Renee Good's family sues Trump administration over fatal Minneapolis shooting

The video shows what I've factually stated.

The officers in the pickup exit and advance towards Goode's vehicle. One officer repeatedly shouts for her to "Get out of the (fucking in several instances) car."

She clearly says "No!" in response.

At that point she has escalated the situation to a serious misdemeanor and potentially a felony. She is now resisting arrest.

The officers surround the vehicle, one in front, two on the driver's side. One on the passenger side is engaged with Goode's bitch of a partner.

One of the officers repeats the command to get out of the vehicle and attempts to open the door of the vehicle.

Goode begins to accelerate heavily to flee the scene. This is now felony flight.

The officer in front of the vehicle tries to dodge to the driver's side but gets swiped by the vehicle. He draws his service weapon and fires on the vehicle.

Those are all observable facts.
Wow. You just make up your own timeline of facts. Ross has walked around her vehicle before the other offices exit their vehicle. Ross places himself in front of her vehicle in violation of department policy. She was told to move prior to being ordered out of her vehicle making the commands contradictory.

Accelerate heavily? LOL.. yeah.. she is riding a rocket and not a minivan.
 
It seems you are so stupid you don't understand that the individuals that work in the Trump administration are part of the Trump administration. The lawsuit lists DHS and six individuals that work for the Trump administration. In other words, she sued those individuals and the Trump administration.

Speeding towards him? Did she have a rocket car? A minivan doesn't exactly get up to 30 mph in 4 feet.

A jury will decide that when the suit goes forward.
Your poor reading comprehension is a big part of why you're a leftard.
 
Oct 1 (Reuters) - The family of Renee Good, one of two US citizens fatally shot by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis in January, sued the Trump administration on Thursday, saying there had been "no accountability" for her killing during deportation sweeps.



Good, if it is allowed the subpoena power of the case should get this all out in the open.
 
Oct 1 (Reuters) - The family of Renee Good, one of two US citizens fatally shot by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis in January, sued the Trump administration on Thursday, saying there had been "no accountability" for her killing during deportation sweeps.


Saw this story a couple days ago. Good. Why are these ICE goons getting off? What about the ones that gunned down Pretti?
 
She "peacefully accelerated her car into a cop", right, buddy?
Once the officer gave her the command, which she clear did hear, "Get out of the car," she was 'detained.' That means she couldn't legally leave the spot she was at. She immediately panicked after that and tried to drive away. That is felony fleeing. If she had obeyed the officer, she'd be alive today.
 
Trump's Gestapo agent murdered that woman.


Could very well be but the federal authorities has stone walled any case that could be made of it. If the civil suit goes forth and Good's family have good attorneys with good investigators and a research team behind them the subpoena power and discovery will blow the lid off any cover up and we will get to the bottom of this. Same should be true for the Pretti case and any of several others. It is the lawsuits that will resolve all of it.
 
Once the officer gave her the command, which she clear did hear, "Get out of the car," she was 'detained.' That means she couldn't legally leave the spot she was at. She immediately panicked after that and tried to drive away. That is felony fleeing. If she had obeyed the officer, she'd be alive today.

How long was you career in law enforcement?

Tennessee vs. Garner, 1984 SCOTUS

Under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a police officer may use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect only if the officer has a good-faith belief that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

There is no way that any court is going to find that under the circumstances of the Good case any officer could have determined in good faith that Good posed a significant threat to others.

As to the officer, HIS failure to abide by standand practices, placing himself in front of that vehicle, caused any threat to his own life so it is going to be up to the court to determine just how much his actions added to this. Also, where he was still at threat when he fired, as it seems by the physical evidence he was beside, not in front, of the vehicle when he fired the fatal shot.

That is why I think this lawsuit is good. This is ALL going to come out in this wash, IF the law suit is allowed to go forward.

If it is allowed I bet the government moves to settle it quickly out of court EXACTLY to keep that from happening. I hope the plaintiffs refuse any attempt at settlement.
 
Last edited:
No, it’s not “felony fleeing”. She wasn’t under arrest even for a misdemeanor, let alone a felony. Yeah, if she had “obeyed” she’d be alive today. If the officer had been a man, not an animal she’d be alive today.
Yes, it is. The pick up truck turned on it's emergency lights. The officers exited the vehicle. They clearly gave Goode a repeated order to exit the vehicle. At that point they had made a traffic stop and detained her. She decided to flee instead. That is a low-level felony almost everywhere in the US.

She FAFO'd and got fucked for it. 100% her fault.

Let's start with local law:

346.04 Obedience to traffic officers, signs and signals; fleeing from officer.
(1) No person including a personal delivery device operator shall fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order, signal, or direction of a traffic officer.

(2) No operator of a vehicle shall disobey the instructions of any official traffic sign or signal unless otherwise directed by a traffic officer.
(2t) No operator of a vehicle, after having received a visible or audible signal to stop his or her vehicle from a traffic officer, federal law enforcement officer, or marked or unmarked police vehicle that the operator knows or reasonably should know is being operated by a law enforcement officer, shall knowingly resist the officer by failing to stop his or her vehicle as promptly as safety reasonably permits.

(3) No operator of a vehicle, after having received a visual or audible signal from a traffic officer, federal law enforcement officer, or marked or unmarked police vehicle that the operator knows or reasonably should know is being operated by a law enforcement officer, shall knowingly flee or attempt to elude any officer by willful or wanton disregard of such signal so as to interfere with or endanger the operation of the police vehicle, the traffic officer, the law enforcement officer, other vehicles, or pedestrians, nor shall the operator increase the speed of the operator’s vehicle or extinguish the lights of the vehicle in an attempt to elude or flee.


(4) Subsection (2t) is not an included offense of sub. (3), but a person may not be convicted of violating both subs. (2t) and (3) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence.

 
How long was you career in law enforcement?

Tennessee vs. Garner, 1984 SCOTUS

Under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a police officer may use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect only if the officer has a good-faith belief that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

There is no way that any court is going to find that under the circumstances of the Good case any officer could have determined in good faith that Good posed a significant threat to others.

As to the officer, HIS failure to abide by standand practices, placing himself in front of that vehicle, caused any threat to his own life so it is going to be up to the court to determine just how much his actions added to this. Also, where he was still at threat when he fired, as it seems by the physical evidence he was beside, not in front, of the vehicle when he fired the fatal shot.
What you said is accurate.
 
Yes, it is. The pick up truck turned on it's emergency lights. The officers exited the vehicle. They clearly gave Goode a repeated order to exit the vehicle. At that point they had made a traffic stop and detained her. She decided to flee instead. That is a low-level felony almost everywhere in the US.

She FAFO'd and got fucked for it. 100% her fault.

Let's start with local law:

346.04 Obedience to traffic officers, signs and signals; fleeing from officer.
(1) No person including a personal delivery device operator shall fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order, signal, or direction of a traffic officer.

(2) No operator of a vehicle shall disobey the instructions of any official traffic sign or signal unless otherwise directed by a traffic officer.
(2t) No operator of a vehicle, after having received a visible or audible signal to stop his or her vehicle from a traffic officer, federal law enforcement officer, or marked or unmarked police vehicle that the operator knows or reasonably should know is being operated by a law enforcement officer, shall knowingly resist the officer by failing to stop his or her vehicle as promptly as safety reasonably permits.

(3) No operator of a vehicle, after having received a visual or audible signal from a traffic officer, federal law enforcement officer, or marked or unmarked police vehicle that the operator knows or reasonably should know is being operated by a law enforcement officer, shall knowingly flee or attempt to elude any officer by willful or wanton disregard of such signal so as to interfere with or endanger the operation of the police vehicle, the traffic officer, the law enforcement officer, other vehicles, or pedestrians, nor shall the operator increase the speed of the operator’s vehicle or extinguish the lights of the vehicle in an attempt to elude or flee.


(4) Subsection (2t) is not an included offense of sub. (3), but a person may not be convicted of violating both subs. (2t) and (3) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence.

Wait.... You think Minneapolis is in Wisconsin?


:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Yes, it is. The pick up truck turned on it's emergency lights. The officers exited the vehicle. They clearly gave Goode a repeated order to exit the vehicle. At that point they had made a traffic stop and detained her. She decided to flee instead. That is a low-level felony almost everywhere in the US.

She FAFO'd and got fucked for it. 100% her fault.

Let's start with local law:

346.04 Obedience to traffic officers, signs and signals; fleeing from officer.
(1) No person including a personal delivery device operator shall fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order, signal, or direction of a traffic officer.

(2) No operator of a vehicle shall disobey the instructions of any official traffic sign or signal unless otherwise directed by a traffic officer.
(2t) No operator of a vehicle, after having received a visible or audible signal to stop his or her vehicle from a traffic officer, federal law enforcement officer, or marked or unmarked police vehicle that the operator knows or reasonably should know is being operated by a law enforcement officer, shall knowingly resist the officer by failing to stop his or her vehicle as promptly as safety reasonably permits.

(3) No operator of a vehicle, after having received a visual or audible signal from a traffic officer, federal law enforcement officer, or marked or unmarked police vehicle that the operator knows or reasonably should know is being operated by a law enforcement officer, shall knowingly flee or attempt to elude any officer by willful or wanton disregard of such signal so as to interfere with or endanger the operation of the police vehicle, the traffic officer, the law enforcement officer, other vehicles, or pedestrians, nor shall the operator increase the speed of the operator’s vehicle or extinguish the lights of the vehicle in an attempt to elude or flee.


(4) Subsection (2t) is not an included offense of sub. (3), but a person may not be convicted of violating both subs. (2t) and (3) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence.

No, even assuming the first shot was 100% her fault, the third shot - the one that entered the left side of her head and exited the right side, the shot that took her life, was 100% the agent’s fault.
 
No, even assuming the first shot was 100% her fault, the third shot - the one that entered the left side of her head and exited the right side, the shot that took her life, was 100% the agent’s fault.
Not true either. Even the training I got in the military stressed firing 3 rounds. You wanted to ensure you hit the target and stopped the action. That's standard stuff. There's none of that shit like you see in Hollywood movies. You shoot center mass and fire multiple times.
 
Not true either. Even the training I got in the military stressed firing 3 rounds. You wanted to ensure you hit the target and stopped the action. That's standard stuff. There's none of that shit like you see in Hollywood movies. You shoot center mass and fire multiple times.
I see. So she was the equivalent of an enemy combatant. I hope he tries that in his upcoming court case. What the fuck is the matter with you?
 
I see. So she was the equivalent of an enemy combatant. I hope he tries that in his upcoming court case. What the fuck is the matter with you?
No, that is standard training for use of firearms. In security settings, it's the same thing. You don't shoot to wound or try to shoot the gun out of a bad guy's hand. You aim "center mass" the middle of their chest, and fire three rounds. If that doesn't "stop the action" you do it again until it does.



 
Back
Top