To wonder if past trauma was a factor in the Renee Nicole Good murder and that, while not absolving agent, it shows ICE should select agents more carefully?

[Carla786]

Reading this from the BBC, I wonder if the agent was suffering from previous trauma. They had earlier been in the Iraq War and then had huge number of stitches after being dragged by a car while arresting apparently a 'child sex offender' illicit migrant last March.

Thus I wonder if, because Renee Good clipped them with the car earlier(as The Times indicates), shooting at her car as she drove past was less a rational decision borne from evil and more an instinctive reaction from recent trauma with cars on the job?

This is NOT an excuse. But I wonder if it also shows that ICE are selecting traumatised agents who are too dangerous, due to this, to be in that position?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdx4qd4d16no

How do you know he had no legal right?

Well ICE has been going on a hiring spree since we have more funding. I think there are thousands of new agents coming in the next few months.

I don’t know JR’s background, but I don’t necessarily think we need to sideline every agent that has some sort of incidence, it’s case by case.

Would be helpful if these protestors went with placards and chanted on sidewalks at federal property safely out of the way instead of actively obstructing ICE operations.

But they want to actively obstruct ICE operations.

A traumatised person should not be given a gun & sent out on some mad ICE mission, why do authorities think he would be a suitable candidate for that role?

I've watched the footage from every angle, he was in no danger. She was entitled to protest - and thank god people are still protesting.

You are a bit deluded about left leaning men.

This is a recognised thing for the extreme alt-right white nationalist types

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=www.nytimes.com/2018/01/06/opinion/sunday/alt-right-asian-fetish.html&ved=2ahUKEwjk6-nxvIWSAxWNWUEAHcsFFtoQFnoECCUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2imXMj1w-CobKVBjCLHKlU

https://www.washingtonpost.com/gender-identity/the-alt-right-likes-asian-american-women-we-shouldnt-be-surprised/

This.

They are so gung-ho that they are detaining US citizens who have lived in the USA their entire lives. Absolute scum, imo. And I can't even find words that can express how much I hate Trump and all his sidekicks.

Whoever gave that man a gun is complicit. His colleagues that didn’t report his troubling aggression are complicit. He was a tragedy waiting to happen.

I’ve watched multiple videos relating to this event - the ICE agent, Jonathan Ross, had a wife. She apparently left him and is now with a woman partner. A coincidence that maps the victim in that she previously had male spouses before her wife.
The victim, like anybody, had every right to protest. She clearly was moving away as directed by some of the ICE agents (another was shouting to get out of the fucking car and trying to open her door - a contradictory instruction) while her wife was outside the car filming the operation. The victim smiling at the ICE agent says “I’m not mad at you” before turning her steering wheel. She’d barely even moved her car before he shot her.
He was not supposed to stand in front of her car and is visibly not directly in front of it.
Given that the same agent (Ross) had also been dragged by a car in an ICE operation previously you’d think he’d have been aware that he ought not to be putting himself in that position- he had no reason to do so and it’s against the protocols.
Its also openly said that the victim and her wife (her wife in particular) deliberately went to the protest and did often. Again, their right.
If an agent can’t control themselves with protestors, they shouldn’t be in that role. ICE, at the very least, owed him a duty of care - I’ll leave aside the shocking manner and purpose of ICE operations for the purposes of this incident..

Amongst many other things, I doubt cutting the training period for ICE agents from six months to six weeks has helped. Nor does letting those people work before their background checks have completed.

To be clear, I don’t know if either of those things apply in this particular case, but those things are both a sign of the culture of the agency and will also have impacts on it’s culture going forward.

Paddy Ashdown was in the Special Boat Service, saw active duty in many areas in the world, over 2 decades, he was the Liberal Democrat's Leader.

A near by Labour MP is an ex Marine.

Its interesting though, across many threads, posters have said that the political violence we see in society is mainly as a result of the "violent left" but now, when it suits, the left are actually all "soft and sensitive" like Dove in jeans...

You do write some funny nonsense, just what i needed to read on a damp grey Monday morning!

Is that you Pete Hesgeth?

Shooting out her tires or at the engine of her 4×4 would not have stopped her vehicle.
That woman was egged on by her wife and not only drove at the ICE agent but hit/clipped him (as seen in all the videos that her wife didn't film), thats assault with a deadly weapon.
Under the law in the US and specifically the state that this happened in him Shooting was absolutely within the law.
This woman chose to interfere with federal agents carrying out their duties, removing illegal immigrants and those who have overstayed their visa. These people are held until they see an immigration judge and are either let go afterwards (rare) or deported (usually within a week).
The fact that this woman believes in uncontrolled immigration and behaved in a criminal and recluse manor to help criminals break the law is why she's dead.

But we all know America is not your average free country with its trigger happy mentality. I certainly wouldn’t be following these ICE psychos around winding them up when we already know they’ve killed several immigrants. It was only a matter of time before they killed an American citizen.

You Disagree?

She can protest. What she can not do is obstruct ICE performing their duties.

Let’s say you believed that the government had no right to restrict drug use. Do you think it reasonable to go and obstruct drug busts by the DEA?

(The DEA is the federal agency that handles major drug enforcement operations)

Incorrect, the courts in the US have said that Police Officers mustn't put himself in the way of the vehicle and that all other options must be employed before shooting into a vehicle, the most obvious one being to move out of the way.

Because he shot the driver, the vehicle then went, at high speed, down the highway, away from the Agent (as she was driving away from him) crashing into a parked car.

ICE don't have the authority to arrest/detain US citizens either, thats for the Police to do.

Protest is allowed in the US, under the 1st Amendment.

However, this isn't what the thread is about, there is an inquiry, hopefully independent, might be worth seeing what they say, rather than your biased opinion?

Ice do have the right to arrest and detained anyone obstructing them in their duties.
Governor waltz signed the state law that allows any police or federal officer to shoot anyone driving a vehicle directly at them.
He's a federal agent not police.
I agree he shouldn't have stood in front of her vehicle but she still drove at and hit him

Incorrect, the courts in the US have said that Police Officers mustn't put himself in the way of the vehicle and that all other options must be employed before shooting into a vehicle, the most obvious one being to move out of the way

The courts have said that if there is a reasonable belief of serious injury or death, then law enforcement can use lethal force. The standard is a ‘reasonable belief’ and your belief that he could have jumped out of the way in that split second is NOT the deciding factor here.

ICE don't have the authority to arrest/detain US citizens either, thats for the Police to do

Why do you repeatedly lie about this? I have told you again and again that ICE, as federal agents, have the right to arrest and detain US citizens who are obstructing their operations.

Protest is allowed in the US, under the 1st Amendment

But you aren’t allowed to interfere in their duties. Thats the point

However, this isn't what the thread is about, there is an inquiry, hopefully independent, might be worth seeing what they say, rather than your biased opinion

Its unhelpful to repeat things that YOU KNOW ARE FALSE

I've seen that comparison before and I think it's actually very apt unfortunately

Are you telling me you believe there is any possibility the investigation could be a neutral assessment of what took place?

She wasn't driving directly at him, if she was, the car would have mounted the pavement and carried on in the direct he was standing in... it didn't, went hard right, down the road... away from him.

Plus he placed himself in danger but easily side stepped the car in order to kill her.

Yes my mistake, ICE cannot hold US citizens in detention, though they have done.

But all this is a diversion back on to 3 full threads, this one is about his mental state and whether he should have even been there.

No he shouldn't, no other ICE agent there, as far as i can see, pulled a weapon, only him, they obviously didn't see her as a serious threat & no other agent put themselves in front of the car either.

It's possible he was more reactive due to previous trauma, but imo there is nothing about his behaviour or demeanor in the run up to or the immediate aftermath which indicates fear. He seemed calm when walking around her car filming her, as did Renee.

Of the other two ICE agents who got out of the white car, one was perfectly calm to the point one could assume he cba and wanted to go home, and the other was angry and inflamed what was, up to that point, a relatively calm interaction with aggressive language and behaviour.

Regardless, his past trauma is irrelevant when deciding on guilt or innocence. The legal argument is "would a reasonable person," along with whether his actions were within the law if a "reasonable person" would fear for their life.

From the videos I've watched, the answer to both of those arguments is no. No other ICE agents drew their weapons, which indicates they did not fear for their lives. In fact, they seemed quite shocked when JR fired his weapon. And his behaviour was not within the law. The law, set by the Supreme Court, which cannot be overruled by individual federal organistions, clearly states that when dealing with moving vehicles, you cannot place yourself in front of the vehicle and then argue it was a threat, nor can you use lethal force to protect yourself from harm if other avenues, including moving out of the way, were available.

JR stepped in front of the vehicle. He clearly had other means of escape because less than a second after firing the first shot, he stepped to the side of the car to fire 2 more shots.

In officer-involved shootings, each shot fired has to be justified in singularity. There was no justification for the 2nd and 3rd shot, even if you could argue the first one was justified.

JRs individual trauma can be used as mitigation in sentencing, but it cannot be used when deciding guilt or innocence.

On top of this, it is JRs responsibility to ensure he informs his supervisors if his trauma is bad enough to impact his abilities to carry out his duties. If he didn't do that, it adds to his guilt, not detracts from it.

You’re right on the individual responsibility but you are not appreciating the fact that a failure to identify a potentially inappropriate person to be put on armed frontline duty is an organisational failure. That’s OP’s point.

No other ICE agents drew their weapons, which indicates they did not fear for their lives

JR was the only one in front of her car! Huge difference

And his behaviour was not within the law. The law, set by the Supreme Court, which cannot be overruled by individual federal organistions, clearly states that when dealing with moving vehicles, you cannot place yourself in front of the vehicle and then argue it was a threat, nor can you use lethal force to protect yourself from harm if other avenues, including moving out of the way, were available

Lethal force is allowed if they have a reasonable belief’ of serious injury or death. Supreme Court had actually settled this decades ago.

JR stepped in front of the vehicle. He clearly had other means of escape because less than a second after firing the first shot, he stepped to the side of the car to fire 2 more shots

Once you decide to use lethal force, you are supposed to continue until the threat is eliminated. It’s not something to do by half measures.

The fact he was hit suggests to me that he had a reasonable belief of imminent injury or death.

It’s only organisational failure if it fails to line up with operational objectives.

It isn’t the first time that a state, has deliberately recruited potentially violent and unstable men for jobs like this.