Maybe the differences in opinion with the Renee Good incident is this
There is a line where, on one side, law enforcement is allowed to shoot at a moving car, and on the other side, they are not.
It seems to me (as a layman) that this incident is right on that line. There are forensics and legal experts who say it was a just shooting and others who say it wasn't.
I realize most people are going to default to their "team's" opinion on this, but when the people who are in the field can't agree, maybe this is truly an either/or situation.
Replies to: Maybe the differences in opinion with the Renee Good incident is this
Hard to believe an internal conduct review would find against the ICE agent.
I don’t know whether such a ruling is dispositive as to suit against the agency and the officer. He may have governmental immunity absent negligent or reckless behavior.
Former FBI Senior Agent alluded to that...Ross still violated CBP/ICE policy by standing (slightly)
in front of the car, thereby causing an unnecessary danger and turning a traffic issue into a homicide.
You can say this all day long but it's not true
(I wish I had saved it; of course now I can't find it.) There is no prohibition on standing in front of a stopped car.
It is true, Mark...please read the linked proof...
...here's an excerpt from the attached guidelines...Note that this event was all about blocking traffic and tooting of horns...with a little taunting of the ICE officers...NONE of which rise to the need for deadly force...AND...if Ms. Ross really wanted to harm Officer Ross with her car, she would have turned LEFT in order to be sure she hit him...BUT...she turned hard RIGHT away from him...'Common Sense' should tell you she meant no harm.
-----------------------
5. Customs and Border Patrol, Use of Force Policy (January 2021) [4500-002A]
Chapter 1: General Guidelines
…
C. Use of Safe Tactics
…
2. 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.
3. Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid intentionally and unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force.
-------------------
Link: https://www.justsecurity.org/128498/dhs-doj-cbp-policy-force-vehicles/
I'll see you that and raise you this
Someone pointed this out and showed the video of something that I hadn't considered...nor apparently has anyone else. The agent was in fact to the right side of her vehicle when she started to back up with her front wheels turned to the left, which then put him in front of her.
I have zero doubt she was trying to hit him, Ty, and you'll get no argument from me. But the fact is she did accelerate towards him initially. That's not even in dispute. And whether he should have fired is something that, as I pointed out, even the experts don't agree on. Now, I know you know more than the experts, but I'll go with the guys who actually do this for a living and say if they can't agree, maybe we shouldn't be so definitive in our beliefs by simply going along with what our "team" days we should believe.
Read all of the material I've provided..."The Guys Who Do This For A Living", Used to purposely
create Dangerous Situations by standing in front of vehicles and shooting drivers/passengers if the vehicle moved at all...always claiming "Self Defense" as an excuse...THAT'S why the Policy of NOT creating a dangerous situation was instituted somewhere around the 2014 mark...also, for the reasons I mentioned, the Agencies banned the practice of shooting at or into vehicles that are fleeing...read the policy.
btw, from Officer Ross' very casual saunter down the street after shooting Renee Good, it didn't appear that he was the least bit concerned for what he did...THAt tells me something as well...i.e. zero respect for Renee Good's life.
.
(no message)
No that's not it
Everyone would probably agree that a car can be dangerously weaponized.
In this case, though, it wasn't. One step to the right would have removed the danger.
And the two shots though the side window - when he was no longer in front of the car - are hard to explain for the "self-defense!" people.
You're missing one half of the equation...
ICE agents are people too, many of them have families to go home to as well. The ICE agent was doing his job, that's why he was there. Why was she there?
I don't doubt that she was being a pain in the ass.
But on only one side of this equation was a (supposedly) highly trained law enforcement professional.
He should not have killed her. Not that complicated.
Yes, both points are valid. People are stuck on one or the other.
(no message)
She was a trained ICE stalker and agitator.
She should have followed their orders.
Not that complicated.
He was in front of the car, which she drove forward. After being told to get out of the car.
(no message)
Officer Ross violated CBP/ICE Policy by creating a danger...and Ms. Good Turned her car to the Right
in order to leave...even if failing to get out of the car, deadly force is not approved by CBP/ICE Policy.
You forgot to mention that she was ordered not to leave. Then she guns it.
(no message)
According to CBP/ICE policy it doesn't matter whether she complied or not...no shooting at vehicles
or persons is warranted...read the information I've provided. This was a traffic and noise making problem...neither is a capital offense.
Don't be so dismissive of Ms. Good being unnecessarily killed by an ICE officer who violated. his organization's policies.
You're not an expert. You've never been in the field. You never had to face this. Stop play acting.
(no message)
Chill...I'm referencing the expert commentary of others...see what happens when you don't read other
people's posts?...you get unnecessarily 'animated'...and look foolish as well...don't do that.
There are many experts chiming in. I have to question the expert you chose.
(no message)
As you should...and don't hesitate to share your thoughts with me...that's how forum discussions are
supposed to go...
Not in the mood for another lecture. I'll pass.
(no message)
Works for me...;-)
(no message)
The CBP/ICE's Training Manual is explicit in its policy of not creating dangerous situations and
definitely not firing at vehicles...or people within.
Don't waste time trying to re-write their manual.
btw, the material I've already provided notes that officers who fire at vehicles put other officers and bystanders in danger...e.g. missed shots...ricochets...and careening vehicles with injured or dead drivers ploughing into bystanders...imagine if a bicyclist or Mom walking her baby on the sidewalk got hit...as Renee's car did when it smashed into other vehicles on the side of the road.
You haven't provided a link or an exception to the hearsay rule to have a discussion.
Simply repeating unsubstantiated opinions of others is not an in-depth nor challenging discussion.
That 'Hearsay' material includes official CBP, DHS documented evidence supporting those comments, JH
...here's some more documentation for your review...
Note that DHS, CBP Officers/agents are advised to not put themselves in positions that necessitate the use of Deadly Force (e.g. standing in the path of a vehicle)...and are not to fire weapons at moving vehicles, even those that are fleeing.
Disagree?...
Link: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-02/23_0206_s1_use-of-force-policy-update.pdf
Consent Management