ICE murdered an innocent woman

[Geo]

How do you still breath then?

I put my lips on your asshole and blow in and out.

 

[JDs Couch]

 

[Findthetone1]

Oh my, Let me get you a tissue.

Wait and see.

I think it will end up in the courts.

I didn't say it wouldn't asshole, I was trying to do a favor and point out the fact that what you posted is for STATE and LOCAL peace officers within the state of Minnesota. But you keep doing you and I'll keep laughing.

 

[MadAsAHatter]

Well I am sure that the Minnesota Prosecuters might start with these:

2025 Minnesota Statutes​

• Authenticate
• PDF

Resources​

• Search Minnesota Statutes
• About Minnesota Statutes
• 2025 Statutes New, Amended or Repealed
• 2025 Table of Chapters
• 2025 Statutes Topics (Index)

Chapter 609​

• Table of Sections
• Full Chapter Text
• Version List

Section 609.066​

• Version List

Recent History​

• 2023 Subd. 2 Amended 2023 c 52 art 10 s 8
• 2020 Subd. 1a New 2020 c 1 s 9
• 2020 Subd. 2 Amended 2020 c 1 s 10
• 2001 Subd. 1 Amended 2001 c 127 s 1

Topics​

• Ammunition
• Arrests
• Bodily harm
• Bullets
• Code of criminal procedure
• Criminal code
• Death
• Defenses
• Peace officers
• Popular names of acts

609.066 AUTHORIZED USE OF DEADLY FORCE BY PEACE OFFICERS.​

Subdivision 1.​

For the purposes of this section, "deadly force" means force which the actor uses with the purpose of causing, or which the actor should reasonably know creates a substantial risk of causing, death or great bodily harm. The intentional discharge of a firearm, other than a firearm loaded with less lethal munitions and used by a peace officer within the scope of official duties, in the direction of another person, or at a vehicle in which another person is believed to be, constitutes deadly force. "Less lethal munitions" means projectiles which are designed to stun, temporarily incapacitate, or cause temporary discomfort to a person. "Peace officer" has the meaning given in section 626.84, subdivision 1.

Subd. 1a.​

The legislature hereby finds and declares the following:

(1) that the authority to use deadly force, conferred on peace officers by this section, is a critical responsibility that shall be exercised judiciously and with respect for human rights and dignity and for the sanctity of every human life. The legislature further finds and declares that every person has a right to be free from excessive use of force by officers acting under color of law;

(2) as set forth below, it is the intent of the legislature that peace officers use deadly force only when necessary in defense of human life or to prevent great bodily harm. In determining whether deadly force is necessary, officers shall evaluate each situation in light of the particular circumstances of each case;

(3) that the decision by a peace officer to use deadly force shall be evaluated from the perspective of a reasonable officer in the same situation, based on the totality of the circumstances known to or perceived by the officer at the time, rather than with the benefit of hindsight, and that the totality of the circumstances shall account for occasions when officers may be forced to make quick judgments about using deadly force; and

(4) that peace officers should exercise special care when interacting with individuals with known physical, mental health, developmental, or intellectual disabilities as an individual's disability may affect the individual's ability to understand or comply with commands from peace officers.

Subd. 2.​

(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 609.06 or 609.065, the use of deadly force by a peace officer in the line of duty is justified only if an objectively reasonable officer would believe, based on the totality of the circumstances known to the officer at the time and without the benefit of hindsight, that such force is necessary:

(1) to protect the peace officer or another from death or great bodily harm, provided that the threat:

(i) can be articulated with specificity;

(ii) is reasonably likely to occur absent action by the law enforcement officer; and

(iii) must be addressed through the use of deadly force without unreasonable delay; or

(2) to effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the peace officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony and the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or great bodily harm to another person under the threat criteria in clause (1), items (i) to (iii), unless immediately apprehended.

(b) A peace officer shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger the person poses to self if an objectively reasonable officer would believe, based on the totality of the circumstances known to the officer at the time and without the benefit of hindsight, that the person does not pose a threat of death or great bodily harm to the peace officer or to another under the threat criteria in paragraph (a), clause (1), items (i) to (iii).

I think you're off base with your assessment, but at least you answered the question and gave some evidence for your reasoning.

Exactly. Ms Good was clearly turning her wheels to avoid the officer who moved into her path. Then he shot her once the vehicle was past him, in no danger to anyone.

If you watch the slo-mo video you can clearly see just after she reverses she points the wheels directly at the agent and presses the gas, but the wheels spin out on the ice. That is when he starts to draw his firearm. No, I don't believe se was trying to run him over. I think she was trying to escape and didn't care what happened to him. Regardless of the reason that I believe would be evidence enough for the agent to think his life was in danger. And further she did strike him with the vehicle. Intentional or not it would still fall under assault.

There was no obstruction. A vehicle passed her on video just before she was shot.
In any event, obstruction is not punishable by death, is it?

I said obstruction of a federal officer, not obstruction of random vehicles. Two separate things.

 

[MadAsAHatter]

For the record, I have not expressed whether or not I believe there could have been an alternative ending to the incident from the officer's perspective simply because I wasn't there. News articles and videos, some often manipulated to fit a narrative are not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Are they useful as evidence? Absolutely, but they can also be hindering in an investigation.

Was it avoidable from her perspective? Yep. Is it horrible that she died? Yep. But as adults, we pave the path we walk on and she chose poorly.
My comments here are mainly because of the inflammatory rhetoric that our resident smooth brains have been slinging and that kind shit is what put this country where it is. These clowns already have the officer tried, convicted and hanged. And they are happy about it. The hypocrisy is stunning, but not surprising. Maybe people should just wait for the investigation to conclude and go from there.

And while we wait, maybe the screaming armchair quarterbacks should remember the proverb:
"Don't judge a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes"

100%. You can clearly see how each "side" is reacting to this event.

 

[67mike]

I didn't say it wouldn't asshole, I was trying to do a favor and point out the fact that what you posted is for STATE and LOCAL peace officers within the state of Minnesota. But you keep doing you and I'll keep laughing.

Resorting to name calling. Geez.

It will be in courts. The very issue you cling to may be the first hurdle to get over, not my area of expertise or concern.

 

[67mike]

Yes, I do have expertise in that area.

Try and answer the question: what us your expertise? Just curious.

 

[67mike]

100%. You can clearly see how each "side" is reacting to this event.

In our jurisdiction ( equal to your "state" there is an immediate and automatic investigation by a non partial third party any time a citizen is injured while in police contact.

You probably don't have the same system, but who knows?

 

[67mike]

I put my lips on your asshole and blow in and out.

Holy crap that is flaming gay!

Not my rear end, cowboy.

 

[JDs Couch]

I put my lips on your asshole and blow in and out.

Odd fantasy

 

[lester]

So an officer has his phone out recording obviously distracted, shoots a woman and calls her a “f’ing Bitch” and they think that HELPS the case?!?

The only case that should be brought at this point is Murder II for the "wife".
There's already video of her literally saying it was her fault.

obstruction is a felony; her wife died while she was committing this felony. that's literally textbook Murder II

 

[MadAsAHatter]

In our jurisdiction ( equal to your "state" there is an immediate and automatic investigation by a non partial third party any time a citizen is injured while in police contact.

You probably don't have the same system, but who knows?

Probably not the exact same across every jurisdiction, but I would assume there would be some sort of investigation any time lethal force was used. I'm guessing the agent has/will be on administrative leave for a bit while they look into the events. How long, who knows. But that's not the same thing as pressing charges or taking things to court.

 

[JDs Couch]

The only case that should be brought at this point is Murder II for the "wife".
There's already video of her literally saying it was her fault.

obstruction is a felony; her wife died while she was committing this felony. that's literally textbook Murder II

You really are a dumb fucker.

 

[DanTravis62]

You really are a dumb fucker.

You realize the badge cam got released right? I would be careful about whose intelligence you insult, considering it's contents, and the history of this thread bro

 

[lester]

“I made her come down here, it’s my fault,”
I feel like it's my fault, I got her killed

Felony Murder Rule: In some jurisdictions, deaths that occur during the commission of certain dangerous felonies (that do not qualify for first-degree murder charges) may be classified as second-degree murder

.

 

[JDs Couch]

You realize the badge cam got released right? I would be careful about whose intelligence you insult, considering it's contents, and the history of this thread bro

Yes, and it clearly shows the murder was a murder.

 

[JDs Couch]

“I made her come down here, it’s my fault,”
I feel like it's my fault, I got her killed

Felony Murder Rule: In some jurisdictions, deaths that occur during the commission of certain dangerous felonies (that do not qualify for first-degree murder charges) may be classified as second-degree murder

.

Keep proving you're the dumbest fucker alive.

 

[Robostyle]

Also could rause doubt that the driver even realize he had walked over and was in front of her vehicle?

That isn't the agent's fault. And i've thought this since day 1-
She is not from minnesota, and may not be used to driving on snow/ice, and she may not have seen the agent until it was too late.
A driver is supposed to be in control of their vehicle at all times.

 

[Robostyle]

Why was she there? Was she lost? Did she not know a law enforcement operation was happening?

Completely blocking any road is "impeding traffic" and technically illegal. No matter who does it, except law enforcement or emergency vehicles.

 

[MadAsAHatter]

Keep proving you're the dumbest fucker alive. that title from you.

It's gonna be a pretty big challenge to take that title away from you.