Just now, DEagle7 said:

No he won't. Officers have a lot of legal coverage at baseline, but regardless even if he was convicted do you think there is any chance in hell Trump wouldn't try to make it a federal case and just pardon the guy? He's gonna walk.

He’s going to jail on state charges. He’s a murder. They don’t have that much leeway.

"These are the kinds of disputes that the courts are equipped to handle. Because if an agent shot directly into a car and killed the driver without some credible fear of personal harm, it would be called murder. And federal agents can indeed be prosecuted for murder.

States can prosecute anyone for violations of state law, regardless of their rank or authority. Murder is a felony in the state of Minnesota, as it is in every other state. Within the last several years, we saw Minnesota successfully prosecute a murder, committed by a law enforcement officer, that was documented on tape and broadcast to the world.”

The American Prospect

ICE Agents Can Be Charged With Murder - The American Pros...

As a killing in Minneapolis is documented, the law clearly stipulates that federal agents do not have universal immunity.

2 minutes ago, barho said:

He’s going to jail on state charges. He’s a murder. They don’t have that much leeway.

*They shouldn't have that much leeway

Big difference

6 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

No he won't. Officers have a lot of legal coverage at baseline, but regardless even if he was convicted do you think there is any chance in hell Trump wouldn't try to make it a federal case and just pardon the guy? He's gonna walk.

If a federal court finds the actions "necessary and proper" then he has immunity from state charges. And the case will be heard by a federal judge. Add the highly conservative 8th circuit and it is highly likely that this "officer" goes free.

Add to it that the one person in this thread with demonstrated law enforcement experience said that it leans "justifiable", this will just start another series of riots in Minneapolis.

6 minutes ago, barho said:

"These are the kinds of disputes that the courts are equipped to handle. Because if an agent shot directly into a car and killed the driver without some credible fear of personal harm, it would be called murder. And federal agents can indeed be prosecuted for murder.

States can prosecute anyone for violations of state law, regardless of their rank or authority. Murder is a felony in the state of Minnesota, as it is in every other state. Within the last several years, we saw Minnesota successfully prosecute a murder, committed by a law enforcement officer, that was documented on tape and broadcast to the world.”

The American Prospect

ICE Agents Can Be Charged With Murder - The American Pros...

As a killing in Minneapolis is documented, the law clearly stipulates that federal agents do not have universal immunity.

I'm not arguing can or should. I'm arguing will.

There's about a dozen hard hurdles you'd have to clear to get a conviction on this guy. But in the end all of em are irrelevant when we know that if there is a chance get convicted on the State level (doubtful) this case will be made federal and even if he does get convicted there (*highly* doubtful) Trump will pardon him (virtual certainty)

2 hours ago, DEagle7 said:

I'm not arguing can or should. I'm arguing will.

There's about a dozen hard hurdles you'd have to clear to get a conviction on this guy. But in the end all of em are irrelevant when we know that if there is a chance get convicted on the State level (doubtful) this case will be made federal and even if he does get convicted there (*highly* doubtful) Trump will pardon him (virtual certainty)

Hurdle one: Was her action to block the road intentional.

Yes

Hurdle two: Did she accelerate into the officer in front of her to avoid arrest?

Yes

She was a widow of an air force pilot killed in Afghanistan. disgusting isn’t even the word for anyone defending ice, Trump, Noam, or any of those Fing retards.

Looking at this one again this morning it is 100% clear that what she is trying to do is flee. She was absolutely not trying to hit the agent. That's just bullsheet. Certainly not a self defense situation.

Was she protesting? Unsure from the videos. Does it matter? I wouldn't think so in this case. This is just a very very bad situation where an ICE agent (probably untrained) has made a mistake. Mistake's happen for sure and the agent should be investigated and he may be found innocent of breaking any laws or he may be indicted. Instead we have Noem/Trump immediately blaming the victim and declaring the agent innocent. It is the Noem/Trump reaction that matters the most here and is the reason there will be protests. Of course this plays right into their game.

I’m not a cop but isn’t it cop 101 to not approach a car from the front? Or stand in front of a car?

5 hours ago, lynched1 said:

Hurdle one: Was her action to block the road intentional.

Yes

Hurdle two: Did she accelerate into the officer in front of her to avoid arrest?

Yes

She only has herself to blame here. It’s a sad situation, but she had a massive lapse in judgement, which she intentionally put herself into, which cost her life.

Don’t know if this was posted already.

"Fox News has learned from multiple ICE sources that none of the agents involved in the shooting in Minneapolis were wearing body cameras at the time of the incident.”

44 minutes ago, Blazehound said:

She only has herself to blame here. It’s a sad situation, but she had a massive lapse in judgement, which she intentionally put herself into, which cost her life.

She made a mistake for sure but so did the agent. The entire thing is sheet and there is blame to go around starting with the Trump WH and their thirst for putting untrained ICE agent knuckleheads out in the streets in a show of force.

btw - We have no idea what occurred leading up to her decision to try to drive off. Had she engaged with the agents prior to them walking up to the car, etc.? Was she there protesting or just passing by?

17 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

She made a mistake for sure but so did the agent. The entire thing is sheet and there is blame to go around starting with the Trump WH and their thirst for putting untrained ICE agent knuckleheads out in the streets in a show of force.

btw - We have no idea what occurred leading up to her decision to try to drive off. Had she engaged with the agents prior to them walking up to the car, etc.? Was she there protesting or just passing by?

All fair. I’ll be interested what gets fleshed out in the investigation that led up to the incident.

And for the love of god, get body cameras on these agents.

2 minutes ago, Blazehound said:

All fair. I’ll be interested what gets fleshed out in the investigation that led up to the incident.

And for the love of god, get body cameras on these agents.

They don't even show their faces. Body cameras seem unlikely

4 minutes ago, Blazehound said:

All fair. I’ll be interested what gets fleshed out in the investigation that led up to the incident.

And for the love of god, get body cameras on these agents.

the problem is who will be carrying out the investigation.

3 minutes ago, Blazehound said:

All fair. I’ll be interested what gets fleshed out in the investigation that led up to the incident.

And for the love of god, get body cameras on these agents.

Fair.

I think in the end we can debate the first shot. He's on the side of the car after getting grazed but is holding his hand out and pointing in thru the windshield. She is turning the wheel away from him and starting to pull away. Things happen super fast. That shot probably just goes down to being an unfortunate disaster for everyone involved. However, the other two shots are really bad for the agent. He's totally clear of the vehicle and is in no danger and yet points directly into the driver's window and fires. At this point we don't even know which shots hit her. Maybe they all did, maybe not and the answer may dictate the final outcome for the agent.

11 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Fair.

I think in the end we can debate the first shot. He's on the side of the car after getting grazed but is holding his hand out and pointing in thru the window. She is turning the wheel away from him and starting to pull away. Things happen super fast. That shot probably just goes down to being an unfortunate disaster for everyone involved. However, the other two shots are really bad for the agent. He's totally clear of the vehicle and is in no danger and yet points directly into the driver's window and fires. At this point we don't even know which shots hit her. Maybe they all did, maybe not and the answer may dictate the final outcome for the agent.

There’s no debating anything. This is not acceptable use of force. This is from the DOJ website specifically regarding ICE agents. They are not to shoot for the sole purpose of keeping someone from fleeing and they can’t even shoot the tires of a vehicle.

Second and third shots (Do they look good? Absolutely not. Are they intentional? Not not necessarily.) were more than likely on autopilot. It's kind of weird how your brain works in those situations, once you make a decision to do something, you kind of float through the process of doing it without having any direct control over what you're doing. It's kind of a weird feeling, if I'm being honest.

Standing in front of the vehicle isn't smart anymore. Back in the day you'd stand there as a secondary officer so that a: there's no crossfire, and b: if the suspect starts getting stupid you have a wide open window to return the stupidity. But too much of this happened so now it's in a lot of policies not to do this.

That said there are use of forces that are unavoidable and those that are avoidable. While I think this leans justified, this was still avoidable.

I've only been in similar spots twice before, and things come at you fast, so it's a bit disingenuous for people to be frame by framing the replay.

5 minutes ago, DBW said:

There’s no debating anything. This is not acceptable use of force. This is from the DOJ website specifically regarding ICE agents. They are not to shoot for the sole purpose of keeping someone from fleeing and they can’t even shoot the tires of a vehicle.

I know what you're trying to go for here, but the policy you posted here doesn't back your remarks.

1 minute ago, DBW said:

There’s no debating anything. This is not acceptable use of force. This is from the DOJ website specifically regarding ICE agents. They are not to shoot for the sole purpose of keeping someone from fleeing and they can’t even shoot the tires of a vehicle.

You are missing the self defense angle which could apply on the 1st shot. My inclination is to say he shouldn't have felt the need to use his firearm to defend himself but I do admit it is a gray area. The car is pointed toward him when she starts to move even though she is turning her wheels straight away.

9 minutes ago, Bill said:

Second and third shots (Do they look good? Absolutely not. Are they intentional? Not not necessarily.) were more than likely on autopilot. It's kind of weird how your brain works in those situations, once you make a decision to do something, you kind of float through the process of doing it without having any direct control over what you're doing. It's kind of a weird feeling, if I'm being honest.

Yeah sure but that doesn't exonerate him.

18 minutes ago, Bill said:

I know what you're trying to go for here, but the policy you posted here doesn't back your remarks.

11 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

You are missing the self defense angle which could apply on the 1st shot. My inclination is to say he shouldn't have felt the need to use his firearm to defend himself but I do admit it is a gray area. The car is pointed toward him when she starts to move even though she is turning her wheels straight away.

Regarding the self defense defense:

"and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

Even if she posed an immediate threat to the officer who was stupidly standing in front of the vehicle, shooting her would be a last resort, way down the list behind moving out of the way.

11 hours ago, The_Omega said:

She's clearly turning right to get out of the path of the agent. She had no intent to run over an agent.

The tactics being employed by ICE are going to lead to these situations. This is a choice being made that will result in unnecessary deaths. They're not targeting violent criminals, they're targeting anybody they can - up to and including people who have been naturalized.

There is no defense.

11 hours ago, M.C. said:

r/law

u/honeyhoneybean6h

"The Minneapolis Woman Who was Shot in the Face and Killed by ICE Agents DID NOT try to Block the Road -- Video Shows she Attempted to YEILD to their Vehicle Before Pulling Out."

https://www.reddit.com/r/law/s/Wu5h8Pp2V4

ICE escalated.

The officer should be arrested.

4 minutes ago, DBW said:

Regarding the self defense defense:

"and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

Even if she posed an immediate threat to the officer who was stupidly standing in front of the vehicle, shooting her would be a last resort, way down the list behind moving out of the way.

That's the gray area. What should he "know" at that critical moment that last less than a second or two.