New documents shed light on Renee Good’s ties to ICE monitoring efforts in Minneapolis

wing2000 · Saturday at 8:22 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
I was referring to the mentality...

That's what's being suggested right? If someone blocks the road, the appropriate response is, "gee, I'll just try to find a completely different route to get there because don't want them to get angry, that could escalate things" (Nevermind the fact that they'd be following them around so it's not like you can just take a different route to avoid them, but that aside)

That's the same mentality a battered wife uses, walks on eggshells and puts themselves out to avoid confrontation out of fear of making the other person mad. (when it's often to no avail, because the other person will just find some other reason to be mad)

No. I was suggesting it one option ICE could have taken to reach their destination. As it was, 11 ICE vehicles, including the agent's who eventually killed her, had already gone around her vehicle. So, it seems her efforts to block the street were not entirely possible. In addition, a video shows Renee motioning two more ICE vehicles to go around her. Instead, those agents stopped their vehicle and aggresively engaged.

My overall point is: All law enforcement officer have an obligation to deescalate and avoid lethal force. These ICE agents failed to do so.

Stopped_lurking · Saturday at 8:25 AM

stevevw said:
I don't think its as simple as people think. The use of enforcement has been done in the past by most presidents. Even the use of the National Guard has been used 58 times in the past. Its nothing new or specific that Trump is doing.

But if we look at the context. Trump was voted in on exactly what he is doing which he promised to get rid of the illegal immigrants and especially the criminal illegals.

But fundementally the santuary States are even against any deportations at all. Even if 1 car of officers went in they would be attacked. So the santuary States are already defying federal laws no matter if the approach was soft or hard. They oppose this ideologically.

I think it has been made hard and escalated by the defiance of these States. In other States who have cooperated there is little issues. As we seen with the trashing of ICE vehicles and attacking the offices of ICE they are going too far.

I mean even if they were going in and getting hardened criminals who have raped and murdered they would be prevented. Its like the protesters want to protect hardened criminals.

Do you believe the local or state police or some other federal agency than ICE or CBP would not pick up a rape or murder suspect? Or what are you saying?

stevevw said:
Its now a case that I don't think any officer could safely go in and do their job in these States.

Hans Blaster · Saturday at 11:28 AM

Pommer said:
He’s not a King, yet!
(Not a dig at your sovereign, my good friend!)

I'm a strict anti-monarchist. I think the French had the right solution. When I go after some "monarch" it isn't personal or an attack on any of their "subjects". Hopefully it will encourage them to correct the situation.

Hans Blaster · Saturday at 11:48 AM

stevevw said:
All I have mentioned is what the facts that have already come out.

Mr. Pot have you spoken to Mr. Kettle? You are a contender for board champion at "pontification as if an expert that you are not".

stevevw said:
These are the facts. What narrative. That people should not antagonise or block law enforcement officers. Thats not a narative. That just plain common sense. If you want to dispute that then thats a narrative that is wrong.

The bit you are responding to was about the "internal torso bleeding" claim that DHS laundered through CBS news. If Mr. Ross (the shooter) really had serious internal injuries from contact with Ms. Good's car, then they should have no problem at least making a press release or having a "press availability" with his doctors about his serious injury and treatment. That's what would normally happen when an officer was seriously injured by a criminal and treated at a hospital.

Not only was he not apparently injured on site just after he shot her, but he was not taken to a hospital, but to the local DHS office.

stevevw said:
Can you link the source.

The info from her autopsy is now widely circulating.

stevevw said:
This is crazy mentality. Doing everything to make out that these federal officers who are doing their legal duty are going around purposely murdering people. This is what is causing all the chaos.

It sure seems like he did just purposely murder her, but that's what criminal trials are for.

Vanellus · Saturday at 1:05 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
You can find videos of cops of all stripes and departments abusing their power.

"I saw a video of police cruelty, and that's why I fled" is a defense that wouldn't hold up in court.

Not to mention "afraid of the officers" didn't seem to apply to the Goods' situation. If they had that level of fear of the agents, they would have sat there smack-talking, and the wife wouldn't have gotten out of the car to be confrontational.

If you were deathly afraid of an entity you saw as brutal and murderous (who are visible armed), would your first thought be "I'm going to block their car to give them a hard time, honey, get the whistle and go trash talk the other one, and make sure to comment about his weight"

...or would you be staying as far away from them as possible?

Well they aren't cops but ICE agents and that is not just a pedantic point as stated by the genuine policewoman Rochelle Bilal who detailed the things killer Ross did wrong earlier this week:

This article provides some important background:
'An occupying force': Minneapolis caught up in Trump’s anti-immigration surge

The event was not an isolated episode. The Washington Post on Friday reported the January 3 death of Geraldo Lunas Campos, 55, while in ICE custody, citing a medical examiner who believes his death to be a homicide. A fellow detainee said he witnessed Luna Campos being choked by guards.

The starting point of the escalation was relatively innocuous. The Trump administration initially alleged financial irregularities involving Somali-run daycare centres in Minnesota as justification for the first raids. Minnesota is home to the largest Somali community in the United States, estimated at around 84,000, most of whom are US citizens.

Now why is it that Trump seems to think all Somalians are inherently bad calling them "garbage"

Immigration attorney Scott Shuchart says Minnesota offered a perfect opportunity for the Trump administration, which was looking for an excuse to invoke the Insurrection Act as Trump has threatened to do.

“The administration has been trying to pick this fight, trying to find a place [resisting] enough to have an excuse to declare an insurrection and use more force,” Shuchart said. “Minneapolis was the next target. It’s ideal for them – it has a large Somali immigrant population, and there is [Minnesota Representative] Ilhan Omar, whom Trump hates. His people are very angry and, frankly, racist.”

and Trump isn't too keen on Minnesota governor Tim Walz or Minneapolis mayor Jacob Frey.

ICE has more than doubled its manpower in less than a year, from roughly 10,000 officers to more than 22,000, driven by an aggressive recruitment campaign. To staff that expansion, barriers to entry have been lowered. Deportation officers must be US citizens, pass a background check and drug screening, and meet basic physical requirements. The job requires carrying a firearm and explicitly authorises the use of deadly force “when necessary”. Training has been significantly shortened, with NBC reporting that it was cut from 13 weeks to six – a move one former ICE agent described to Time magazine as “a recipe for disaster”. “New recruits often have minimal education and abbreviated preparation. The danger is that it attracts people who are more loyal to Trump than to professional law enforcement,”

But "disaster" suits Trump's disruptive techniques very well and if some eggs get broken (i.e. citizens killed by ICE) well ... these things happen don't they.

rjs330 · Saturday at 2:32 PM

Pommer said:
I had a thought.
The bullet hole in the windshield, fired from the angle it seemed to have come from, night have missed Ms Good altogether, meaning that the second and/or third shots done did the damage.

I’ve seen LEO’s opine that the first shot was “okay” but the send two were at best “iffy”.

This is all speculation since there’s going to be no investigation into this incident.

LE is not trained to fire one round and evaluate. For a long time the double tap was the typical standard that was used. However as standards in training changed they realized it was too dangerous for the officers. They would fire two rounds and stop then they'd get shot or whatever.

The standard became to stop the threat, however many rounds that took. Brain studies also took into consideration how the brain assesses threat and how quickly under deep stress one can process that the threat is over. In the short span of physiological response of recognizing a threat, response to it, much of which is physiological unconscious response, and assessment of the need for more reaponse it simply is cannot be done in as short a time span as some believe it should.

All that to say, shots 2 and 3 are perfectly aligned with the human bodies abilities, under these circumstances, to see a threat, respond to the threat and then assess the threat and stop firing. Its quite astounding he was able to stop at only 3.

JosephZ · Saturday at 2:46 PM

rjs330 said:
LE is not trained to fire one round and evaluate. For a long time the double tap was the typical standard that was used. However as standards in training changed they realized it was too dangerous for the officers. They would fire two rounds and stop then they'd get shot or whatever.

Law enforcement officers are trained not to walk in front of a vehicle while the engine is running or with someone behind the wheel and to move out of the path of a vehicle when it accelerates towards them, not to shoot at the driver. The only time deadly force can be used is when there is no possible way to escape serious injury or death. If the agent had followed his training and DOJ protocol, he would have never drawn his weapon.

rjs330 · Saturday at 2:50 PM

Stopped_lurking said:
I know, it doesn't change what I saw in the clips. How does that negate that he could jumped out of the way?

Monday morning quarterbacking. He was teying to get out of the way. He didn't stop and stand there you know. Rhe streets were icy as well. How agile is he? Do you know that?

Stopped_lurking said:
Are you saying that Frey intends to instigate violence?

Not sure about violence, maybe he is just an idiot and doesn’t think about the potential consequences of his idiotic comments. I do think he intends to instigate chaos and criminal activity and rebellion against the governement.

Stopped_lurking said:
Which court determined that?

Courts have long upheld that a vehicle can be considered a deadly weapon if driven toward another human being.

rjs330 · Saturday at 2:53 PM

wing2000 said:
And I have zero confidence in any investigation carried out by Trump's FBI.

And now you know how we have felt about the FBI and their investigations into Democrats and their operatives. Join the club.

rjs330 · Saturday at 3:08 PM

JosephZ said:
Law enforcement officers are trained not to walk in front of a vehicle while the engine is running or with someone behind the wheel and to move out of the path of a vehicle when it accelerates towards them, not to shoot at the driver.

1. No they aren't. They walk in front of running vehicles all the time. There are plenty of legitimate law enforcement reasons to walk in front. What they are taught is to not step in front of a vehicle in order to try and prevent it from leaving. And in this case he did not do that.
2. They are told to get out of a vehicles path if possible if a vehicle drives at them. Sometimes its not possible.

JosephZ said:
The only time deadly force can be used is when there is no possible way to escape serious injury or death.

And this is based upon the totalitybof rhe circumstances including the officers reasonable belief at the time. Its not based on armchair quarterbacks who THINK they know. The fact he was actually struck by the vehicle while moving is paramount to understanding that its reasonable to believe that he was in danger of serious bodily injury at minimum.

MarkSB · Saturday at 3:27 PM

rjs330 said:
Monday morning quarterbacking. He was teying to get out of the way. He didn't stop and stand there you know.

Actually, he did stop and stand there. If you watch the video, the vehicle goes into reverse first to begin to make a Y turn. It is when the vehicle is in reverse and transitioning into drive that the agent stops in front of the vehicle and draws his gun (while still recording on his cell phone, no less). He wasn't trying to get out of harm's way... in the video he stops and unholsters his weapon. It looks very much like if he would have just kept walking in the direction that he was going, he would have not been anywhere near the vehicle's path.

There's a lot of evidence here to be looked at and things to consider. Which is why, in my opinion, this should go before a jury. The law is the law, and it is up to a jury to determine if it was violated here.

Another point to consider is - Which one was the kill shot? The second and third shots were fired through the driver's side window, when he was well out of harm's way.

Pommer · Saturday at 3:33 PM

stevevw said:
I don't think its as simple as people think. The use of enforcement has been done in the past by most presidents. Even the use of the National Guard has been used 58 times in the past. Its nothing new or specific that Trump is doing.

But if we look at the context. Trump was voted in on exactly what he is doing which he promised to get rid of the illegal immigrants and especially the criminal illegals.

But fundementally the santuary States are even against any deportations at all. Even if 1 car of officers went in they would be attacked. So the santuary States are already defying federal laws no matter if the approach was soft or hard. They oppose this ideologically.

I think it has been made hard and escalated by the defiance of these States. In other States who have cooperated there is little issues. As we seen with the trashing of ICE vehicles and attacking the offices of ICE they are going too far.

I mean even if they were going in and getting hardened criminals who have raped and murdered they would be prevented. Its like the protesters want to protect hardened criminals.

Its now a case that I don't think any officer could safely go in and do their job in these States.

Immigration falls under the Federal Government’s purview; states can choose what level of “cooperation” with the Feds’ efforts to enforce immigration statutes, they will abide by.

Pommer · Saturday at 3:36 PM

stevevw said:
I don't know. It seems harsh to keep marching on like a machine through the community. But it seems unjust that some of these criminal illegals are allowed to be protected as well in the name of treating our neighbours as equals.

I think everyone is all for helping immigrants in need the legal way. Its an onus on the nations who are suppose to be the free nations that offer a better life.

But I think we have got it wrong. Immigration has got out of hand and dragging down free nations. They are divided and losing who they are. What they stand for as a nation.

This is what it seems to be about to me. All this is just the expression of a deeper divide that needs to be sorted. But its an ideological divide that has polarised. I am not sure how people can unite under such a political climate.

Some people who were “born in the wrong place” are in my country without proper paperwork?
Oh noes! Whatever shall I do?

JosephZ · Saturday at 3:59 PM

rjs330 said:
No they aren't. They walk in front of running vehicles all the time

Yes they are, and no they don't.

rjs330 said:
They are told to get out of a vehicles path if possible if a vehicle drives at them. Sometimes its not possible

The agent in this case was able to avoid serious injury by getting out of the vehicle's path.

Hans Blaster · Saturday at 4:47 PM

stevevw said:
But I think we have got it wrong. Immigration has got out of hand and dragging down free nations. They are divided and losing who they are. What they stand for as a nation.

I remember the last time they said that and the time before that. They said it about my ancestors many years ago. It was nonsense then and it is nonsense now.

BPPLEE · Saturday at 5:00 PM

Hans Blaster said:
I remember the last time they said that and the time before that. They said it about my ancestors many years ago. It was nonsense then and it is nonsense now.

Press 1 for English….

Hans Blaster · Saturday at 5:38 PM

BPPLEE said:
Press 1 for English….

Nein.

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 5:46 PM

Pommer said:
Some people who were “born in the wrong place” are in my country without proper paperwork?
Oh noes! Whatever shall I do?

Strictly legally speaking, remove them.

However, if you're inclined to provide some wiggle room...
Practically speaking, if you have any sort of appreciation for the westernized culture and everything it's given us, and don't want to see that eroded, then limit the number of purely economic migrants from countries who don't have respect for those things, and simply want to recreate their old culture in a new place so they can piggyback off of a more stable economy.

Stopped_lurking · Saturday at 11:03 PM

rjs330 said:
Monday morning quarterbacking. He was teying to get out of the way. He didn't stop and stand there you know. Rhe streets were icy as well. How agile is he? Do you know that?

No, but he used time and effort better used trying to get away to draw and aim the gun. He could've pushed himself away with both hands, or at least put his arms between himself or the car.

I am familiar with icy streets.

rjs330 said:
Not sure about violence, maybe he is just an idiot and doesn’t think about the potential consequences of his idiotic comments. I do think he intends to instigate chaos and criminal activity and rebellion against the governement.

Courts have long upheld that a vehicle can be considered a deadly weapon if driven toward another human being.

Can? Wouldn't the court make that determination in this particular case then? Only if it is done with the intention to harm, I would guess? Or don't you have traffic accidents?

perplexed · Sunday at 12:03 AM

What can we agree on ?
I think that since first shot hit her and the bullet hole is on the edge I think it is likely the center of mass of the officer was not in front of car so he probably was dealt a glancing blow and had no chance of being run over

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

New documents shed light on Renee Good’s ties to ICE monitoring efforts in Minneapolis

E pluribus unum

Well-Known Member

Area Meathead

Area Meathead

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Well-Known Member

Area Meathead

Well-Known Member

Area Meathead

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Similar threads