Official Minnesota ICE shooting thread

otter wrote:

I feel so much safer now that this woman of three kids who obviously packed her car full of stuffed animals to cause a distraction is off the streets.

It's a good thing he survived the incident last year so he could impose justice on a very dangerous domestic 37 year old mother terrorist who was armed with a dangerous cell phone camera.

It's hard to imagine that this agent has now been involved in two incidents fighting the rebel warriors of suburban US communities.

I hope this agent can defend our constitutional rights of free speech by silencing people that say terrifying words like, "That's fine, dude. I'm not mad at you." And his dignified response of, "F***ing b*tch," while taking out the threat.

Thank goodness she made a mistake by steering away from the agent instead of her intent to steer at him. We are so lucky he will be out defending us all against these horrible mommy terrorists that threaten our very way of life.

Good thing two of those bullets entered the side of the car as it was driving away from this hero. We would not have wanted her to survive and get out of jail one day as a grandmother and do this again.

The world is safer now.

Sub-9:00 guy wrote:

otter wrote:

I feel so much safer now that this woman of three kids who obviously packed her car full of stuffed animals to cause a distraction is off the streets.

It's a good thing he survived the incident last year so he could impose justice on a very dangerous domestic 37 year old mother terrorist who was armed with a dangerous cell phone camera.

It's hard to imagine that this agent has now been involved in two incidents fighting the rebel warriors of suburban US communities.

I hope this agent can defend our constitutional rights of free speech by silencing people that say terrifying words like, "That's fine, dude. I'm not mad at you." And his dignified response of, "F***ing b*tch," while taking out the threat.

Thank goodness she made a mistake by steering away from the agent instead of her intent to steer at him. We are so lucky he will be out defending us all against these horrible mommy terrorists that threaten our very way of life.

Good thing two of those bullets entered the side of the car as it was driving away from this hero. We would not have wanted her to survive and get out of jail one day as a grandmother and do this again.

The world is safer now.

Had her life instead been taken by an illegal immigrant as so many American lives have been, you wouldn’t even know her name. You would never have even seen the video. Let that sink in.

She was obstructing and violating the law and forcing a law enforcement agent without the luxury of time into a potentially very bad situation. Exact same thing as Ashli Babbitt on J6. Exact same thing, exact same outcome.

These situations are by definition unpredictable, which is why they should be avoided. But everyone hates and denigrates cops, so… ICE? An even more thankless job. It should also surprise exactly nobody that this is happening in Tim Walz’ Minnesota. You live, you lear. At least most people do.

Sub-9:00 guy wrote:

otter wrote:

I feel so much safer now that this woman of three kids who obviously packed her car full of stuffed animals to cause a distraction is off the streets.

It's a good thing he survived the incident last year so he could impose justice on a very dangerous domestic 37 year old mother terrorist who was armed with a dangerous cell phone camera.

It's hard to imagine that this agent has now been involved in two incidents fighting the rebel warriors of suburban US communities.

I hope this agent can defend our constitutional rights of free speech by silencing people that say terrifying words like, "That's fine, dude. I'm not mad at you." And his dignified response of, "F***ing b*tch," while taking out the threat.

Thank goodness she made a mistake by steering away from the agent instead of her intent to steer at him. We are so lucky he will be out defending us all against these horrible mommy terrorists that threaten our very way of life.

Good thing two of those bullets entered the side of the car as it was driving away from this hero. We would not have wanted her to survive and get out of jail one day as a grandmother and do this again.

The world is safer now.

Had her life instead been taken by an illegal immigrant as so many American lives have been, you wouldn’t even know her name. You would never have even seen the video. Let that sink in.

She was obstructing and violating the law and forcing a law enforcement agent without the luxury of time into a potentially very bad situation. Exact same thing as Ashli Babbitt on J6. Exact same thing, exact same outcome.

These situations are by definition unpredictable, which is why they should be avoided. But everyone hates and denigrates cops, so… ICE? An even more thankless job. It should also surprise exactly nobody that this is happening in Tim Walz’ Minnesota. You live, you lear. At least most people do.

pupil3142 wrote:

Thou shalt not kill wrote:

By Attorney Honey Leech:
There seems to be a lot of Keyboard attorneys online today. So, as an actual attorney, I'd like to cite actual law. The ICE officer in MN violated both protocol and case law. 1) officers are not allowed to fire into a moving vehicle 2) lethal force is not allowed to prevent someone from fleeing 3) case law is clear, an officer cannot intentionally place himself in front of a vehicle and then allege self defense At best, this officer acted with a reckless disregard for public safety and is guilty of negligent homicide. Federal agents do not have blanket immunity from state laws or criminal prosecution. They can be prosecuted by state authorities for violating state laws if their actions were unauthorized, unlawful, or unreasonable, even if they were on duty.
The concept governing this is called Supremacy Clause immunity. Federal agents are generally immune from state prosecution only if their actions were:
Authorized under federal law; and
"Necessary and proper" to fulfill their federal duties.
If a federal agent is charged in state court, they can petition to have their case "removed" to federal court. In federal court, the judge would then determine whether the agent's actions met the "necessary and proper" standard. If the court finds the agent was acting within the reasonable confines of their duties, the state charges will be dismissed. If not, the state prosecution can proceed in federal court, applying state substantive law. It is unlikely any judge would find his behavior necessary and reasonable. The mere fact that no other officer present unholstered their weapon and appear shocked he fired towards them reinforces that fact.
Estate of Starks v. Enyart, 5 F.3d 230 (7th Cir. 1993)
Seventh Circuit – foundational caseFacts:
Officer stepped in front of a slowly moving vehicle and then shot the driver, claiming fear for his life.
Holding (paraphrased):
“An officer may not unreasonably create a physically threatening situation and then use deadly force to escape it.”
Adams v. Speers, 473 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2007) Ninth Circuit
Facts:
Officer jumped in front of a vehicle during a stop and then fired.
Holding:
An officer cannot provoke a confrontation and then rely on the danger they created to justify deadly force.
Key language:
The court emphasized that reasonableness includes the officer’s own tactical decisions leading up to the shooting.
Thompson v. Hubbard, 257 F.3d 896 (8th Cir. 2001)
Eighth Circuit
Key point:
The court rejected summary judgment for officers where evidence showed the officer moved into the vehicle’s path, creating the perceived threat.
Abraham v. Raso, 183 F.3d 279 (3d Cir. 1999)
Third Circuit
Facts:
Off-duty officer shot a fleeing driver.
Holding:
The court stressed that pre-seizure conduct matters and that officers cannot rely solely on the “split second” framing if their own actions escalated the situation.
Kirby v. Duva, 530 F.3d 475 (6th Cir. 2008)
Holding:
Deadly force may be unconstitutional where:
The officer fired into a moving vehicle
The officer could have stepped aside
The threat was self-created
The Sixth Circuit explicitly rejected the idea that a moving car automatically justifies gunfire.
Adams v. Speers, 473 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2007)
Holding:
An officer may not intentionally place himself in danger and then use deadly force to neutralize the danger he created — including firing into a vehicle.
The Ninth Circuit emphasized tactical disengagement as the constitutional expectation.
Training & Policy Alignment (Courts Care About This)
Many courts note that modern police training instructs:
Do not fire into moving vehicles
Do not use deadly force to stop a fleeing car
Disengage and contain instead
Courts treat violations of training as evidence of unreasonableness, even if not dispositive.
Copied and pasted.

There is a long video that shows the shooter was originally on the right hand rear of the vehicle with the wife. they both walk around the rhs of the stationary vehicle. the wife stops by the passenger door. the car then reverses with the wheels pointing left, this causes the car to point not only in the shooters direction, but brings him square into the middle of the 'aim' of the car as it stops reversing. he is unsighted during most of this, but there is evidene that he did not deliberately place himself there.

He may or may not have known the situation was escalating at that moment since one wooly hat officer seemed much less botheed than the one who went for the door. as the woolly hat officer went for the door, the shooter seemed more concerned about drawing his weapon to support his colleague than his postion relative to the car. he ight have been movign slowly to the left, but his priority was clearly to back up his colleague. seems a reasonable thing to do.

without question, when she put the car into fwd gear and pressed the accelrator, the wheels were pointing left. this is very very clear. its almost the one indisputable thing.

the car unquestionably hit the shooter. interestingly in the blurred video from the far right, it looks like he was hit quite hard and moved a little distance. in the video from behind and left it is hard to see he is hit at all, but the relative position means movement would have been away from the camera so hard to see.

Much of this post is one sided deliberate disinformation presented as absolute fact. context always matters. of course there are circumstances when oyu can shoot a fleeing suspect in the back and / or shoot into a moving car. to pretend this is absolute just discredits the author.

Personally i dont think this incident shuold have happened. both sides made huge mistakes and both the police system and the system of aggravated obstruction of police duties are broken so such incidents are inevitable.

At the end of the day, with the help of our friend Occam's razor; she was where she shouldnt have been, and was there deliberatly, her wife has admitted it. An ice officer was legitimately ordering her to stop and get out of the car. Another ice officer was in front of the car with a drawn weapon to back up the lawful order. She drove towards him. he considered the bar for lethal force was met and opened fire.

Harambe wrote:

Sub-9:00 guy wrote:

Had her life instead been taken by an illegal immigrant as so many American lives have been, you wouldn’t even know her name. You would never have even seen the video. Let that sink in.

She was obstructing and violating the law and forcing a law enforcement agent without the luxury of time into a potentially very bad situation. Exact same thing as Ashli Babbitt on J6. Exact same thing, exact same outcome.

These situations are by definition unpredictable, which is why they should be avoided. But everyone hates and denigrates cops, so… ICE? An even more thankless job. It should also surprise exactly nobody that this is happening in Tim Walz’ Minnesota. You live, you lear. At least most people do.

Wow man this is so brave.
If something completely different had happened, I would have a different reaction. You’ve really pierced to the heart of this issue.

We hold law enforcement to a high standard of behavior because they have a monopoly on violent force.

The videos have exhaustively shown the driver was not acting as a serious threat AND the shoot intentionally put himself in front of the car to film a video.

Escalation and overreaction. He’s going to jail.

pupil3142 wrote:

this doesn't help your case wrote:

That's not a body cam, my friend - as the title says, it's the ICE agent's cellphone video. You guys claim the agent's life was in danger yet he never even drops his cellphone, just pulls out his gun with one hand and executes her gangster-style while filming it with the other hand. Is that standard law enforcement protocol? Cellphone camera in left hand, gun in right hand, shoot unarmed woman in face through the side window as she drives past?

I didn't even see the woman by the passenger door in the other videos, he damn near executed her as well.

does it seriously matter what camera was being used?

'your honour, please disreard the had held camera because it does not faithifully recrd the same info as a body camera?' all cameras and angles have their faults. it is the totality of evidence that counts.

but, again, yes, i agree, that his initial use of deadly force was reckless, but only for his colleagues and innocents. she was guilty of an ongoing assault on a government official with a deadly weapon. it doesnt end because she didnt do it properly the first time.

if a perp fires at you once, do you need to wait for him to fire again? she assaulted a govt official with a deadly weapon. he is entitle dto use deadly force. with hindsight does it look like an overreaction? yes. but hindsight doesnt exist in the 2 or three seconds of this incredibly fast situation.

Sub-9:00 guy wrote:

otter wrote:

I feel so much safer now that this woman of three kids who obviously packed her car full of stuffed animals to cause a distraction is off the streets.

It's a good thing he survived the incident last year so he could impose justice on a very dangerous domestic 37 year old mother terrorist who was armed with a dangerous cell phone camera.

It's hard to imagine that this agent has now been involved in two incidents fighting the rebel warriors of suburban US communities.

I hope this agent can defend our constitutional rights of free speech by silencing people that say terrifying words like, "That's fine, dude. I'm not mad at you." And his dignified response of, "F***ing b*tch," while taking out the threat.

Thank goodness she made a mistake by steering away from the agent instead of her intent to steer at him. We are so lucky he will be out defending us all against these horrible mommy terrorists that threaten our very way of life.

Good thing two of those bullets entered the side of the car as it was driving away from this hero. We would not have wanted her to survive and get out of jail one day as a grandmother and do this again.

The world is safer now.

Had her life instead been taken by an illegal immigrant as so many American lives have been, you wouldn’t even know her name. You would never have even seen the video. Let that sink in.

She was obstructing and violating the law and forcing a law enforcement agent without the luxury of time into a potentially very bad situation. Exact same thing as Ashli Babbitt on J6. Exact same thing, exact same outcome.

These situations are by definition unpredictable, which is why they should be avoided. But everyone hates and denigrates cops, so… ICE? An even more thankless job. It should also surprise exactly nobody that this is happening in Tim Walz’ Minnesota. You live, you lear. At least most people do.