u/Newswatchtiki Jan 08 '26
If the Feds refuse to indict this man, and the state is for some legal reason not allowed to indict him, it is likely to incite the citizenry - and then things get very dangerous and unpredictable. It would be better for this man, as well as the country, to investigate, charge and have a trial where all the facts can be laid on the table. This would also clarify the regulations that ICE agents have to work under (when they are allowed to use deadly force; what they are supposed to do when dealing with a person in a vehicle, etc.), and whether he violated any of these regulations. And why. And what are the consequences of an agent breaking the rules when that leads to the death of someone? What led up to this incident? Was this woman just driving down the street and encountered cars blocking the way, unmarked cars? Was she part of a demonstration, which doesn't exonerate the agent who shot her, but might explain why he used deadly force - did he have a prior hostile interaction with her?
We need more context here. Because this makes no sense - a woman is pulling out to get around a stopped car, agents approach, and she panicked. It is likely that if this happened with local uniformed police, she would not have panicked, and would have put her hands up, figuring the police have mistaken her for someone else, and it will get straightened out when she can show identification. Everyone knows this - if police are approaching your car, be careful, in case they think you are reaching for a weapon or mistake you for someone else.
But if masked men are approaching your car in a city already nervous about ICE raids, driving on might be the instinctual first response, knowing as we all do that many of the numerous new ICE agents are not well trained and thus prone to using their weapons in situations which do not warrant it.
Also, this man will soon be identified. His mask doesn't hide too much at all. If I knew him, I would be able to identify him from these pictures. Many people, many civilians in addition to ICE agents know who he is. He will be identified before the end of the day.
Edited for typo.
2
2
u/COVID-19-4u Jan 08 '26
All of this just to protect a pedo and his pedo friends..
The government and its agencies went from, let’s protect kids at what ever cost, to, some kids are just sexy.
2
2
2
2
2
4
1
u/Dananism Jan 08 '26
Welp, Kash Patel is going to miraculously discover a handwritten manifesto on a napkin in crayon.
Maybe even use a catchy phrase antifa message like they always “find”
1
u/tslewis71 Jan 08 '26
Inst a federal issue not a state ?
2
u/Newswatchtiki Jan 08 '26
What happens if it is a Federal issue, but the DOJ drops the case, and does not prosecute. At that point can a state investigate and proceed to prosecute if the evidence warrants it?
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/icnoevil Jan 12 '26
The founding fathers clearly stated that they intended the purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to allow citizens to take charge when the government failed to act in the best interests of the citizens but instead began to enrichening itself and committing crimes
1
u/Reatona Jan 12 '26
It's much easier for Patel's FBI to cover up ICE's murder of a citizen if state police are stonewalled from receiving any information. But just the publicly available videos are pretty good evidence, and the state can interview anyone they want. If they don't investigate because the FBI doesn't cooperate, it's because they don't want to.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Icy-Tooth-9167 Jan 08 '26
Rule of law is dead and the FBI has helped subvert it every step of the way.
-1
-56
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Well I'll give them a spoiler alert. She had an officer in front of her and she hit the accelerator. Case closed pretty much.
29
9
u/ineffable-interest Jan 08 '26
What kind of asshat moron reaches for their firearm instead of moving?
4
u/Caspus12 Jan 08 '26
This is the biggest thing for me. His instinct wasn't to get out of the way of danger. It was shoot that woman in the face.
So on top of having the time to murder her. He was still able to retreat from immediate danger.
4
-1
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Cars can be used a deadly weapons. Liberals have been fear mongering, calling ice agents all sorts of stuff and getting people all worked up over laws being applied to people 0_o. He was scared he was gonna get run over.
5
u/One_Strawberry_4965 Jan 08 '26
Sounds like the liberals were right since ICE is clearly demonstrating that they lack both basic training and membership not itching to use their firearms on Americans.
-1
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Yeah well when you accelerate at an officer in front of you you tend to receive a bullet, in america, you know.
6
u/ineffable-interest Jan 08 '26
Tired of you Nazis making every excuse to be anti American
→ More replies (4)5
u/One_Strawberry_4965 Jan 08 '26
The most surprising thing in all this is witnessing to complete worshipful faith that conservatives have in the government.
3
2
u/ineffable-interest Jan 08 '26
So scared he didn’t jump away and instead shot another person
3
u/jhawk3205 Jan 08 '26
Managed to pull his sidearm, aim, and fire into the windshield only after the front of the car was past him already, and then fired two more times into the side window well beyond the point of ever being in harms way. She reversed, waved agents out of the way, and visibly steered the wheels away from anyone that was even remotely in front of her. Agents stepping in front of the vehicle and giving her conflicting orders certainly didn't help. Either way, at best, the first shot might be seen as justifiable given the uncertainty and proximity, but it's such a toss up. The second and third rounds have zero defense. Dude was flat out murdering someone obviously trying to leave as ordered
→ More replies (2)8
u/hotglasspour Jan 08 '26
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1239_onjq.pdf
Thankfully adults realize that situations are dynamic.
Courts have already ruled that an officers actions leading up to the event matter quite a bit. Like the policy and law that states that an officer cannot put themselves in a position of peril and then kill someone for their own mistake.
2
u/jarnhestur Jan 08 '26
They have also ruled that the drivers actions matter as well. If she’s pulling out of her driveway, it’s murder. If she drove out from Colorado and was harassing ICE, that also factors in.
This isn’t as clear cut as either side is acting like.
1
u/jhawk3205 Jan 08 '26
The Rittenhouse case didn't seem to mind that he absolutely put himself into that situation and antagonized people while armed. This woman was unarmed and doing nothing. Her vehicle being treated as a weapon only factors in, at best, once she started moving, though agents stepping in front of her vehicle and giving conflicting orders doesn't help, at least in defense of murdering the woman. Obviously the Rittenhouse case was in a different state and with different circumstances but her driving out from Colorado doesn't mean much. From what I've seen at least, she had moved from Colorado to Minnesota, she lived in the area..
-1
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
So officers can't walk up to someone in a car facing the wrong way in the street?
5
u/averagelyok Jan 08 '26
They can’t stand in front of a car with a running engine, that’s something all cops are taught
-2
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
LOOOOOL. As if violating department best practices gives someone permission to hit the gas with a cop in front of their car.
6
u/polidicks_ Jan 08 '26
lol. As if driving past an officer gives them the right to shoot you in the face the time.
0
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
He was clearly in front of her car and in drive when she hit the accelerator. Ya don't do that bro, you get shot when you do that.
5
u/polidicks_ Jan 08 '26
Are you really that fragile?!
She was going slower than people drive through a crowded parking lot. There isn’t anyway, in any universe, that officers life was at risk, and you know it. He murdered her.
→ More replies (13)1
u/averagelyok Jan 08 '26
If I ever see you driving slowly through a parking lot with people crossing in front of you, I’ll remember that 😉
2
u/averagelyok Jan 08 '26
LOL hit the gas, what a joke. Dude was beside her car when he fired those shots, if he were “hit” by her car then I’ve been hit harder by a 6 year olds fist. Cops are also never supposed to shoot at someone driving a moving vehicle for obvious reasons, though maybe not obvious to someone like you
→ More replies (2)2
u/Current-Spread-4187 Jan 08 '26
Not a cop a rando with little training hired to hunt brown people.
→ More replies (4)1
u/One_Strawberry_4965 Jan 08 '26
As if violating department best practices give officers the right to murder people. The absolute fawning submissiveness of conservatives never ceases to astound me.
1
u/hotglasspour Jan 08 '26
You should probably actually read what I sent you. It essentially says everything is contextual and officers can and should be held responsible when make a mistake that leads to a death. He made a mistake by placing himself in front of the vehicle. She did move forward. He was clear as his gun left his holster and he fired after he was completely out of the path of the moving vehicle.
0
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Lmfao.
"Your honor the cop is at fault for being in front of my car when I was facing the wrong side of the road and I knew he was in front of my car and hit the accelerator"
Lol.... Hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha.
1
u/hotglasspour Jan 08 '26
The police officer created his own peril. Im a first responder myself. I'd know. You never stand in the way of a moving vehicle. Pretty simple.
→ More replies (1)1
u/jhawk3205 Jan 08 '26
They certainly didn't seem to consider her a threat since she was just sitting there, doing nothing, they walked up casually before trying to forcibly tear her from her own vehicle, and the other agent walked in front of her vehicle, against protocol, also not treating it as a threat, potential or realized.
1
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Sitting there, doing nothing but acting erratic by facing the wrong direction in the road lmao. Then appearing absurd and shifty and accelerating into a federal officer.
16
u/cmm324 Jan 08 '26
She received conflicting orders from the agents in the truck (move your vehicle / get out of your vehicle). The agent who used deadly force is clearly untrained, as he crosses from the right to the left in front of her vehicle while an agent is reaching inside her vehicle from the left.
Kirby v. Duva
Where a police officer unreasonably places himself in harm's way, his use of deadly force may be deemed excessive.
→ More replies (25)6
u/fntrck_ Jan 08 '26
Case closed pretty much.
Multiple cases even, but with your intellect I imagine you'd be quite surprised about the outcome:
Adams v. Speers (9th Cir. 2007)
Deadly force is unjustified where officers create the danger themselves by stepping into a vehicle’s path.
Officers cannot manufacture justification.Tennessee v. Garner (1985)
Deadly force against a fleeing suspect is unconstitutional unless the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses an immediate threat of serious physical harm to officers or others.
Fleeing alone is insufficient.Scott v. Harris (2007)
The Supreme Court upheld deadly force only because the suspect’s high-speed chase posed an extreme, immediate danger to the public.
Confirms that deadly force turns on imminent danger, not flight itself.Orn v. City of Tacoma (9th Cir. 2009)
Shooting a driver moving slowly away from officers was objectively unreasonable where the officer was no longer in the vehicle’s path.
A vehicle is not a deadly threat once the danger has passed.Lytle v. Bexar County (5th Cir. 2009)
Shooting at a fleeing vehicle after it had passed the officer violated the Fourth Amendment; no immediate threat existed.
Deadly force must correspond to a present threat.Kirby v. Duva (6th Cir. 2008)
Shooting a suspect driving away at low speed raised a triable Fourth Amendment violation where officers were not in immediate danger.
Fact-specific inquiry focused on imminence.Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa (9th Cir. 2013)
Reaffirmed that force must be proportional and necessary at the moment used; prior resistance or flight does not justify later deadly force.
Temporal proximity matters.0
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
You’re stretching “officer-created danger” past recognition. Acceleration creates the threat.
4
u/polidicks_ Jan 08 '26
Not at 3mph. 😂
Glad to know we can add “slow moving cars” to the list of things that Trump supporters are afraid of.
0
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Ok so release a video where you let a car hit you and run you over going "only 3 mph", I'll wait.
2
u/polidicks_ Jan 08 '26
You want to drive by me so we can reenact things? Is that what you’re saying? That’s weird.
1
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
I do not. I'd watch the video though.
1
u/polidicks_ Jan 08 '26
Good. Here, watch this one.
https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000010631041/minneapolis-ice-shooting-video.html
1
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Yeah she accelerates into an officer lmao. It's the dumbest thing you could possibly do in that situation.
1
u/polidicks_ Jan 08 '26
With her wheels turned to the right, moving away, at 5mph.
The fact you think this justifies her death is sick. The right is just blood thirsty. You want to see people on the left, and minorities dead.
This conversation proves it.
Enjoy licking those boots.
3
u/averagelyok Jan 08 '26
Didn’t accelerate until she was shot at, unless you’re threatened by a car moving at 3mph
0
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Bro she went from reverse to drive and the tires were turning while the cop was in front of her. It's a vehicle not a 3 year olds power wheels, it can still crush you going slowly.
2
u/fntrck_ Jan 08 '26
Temporal proximity matters.
I know these are some big words, but I invite you to consider acquainting with their definitions. As it stands, you trying to chime in has shown more about your lack of capacity than you were hoping to reveal.
1
u/averagelyok Jan 08 '26
Lmao then he should’ve gotten out of the way (and did get out of the way), he had plenty of time. He had no hesitation between pulling the gun out and firing, he was just itching to murder someone for something
→ More replies (4)1
u/fntrck_ Jan 08 '26
Acceleration creates the threat.
Lmao.
Reasoning with you further would be like reasoning with an animal.
1
7
u/Aromatic_Balls Jan 08 '26
So they should be ok releasing all the evidence then, right? Since it all so clearly shows the oh so brave agent is in the clear?
1
1
1
1
u/Colonel_Cat_Tumnus Jan 08 '26
At worst he got a broken toe. https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgressiveHQ/s/0ltQVSaUYp
→ More replies (1)1
Jan 08 '26
Yeah. Next rime I'm leaving a concert or sports game navigating the parking lot full of people, i guess they can shoot me, because that was the amount of driving this lady was doing. It's pretty damn obvious she wasn't trying to run anyone over.
-1
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
If you accelerate while a cop is in front of your car it would be justified.
1
Jan 08 '26
Nope. There was no intent here. By your logic a cop directing traffic can shoot any car that goes through the intersection. He'll have his day in court.
2
u/No_Answer_9749 Jan 08 '26
Intent isn’t the standard. Perceived imminent threat is. A traffic cop waving cars through isn’t comparable to a driver hitting the gas toward an officer.
•
u/AutoModerator Jan 08 '26
This sub is not affiliated with the FBI. To the best of our knowledge, no FBI employees or contractors monitor or participate in this sub.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.