I have to wonder why nobody seems to be addressing the fact that ice has no jurisdiction over US citizens and that the killer had no right in issuing orders in the first place? There's a whole lot of discussion around justifiable use of force and no discussion around unjustifiable use of power. In legitimizing his right to issue any orders in the first place, we are normalizing something which isn't even legal.
Yes they are but in this case ice is so clearly out of any semblance of authority in any way shape or form that people discussing the technicalities works to legitimize the interaction in the first place. US citizens do not fall under ice jurisdiction in any way shape or form. Keep blurring those lines and they will disappear. She was shot because she was queer and her partner was with her. The transfer of eugenics to ice is a very very slippery slope.
The reason he filmed it and they released it to the public was to ensure that the Maga base understood that he was "taking out" a queer woman. Her wife was present with her and they were there together to support a neighbor.
"A DHS LEO may use deadly force only when the LEO has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the LEO or to another person."
"A reasonable belief..." is doing a Herculean bit of work here to justify use-of-deadly-force, and usually wins the day for cops or other "law enforcement" types resorting to shoot-to- kill responses.
And so shall ICE-man Ross walk, as he cites "reasonable belief" that Reneé Good was intent on "harming" him, and the most flimsy of "evidence" — contradictory or not — is sufficient to put this assassin out on the streets again.
Remember, that Ross was "dragged" by a vehicle in an earlier operation last year in MN, as he tried to apprehend an alleged "illegal migrant" whilst hanging on to the man's car door, and repeatedly shooting him with a taser.
And there's your exculpatory excuse..."imminent threat of death or bodily injury", and case closed.
If he hadn't illegally approached her and remanded she get out of the car, there would have been no reason to believe anything about "reasonable risk". Take it back to the beginning where he was not authorized to stop her or make any demands in the first place
If Ross was so impacted by his prior experience of being dragged by a car such that he would REACT in fear rather than ACT rationally, then he should not have been back on the job. Given what he did, that he was previously dragged by a car is not a defense of his action, it’s an indictment.
Agreed … what the entire team with Ross did was illegal. They should all be fired. Ross should be charged with murder and the others with a range of assault and reckless endangerment charges as well as violating Good’s civil rights. From the get go they were out of their jurisdiction and authorities.
I was one of those Hogan's Alley actors back in the early 1990s. In the scenarios where I was armed (we had guns with blanks) they were usually written to be resolved without anyone resorting to discharging their weapon. When I did decide to discharge my weapon, the scenario ended and the trainees were dinged.
Once some veteran agents came through for some reason and the difference was night and day. They had total control of the situation in every scenario I played, versus the uncertainty of many of the trainees. Experience matters.
Which is why I am even more inclined to think this was intentional. Jonathan Ross has a lot of training and experience. He is an Iraq war veteran and has been on the job with CBP and ICE for nearly two decades. As you said, he was just pissed.
One aspect not mentioned which I feel carries quite a bit of weight for Ross, prior to this incident he was dragged by a car and suffered quite a few injuries. This likely played a role in his decision making as it is imprinted in all future decisions for similar incidents.
I understand he was dragged about, give or take, 90 metres. It's noteworthy that in that situation, which was actually dangerous to him, that he didn't fire his weapon.
Further, if his trauma was still such a factor, he shouldn't have been in the field.
From all the interviews with law enforcement or ex-law enforement, if you are trained properly, you never walk in front of the car. As Asha said, he saw no danger and he was even focused on the camera and not on her. The other thing is, if he indeed had PTSD due to a previous incident involving a car, he should never have been in the field in these types of situations.
I think if he was scarred by this past incident, it would make him less likely to walk in front of her vehicle. I'm assuming that a fundamental rule in his training was "Don't put yourself in harm's way." Yet he walked in front of the vehicle . I can only conclude he was preparing to shoot.
Wouldn’t that life threading and awful earlier experience months before inspire him to step away from the car rather than to kill the driver? Remember he did step out of the way because notice in every video he is much further away from the car when he fired than the other two officers who were trying to open the door? So the conclusion is mandatory: he intended to KILL HER which is why Trump was afraid to let the professionals in DOJ even begin these official analysis! Is that conclusion wrong?
And I've always wondered if I'd run into any of the trainees who surveilled or arrested me! Not so far, as far as I know.
The Hogan's Alley actors are probably professionalized now, but we were a diverse lot with little training then—some actors who did local theater seemed to be the core. One guy did makeup and hair for a local theater IIRC. Another was a straight-edge punk kid with a mohawk—no idea how he found the job.
I was just a rando college student who got pulled into it by a musician friend of mine. His then girlfriend found the gig for him—she was really driven. She's a writer/publisher now. It was gig work for me. I'd get called a day or two in advance for a few hours work at $8/hr. Others had more regular schedules. It was always fun and paid for some beer every now and again.
As for what we thought of everything, it was interesting seeing the thought that went into the scenario design. They'd tell us how to play it, but there was a lot of improvisation. As I said, we were armed in some, but the goal for a successful scenario was no discharges. We were discouraged from shooting if it didn't make sense in context. The goal of the contact training was to get the job done with minimum risk to all involved. The hostage scenario in the detached house with multiple armed characters was probably the most likely to go bad IME.
I recently alternated listening to the audiobooks *Verbal Judo* by George Thompson and *Rise of the Warrior Cop* by Radley Balko. It was an interesting juxtaposition and made me think back to those days. The training that I was a very small part of was obviously aimed at deescalation when possible while still getting the task at hand done. It's how I've viewed what law enforcement ought to be—professional.
DHS and particularly CBP and ICE obviously don't play that way. They are better described by Balko's book. What I've seen of them is profoundly unprofessional.
This is fascinating. The "detached house with multiple armed characters" is probably the "Trailer of Death," as we referred to it. You are correct that things were most likely to go bad in there. It instilled in all of us trainees a deep respect for how quickly and dramatically things could go bad in a tight, compartmentalized space with no ability to see inside and the very real possibility that any fired rounds could fly right through the walls and hit an unintended target. I hope that your experience was good. I have deep respect for the trainers we had, the training we received, and the colleagues with whom I worked. I don't recognize a lot of what I see happening in law enforcement these days. I left the Bureau a long time ago and I fear that whatever positives I experienced in my time there has been eroded and might not be rebuilt.
Did you see that the Minniapolis supervisor resigned on Sunday?
I've been in the IC since Aug 2001 (thought it would be a temporary thing, but timing.) First with the DOD, and then with the FBI and various other agencies (and always as a contractor.)
There are still good people here, but fewer. I have a Hanna Arendt quote prominent in my ecomms, and I haven't been walked out yet.
Women also have testosterone. It's a necessary hormone for both men and women. Fight or flight is ingrained into all of our minds. For some, especially for veterans and law enforcement that have seen the worst of the worst, this fight or flight reaction is quite different from the civilian populus.
And Good was female. These rabid despicable misogynist ice monsters believe women are disposable owned objects with no other reason for their existence except to be raped and murdered so they know who is the (impotent) boss: what I have not seen anywhere is commentary about how shooting her in the face is an example for the rest of us so we are too terrified to assert our fundamental human rights. He intentionally meant to remove her identity, her humanity. He likely beats his wife (if any stupid woman would have him) and his kids as well. Looks like he is going to get a pass, at least temporarily, but he should remember there is no statute of limitations on murder.
As a Minnesotan, it sounds like you are describing many of the individuals being targeted by ICE. Somali men treat all women as if they are trash. It's part of their religion. Often times beating, raping, or keeping their "wives" hostage. Incest is common among the Somali population with fathers forcing their daughters or nieces. They project this hatred of women towards every race.
As for us Minnesotans since it is our state, we are angry about the fraud and want there to be accountability. We went from a surplus of billions to a deficit in roughly a year. As many of us can no longer afford to heat our homes, keep the lights on, and food on the table, seeing our hard earned money funneled into fraud is infuriating.
If someone is mad about the federal government going after criminals but not mad about the billions in fraud, it speaks louder than ever.
It sounds like you have legitimate reasons to be upset. I have no idea about the specific challenges you are facing in MN but I understand how hard things are right now. It’s hard here in rural WA as well, but we do not have Somalis to blame it on. But crime is hardly something only immigrants engage in. In fact contrary to what the venal republicans say, violent crime among immigrants is significantly lower than violent crime among native-born Americans; we have dumb-as-a-box-of-rocks ronnie r and bush 1 to thank for that lie. The criminal in the White House is an adjudicated rapist and has actually been convicted on 34 counts of fraud so the people who voted for him are in some sense complicit in making rape and fraud seen as desirable, even prerequisite for positions of power, to judge by his cabinet.
In most countries men treat the women like dirty trash — sometimes literally, as did ross when he murdered Ms Good, both of whom are native-born Americans, btw. He treated her like a throw away, a literal soft, easy target to prove his ‘manliness' to his despicable gang of slobbering thuggish bros. I have no control over Somali men and don’t know what evidence (or not) there is for your contentions. But I live in America and there is NO excuse for men here to do that. Absolutely NO excuse. What I do know is that just because some immigrant men are heinous misogynists that does not justify the reprehensible actions of American men. I think it is crystal clear that far from ‘going after criminals’ as you want to believe, ice is terrorizing and murdering innocent Americans. Maybe you could save a bit of your self-righteous rage for them.
I think Americans can walk and chew gum at the same time: it’s not a competition to see who is more of a victim. We can prosecute fraud in MN and fight violent misogynist ice, too. Indeed, we must.
You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes treating women like trash. I submit that it is highly disrespectful and constitutes serious mistreatment to sequester women from public participation. Women are more than half the human population and as the majority we should be running things. What are you afraid of - losing your unearned male supremacy? ALL religions are violently patriarchal and deeply misogynist.
NO NO NO. If we want to have the rule of law for anyone it has to apply to everyone, even the most heinous among us. I want to see him tried in a court of law. THEY are the vigilantes. The only way to defeat them is with overwhelming PEACEFUL PROTEST. IT WORKS.
None of those countries had populations who enjoyed a 250 year history of the freedom of democracy, nor were they anywhere near as ornery as Americans. We’ve got to work it 24/7: nothing is guaranteed but also nothing else works other than peaceful protest. It’s like what Churchill said about democracy:
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms .…’
And anyway - don’t you think you can do better?? I certainly do. What happened to some benighted European yahoos in the 1920s and '30s is not going to determine what happens to my country in the 21st century. Not happening. That would be the essence of defeatism and for better or worse is totally un-American. So, pitch in and give it your all because the other choices of government are much, much worse than democracy. And since nothing else works to guarantee our democracy, it’s all hands on deck. PEACEFUL PROTEST WORKS. INDEED, IT’S THE ONLY THING THAT DOES.
If you want to live in a democracy, can the weepy whiney cynicism; it’s not as cool as you think. WE NEED YOU.
Asha, in general, how often are these policies updated? They need to be updated after this, when the Dems get back in charge. The terrifying part is that the killing could have been worse if her child had been in the car and if the member of the Gestapo had killed Renee and her partner.
For me, the worst part isn't just the killing, it's the denying of medical aid. The FBI and PD tend to be taught to apply basic first aid and to call for an ambulance or ambulances.
After that? They don't leave the scene until an ambulance/ambulances has/have pulled away. Even after a car accident when I was t-boned, the officer didn't pull away until the ambulance pulled away. I was fine. I bruised my shoulder. The car couldn't be fixed.
Not allowing the doctor to act is the most damning. You have to be a special sort of villain not to allow that doctor to act. That member of the Gestapo will ALWAYS be the villain in our history, as Leslie Odom Jr. sings in Hamilton.
I get your main point on the damning prevention of medical care to Good. What actually caught my attention was the words "when the Dems get back in charge". I think you might be demonstrating a degree of naivety. With a war underway in Venezuela and Columbia, such a national emergency might convince the President to delay elections. As ICE agents continue their patriotic protection of the American people, certain types of voters may be reluctant to go to polls, if there are any. If the Dems actually won the next election that certainly proves it was stolen. Loyal Americans would be justified in hunting, harassing and killing domestic terrorists (people displaying signs of democratic support). Knowing they are unlikely to be charged, but if charged and convicted, would then be pardoned, it would embolden these patriots like Agent Ross to be pretty ruthless in suppressing the "illegal votes". "Dems in power" might be a few years off.
I'm thinking my sarcasm was too subtle Lauren. Just to be clear I don't believe any of the justifications I'm hearing out of the MAGAT administration have any basis in fact or ethics. However, Teflon Don and his cronies have bulldozed the US constitution, the world trading order, the rule of law, the western alliances and standards of human decency. I can't see them allowing the Dems to succeed if it means maintaining any of those principles.
I recognized the sarcasm. My concern is will we actually need to begin to defend ourselves? Take a moment and look up the video of trump supporters dangerously harassing a Joe Biden campaign bus in texas. If these defensive skirmishes begin, I don’t see how we’re going to head off a civil war, sans hyperbole. We can now clearly see trump supporters do and will act with impunity.
If you live abroad you have to register to vote every year. U.S. citizens living, serving, or studying abroad—you can vote from wherever you are! 🌍 Visit https://votefromabroad.org to register and request your overseas ballot.
It’s quick, free, and valid for all elections in 2026. Need help? Write to help@votefromabroad.org.
Vote from Abroad volunteers are ready to assist you with any questions about requesting or returning your ballot. Don’t wait! Request your ballot today and make your voice heard! 🗳️
ICE Victims
Abelardo Avellaneda Delgado
Alex Jeffrey Pretti
Brayan Garzón-Rayo
Carlos Roberto Montoya Valdez
Chaofeng Ge
Delvin Francisco Rodriguez
Fouad Saeed Abdulkadir
Francisco Gaspar-Andrés
Gabriel Garcia Aviles
Hasan Ali Moh’D Saleh
Henry Ruiz Guillén
Huabing Xie
Isidro Pérez
Ismael Ayala-Uribe
Jean Wilson Brutus
Jesus Molina-Veya
Johnny Noviello
Josué Castro Rivera
Juan Alexis Tineo-Martinez
Kai Yin Wong
Keith Porter
Leo Cruz-Silva
Lorenzo Antonio Batrez Vargas
Maksym Chernyak
Marie Ange Blaise
Miguel Angel Garcia Medina
Nenko Stanev Gantchev
Nhon Ngoc Nguyen
Norlan Guzman-Fuentes
Oscar Rascon Duarte
Pete Sumalo Montejo
Renee Nicole Good
Santos Banegas Reyes
Serawit Gezahegn Dejene
Shirez Fatehall Sachwani
Silverio Villega Gonzalez
Tien Xuan Phan
Please add names of people who are missing from this list. We will be reading them at vigils in Indivisible Abroad and Democrats Abroad vigils.
Marcia. It is just tragic. I am attending a Democrats Abroad virtual vigil for all of these people in about half an hour. I know there are also vigils in person in Berlin and Strasbourg, and I believe in Italy as well. There may be more.
If I were Minnesota BCA, and I were told that the Feds (FBI) won't be sharing investigative information with me, rather than abdicate my responsibility to keep our Minnesota citizens safe, I would use all existing evidence and information to prepare a probable cause affidavit for the arrest of the suspect, using Asha's text verbatim in much of my affidavit, to obtain a warrant for murder. Many murder cases that are successfully prosecuted don't have the luxary of a video recording of it. Force the FBI to play and provide exculpatory evidence or information. PS, I wouild call former FBI Agen, Asha Rangappa as my star witness when and if needed. Or at the very least, present it to a Grand Jury!
Absolutely. The Minneapolis DA doesn't have to have all of his "beyond a reasonable doubt" ducks lined up in order to get an indictment of the Ross sandwich. Probable cause, more likely than not, is all it takes to get the ball rolling. These state justice system officials need to be thinking of the duties owed to the victims--Nicole Renee Good and the law abiding public at large--who have been injured by this ICE thug. There seems to be a bit too much deference being given to this out-of-control Brown Shirt agency because they are federal.
If need be, Gov. Waltz should call up his Nat'l Guard to protect the police making the arrest; and to provide escort for the other 2,000 ICE agents who should be asked to leave the state on account of being a threat to public safety and good order--a clearly established state function.
I had the same idea. The county or city DA should present these facts to a Grand Jury as soon as possible. Indicting Ross would, unfortunately, not be particularly difficult given the video evidence.
I know very little about the applicable Minnesota statues and I realize that it would cause a major political and legal confrontation with the DOJ (not to mention the Administration) but it would make a powerful statement in support of the people affected by these oppressive tactics. In Texas, there are several criminal homicide options including Criminally Negligent Homicide, Manslaughter, Murder and Capital Murder that could be presented to a Grand Jury.
Thanks for the background and analysis. I have another question. Was the confrontation with Renee Good properly legally predicated?
Please let me explain my thinking.
1) These were ICE agents. Presumably there are limitations to their jurisdiction (if that's the correct term), meaning the scope of laws they are authorized to enforce - federal immigration and customs enforcement - it's right in the name.
2) Ross was filming her on his phone and she spoke to him, in a non-threatening manner. He did not ask her for ID or if she was a US citizen. If he suspected she was in violation of immigration laws, he could have asked her. He walked away and continued filming her car suggesting he did not view her as a threat. Does his failure to ask her about her immigration status or treat her as a threat eliminate claims of reasonable suspicion or probable cause?
3) She was not unavoidably obstructing the vehicle that pulled up behind her out of which the other agents jumped. A vehicle passed by her car immediately before that. Law enforcement, especially with lights and siren which that vehicle had, routinely go into the oncoming lane around stopped cars. In fact, if there's no space to pull out of your lane, that's what you are supposed to do - stop and let them pass. They easily could have gone around her so it would seem claiming obstruction is demonstrably false.
4) If the above is all correct, did they even have legal authority to order her out of her car or to stop her in any way? If no, does that render the shooting illegal regardless?
I hope the MN AG or local DA takes your nine points as Exhibits A thru I in any prosecution of that ICE agent, because that was an excellent breakdown. Have not seen anything like that detailed analysis yet in the media.
Spot on. Jonathan Ross is a thug. He felt emasculated because someone didn’t fear him. In a fair and just world, he would be charged with murder and spend the rest of his life in prison.
I read in another'stack post that his wife left him for another woman. Emasculated, and still angry at the ex. He couldn't kill her, so any lesbian would do.
(Paragraph about 'Agents of Change'... 'what being a spy in the agency was really *like*? I think you might have left a word out.) Fascinating article. So informative... thanks.
Still processing article. Thanks so much for adding your professional opinion and clarity. Right now at Crucial Point #3, and am confused. If action beats reaction, isn't unholstering his weapon an in case action - so proactive not reactive. I agree 100% with your evidence based conclusion that this shoot wasn't justified, so I've obviously lost the thread here. Thanks for clarification.
It is very helpful to have your detailed and clear explanations of what the law is and how Ross strayed from the law. I hope that the FBI can do the same when they investigate. It is important that you put this out there now, and hopefully you are publishing this in other forums as well. I will be sharing it. Thank you.
I am assuming they won't which is why it is so important that Asha got her story out there before they say anything. We do not trust the Trump FBI, whereas I trust Asha and have been sharing this post in my network and people have responded positively because it is so well written and clear.
The FBI isn’t going to investigate; they’re going to bury this case. In that regard, they’re not sharing any evidence with Minnesota, who will have to try the ICE agent without all the evidence, if they decide to go ahead with the case at this time.
AudreyRose, Yes they will. This is why Asha getting this out there before they say anything is so important. We know that the first person to tell the story owns the narrative that people most pay attention to. She was wise to use this to get the story out before the Trump FBI comes up with whatever they do. And we should all be sharing this with everyone we know. I have been doing that.
So anticipatory actions here show (again especially in conjunction with the other crucial moments which come later), that his intent was to use his weapon but not in response to a perceived threat, i.e., he was creating the life threatening situation, not attempting to minimize it.
Quality of your analysis reflected by the comments on Bluesky and the impressive quality of those making them. Thanks so much for your insights, Asha. By far the best, most objective and most informed commentary I've read.
I watched a video and commentary of this horrific event on the BBC site. I too saw Ross unholster his weapon while standing in front of the vehicle before it moves forward. As it begins to move forward you can clearly see Good turning the steering wheel to the right AWAY from Ross. Nevertheless he shoots into the windshield at the lower driver's side. Then he steps to the right and shoots thru the open driver's side window as the vehicle PASSES him.
My conclusion is that Ross decided when he pulled his weapon that if Good didn't exit the vehicle he was going to start shooting. As soon as Ms Good put the vehicle in Drive she was dead.
This is the first analysis I've seen that focuses on the moment when the shooter decides to move the camera to his left hand, allowing him to access his gun with his right (dominant) hand. For me, a retired prosecutor, this is when the intent to use deadly force is formed. He goes for the gun immediately after freeing his right hand. The only reason he is near the victim's car, is because he chose to be that close. What is his role in this citizen contact? Is it to document unlawful behavior? Is he there to assist the officer ordering the victim out of the car? Is this a traffic enforcement stop? What's the crime? Impeding traffic on a public roadway? Is that an infraction or a misdemeanor in MN? Neither justifies the use of deadly force. Did the citizen interaction give rise to a reasonable belief that the officer's safety was at risk of harm? The passenger was getting into the car when she dismissed the shooter with a snide remark, "Go have some lunch, dude". The victim attempts de-escalation by stating "I'm not mad at you, dude". The shooter's intent to kill was formed when he freed his right hand to get his gun. There was no legal justification to pull out his gun. He was angry and was looking for a fight. He fired his weapon because he was mad, not fearful. Male hysteria does not justify this killing. He should not have been cleared for return to duty after his last vehicle encounter. He was mentally and emotionally unfit to perform and presented a danger to the public safety and welfare. Not only is this officer criminally responsible for killing Renee Good, ICE is liable for its negligence in putting him back on the street.
Another 'stack i read said his wife left him for another woman. Emasculated from the taunt, and still angry at his ex. He couldn't kill her, so any lesbian would do.
Reacting to your statement: “Crucial moment #5. As Good drives away, Ross takes two additional shots. Any threat that existed has already passed at that point. I don’t see any way to get around this.”
As an experienced hunter and soldier, I see familiar behavior to my training as is necessary to finish off a kill. This suggests premeditation, and there is evidence of this. Notice the premeditation in the actions before the kill: go out of sight behind, then alongside the vehicle. Wait for the right time.
While the victim is preoccupied by cross traffic, the much louder approaching ICE truck coming from the left approaches (as if rehearsed) to immediately command her complete attention while the killer moves unnoticed across Good’s field of view into perfect position to appear nonthreatening with cellphone camera while preparing to draw his sidearm when he’s no longer in danger.
With my experience, watching all evidence online, this was a setup to execute Good unless she stopped her vehicle completely. Completely predictable.
one thing I am wondering about: even if (sake of argument) shooting that person was justified, wasn't it still (procedurally) a reckless discharge because of the backdrop? It included his fellow officers, bystanders, and occupied vehicles.
I have to wonder why nobody seems to be addressing the fact that ice has no jurisdiction over US citizens and that the killer had no right in issuing orders in the first place? There's a whole lot of discussion around justifiable use of force and no discussion around unjustifiable use of power. In legitimizing his right to issue any orders in the first place, we are normalizing something which isn't even legal.
Keep in mind, ALL persons in the country are (were?) protected by the U.S. Constitution; citizen, alien, documented or not!
Yes they are but in this case ice is so clearly out of any semblance of authority in any way shape or form that people discussing the technicalities works to legitimize the interaction in the first place. US citizens do not fall under ice jurisdiction in any way shape or form. Keep blurring those lines and they will disappear. She was shot because she was queer and her partner was with her. The transfer of eugenics to ice is a very very slippery slope.
That stuck with me when I read that Renee Good had a wife.
The reason he filmed it and they released it to the public was to ensure that the Maga base understood that he was "taking out" a queer woman. Her wife was present with her and they were there together to support a neighbor.
And that cost them dearly. A child has no mother now.
"A DHS LEO may use deadly force only when the LEO has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the LEO or to another person."
"A reasonable belief..." is doing a Herculean bit of work here to justify use-of-deadly-force, and usually wins the day for cops or other "law enforcement" types resorting to shoot-to- kill responses.
And so shall ICE-man Ross walk, as he cites "reasonable belief" that Reneé Good was intent on "harming" him, and the most flimsy of "evidence" — contradictory or not — is sufficient to put this assassin out on the streets again.
Remember, that Ross was "dragged" by a vehicle in an earlier operation last year in MN, as he tried to apprehend an alleged "illegal migrant" whilst hanging on to the man's car door, and repeatedly shooting him with a taser.
And there's your exculpatory excuse..."imminent threat of death or bodily injury", and case closed.
If he hadn't illegally approached her and remanded she get out of the car, there would have been no reason to believe anything about "reasonable risk". Take it back to the beginning where he was not authorized to stop her or make any demands in the first place
It was another ICE officer who demanded Good get out of her "f'g" car, but your point is valid. There was no authority for ICE to do so.
If Ross was so impacted by his prior experience of being dragged by a car such that he would REACT in fear rather than ACT rationally, then he should not have been back on the job. Given what he did, that he was previously dragged by a car is not a defense of his action, it’s an indictment.
Did he even have jurisdiction to exit his vehicle?
Agreed … what the entire team with Ross did was illegal. They should all be fired. Ross should be charged with murder and the others with a range of assault and reckless endangerment charges as well as violating Good’s civil rights. From the get go they were out of their jurisdiction and authorities.
I was one of those Hogan's Alley actors back in the early 1990s. In the scenarios where I was armed (we had guns with blanks) they were usually written to be resolved without anyone resorting to discharging their weapon. When I did decide to discharge my weapon, the scenario ended and the trainees were dinged.
Once some veteran agents came through for some reason and the difference was night and day. They had total control of the situation in every scenario I played, versus the uncertainty of many of the trainees. Experience matters.
Which is why I am even more inclined to think this was intentional. Jonathan Ross has a lot of training and experience. He is an Iraq war veteran and has been on the job with CBP and ICE for nearly two decades. As you said, he was just pissed.
This is fascinating, thanks for sharing
One aspect not mentioned which I feel carries quite a bit of weight for Ross, prior to this incident he was dragged by a car and suffered quite a few injuries. This likely played a role in his decision making as it is imprinted in all future decisions for similar incidents.
I understand he was dragged about, give or take, 90 metres. It's noteworthy that in that situation, which was actually dangerous to him, that he didn't fire his weapon.
Further, if his trauma was still such a factor, he shouldn't have been in the field.
From all the interviews with law enforcement or ex-law enforement, if you are trained properly, you never walk in front of the car. As Asha said, he saw no danger and he was even focused on the camera and not on her. The other thing is, if he indeed had PTSD due to a previous incident involving a car, he should never have been in the field in these types of situations.
I think if he was scarred by this past incident, it would make him less likely to walk in front of her vehicle. I'm assuming that a fundamental rule in his training was "Don't put yourself in harm's way." Yet he walked in front of the vehicle . I can only conclude he was preparing to shoot.
Wouldn’t that life threading and awful earlier experience months before inspire him to step away from the car rather than to kill the driver? Remember he did step out of the way because notice in every video he is much further away from the car when he fired than the other two officers who were trying to open the door? So the conclusion is mandatory: he intended to KILL HER which is why Trump was afraid to let the professionals in DOJ even begin these official analysis! Is that conclusion wrong?
If he was that traumatized by the previous incident he shouldn't still be in the field. And, it's no excuse for what he did.
This is amazing! I too am a former FBI SA and we always wondered who the Hogan’s Alley actors were and what they thought about everything.
And I've always wondered if I'd run into any of the trainees who surveilled or arrested me! Not so far, as far as I know.
The Hogan's Alley actors are probably professionalized now, but we were a diverse lot with little training then—some actors who did local theater seemed to be the core. One guy did makeup and hair for a local theater IIRC. Another was a straight-edge punk kid with a mohawk—no idea how he found the job.
I was just a rando college student who got pulled into it by a musician friend of mine. His then girlfriend found the gig for him—she was really driven. She's a writer/publisher now. It was gig work for me. I'd get called a day or two in advance for a few hours work at $8/hr. Others had more regular schedules. It was always fun and paid for some beer every now and again.
As for what we thought of everything, it was interesting seeing the thought that went into the scenario design. They'd tell us how to play it, but there was a lot of improvisation. As I said, we were armed in some, but the goal for a successful scenario was no discharges. We were discouraged from shooting if it didn't make sense in context. The goal of the contact training was to get the job done with minimum risk to all involved. The hostage scenario in the detached house with multiple armed characters was probably the most likely to go bad IME.
I recently alternated listening to the audiobooks *Verbal Judo* by George Thompson and *Rise of the Warrior Cop* by Radley Balko. It was an interesting juxtaposition and made me think back to those days. The training that I was a very small part of was obviously aimed at deescalation when possible while still getting the task at hand done. It's how I've viewed what law enforcement ought to be—professional.
DHS and particularly CBP and ICE obviously don't play that way. They are better described by Balko's book. What I've seen of them is profoundly unprofessional.
This is fascinating. The "detached house with multiple armed characters" is probably the "Trailer of Death," as we referred to it. You are correct that things were most likely to go bad in there. It instilled in all of us trainees a deep respect for how quickly and dramatically things could go bad in a tight, compartmentalized space with no ability to see inside and the very real possibility that any fired rounds could fly right through the walls and hit an unintended target. I hope that your experience was good. I have deep respect for the trainers we had, the training we received, and the colleagues with whom I worked. I don't recognize a lot of what I see happening in law enforcement these days. I left the Bureau a long time ago and I fear that whatever positives I experienced in my time there has been eroded and might not be rebuilt.
Did you see that the Minniapolis supervisor resigned on Sunday?
I've been in the IC since Aug 2001 (thought it would be a temporary thing, but timing.) First with the DOD, and then with the FBI and various other agencies (and always as a contractor.)
There are still good people here, but fewer. I have a Hanna Arendt quote prominent in my ecomms, and I haven't been walked out yet.
Thank you.
Testosterone is usually the problem.
Women also have testosterone. It's a necessary hormone for both men and women. Fight or flight is ingrained into all of our minds. For some, especially for veterans and law enforcement that have seen the worst of the worst, this fight or flight reaction is quite different from the civilian populus.
It’s in their mindset. They’re fascists
And Good was female. These rabid despicable misogynist ice monsters believe women are disposable owned objects with no other reason for their existence except to be raped and murdered so they know who is the (impotent) boss: what I have not seen anywhere is commentary about how shooting her in the face is an example for the rest of us so we are too terrified to assert our fundamental human rights. He intentionally meant to remove her identity, her humanity. He likely beats his wife (if any stupid woman would have him) and his kids as well. Looks like he is going to get a pass, at least temporarily, but he should remember there is no statute of limitations on murder.
As a Minnesotan, it sounds like you are describing many of the individuals being targeted by ICE. Somali men treat all women as if they are trash. It's part of their religion. Often times beating, raping, or keeping their "wives" hostage. Incest is common among the Somali population with fathers forcing their daughters or nieces. They project this hatred of women towards every race.
As for us Minnesotans since it is our state, we are angry about the fraud and want there to be accountability. We went from a surplus of billions to a deficit in roughly a year. As many of us can no longer afford to heat our homes, keep the lights on, and food on the table, seeing our hard earned money funneled into fraud is infuriating.
If someone is mad about the federal government going after criminals but not mad about the billions in fraud, it speaks louder than ever.
It sounds like you have legitimate reasons to be upset. I have no idea about the specific challenges you are facing in MN but I understand how hard things are right now. It’s hard here in rural WA as well, but we do not have Somalis to blame it on. But crime is hardly something only immigrants engage in. In fact contrary to what the venal republicans say, violent crime among immigrants is significantly lower than violent crime among native-born Americans; we have dumb-as-a-box-of-rocks ronnie r and bush 1 to thank for that lie. The criminal in the White House is an adjudicated rapist and has actually been convicted on 34 counts of fraud so the people who voted for him are in some sense complicit in making rape and fraud seen as desirable, even prerequisite for positions of power, to judge by his cabinet.
https://www.npr.org/2024/03/08/1237103158/immigrants-are-less-likely-to-commit-crimes-than-us-born-americans-studies-find
In most countries men treat the women like dirty trash — sometimes literally, as did ross when he murdered Ms Good, both of whom are native-born Americans, btw. He treated her like a throw away, a literal soft, easy target to prove his ‘manliness' to his despicable gang of slobbering thuggish bros. I have no control over Somali men and don’t know what evidence (or not) there is for your contentions. But I live in America and there is NO excuse for men here to do that. Absolutely NO excuse. What I do know is that just because some immigrant men are heinous misogynists that does not justify the reprehensible actions of American men. I think it is crystal clear that far from ‘going after criminals’ as you want to believe, ice is terrorizing and murdering innocent Americans. Maybe you could save a bit of your self-righteous rage for them.
I think Americans can walk and chew gum at the same time: it’s not a competition to see who is more of a victim. We can prosecute fraud in MN and fight violent misogynist ice, too. Indeed, we must.
Oh, my! All Somali men treat women like trash? That's a revealing comment. And, Islam does not teach that women should be disrespected or mistreated.
You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes treating women like trash. I submit that it is highly disrespectful and constitutes serious mistreatment to sequester women from public participation. Women are more than half the human population and as the majority we should be running things. What are you afraid of - losing your unearned male supremacy? ALL religions are violently patriarchal and deeply misogynist.
Jonathan Ross will have to remain in hiding for the rest of his miserable life. There is an unspoken bounty on his head.
NO NO NO. If we want to have the rule of law for anyone it has to apply to everyone, even the most heinous among us. I want to see him tried in a court of law. THEY are the vigilantes. The only way to defeat them is with overwhelming PEACEFUL PROTEST. IT WORKS.
I hope so. But remember peaceful protest did not defeat Hitler, Mussolini etal. And it is not helping Ukraine.
None of those countries had populations who enjoyed a 250 year history of the freedom of democracy, nor were they anywhere near as ornery as Americans. We’ve got to work it 24/7: nothing is guaranteed but also nothing else works other than peaceful protest. It’s like what Churchill said about democracy:
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms .…’
11 November 1947
https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/quotes/the-worst-form-of-government/
And anyway - don’t you think you can do better?? I certainly do. What happened to some benighted European yahoos in the 1920s and '30s is not going to determine what happens to my country in the 21st century. Not happening. That would be the essence of defeatism and for better or worse is totally un-American. So, pitch in and give it your all because the other choices of government are much, much worse than democracy. And since nothing else works to guarantee our democracy, it’s all hands on deck. PEACEFUL PROTEST WORKS. INDEED, IT’S THE ONLY THING THAT DOES.
If you want to live in a democracy, can the weepy whiney cynicism; it’s not as cool as you think. WE NEED YOU.
Exactly!
Asha, in general, how often are these policies updated? They need to be updated after this, when the Dems get back in charge. The terrifying part is that the killing could have been worse if her child had been in the car and if the member of the Gestapo had killed Renee and her partner.
For me, the worst part isn't just the killing, it's the denying of medical aid. The FBI and PD tend to be taught to apply basic first aid and to call for an ambulance or ambulances.
After that? They don't leave the scene until an ambulance/ambulances has/have pulled away. Even after a car accident when I was t-boned, the officer didn't pull away until the ambulance pulled away. I was fine. I bruised my shoulder. The car couldn't be fixed.
Not allowing the doctor to act is the most damning. You have to be a special sort of villain not to allow that doctor to act. That member of the Gestapo will ALWAYS be the villain in our history, as Leslie Odom Jr. sings in Hamilton.
I get your main point on the damning prevention of medical care to Good. What actually caught my attention was the words "when the Dems get back in charge". I think you might be demonstrating a degree of naivety. With a war underway in Venezuela and Columbia, such a national emergency might convince the President to delay elections. As ICE agents continue their patriotic protection of the American people, certain types of voters may be reluctant to go to polls, if there are any. If the Dems actually won the next election that certainly proves it was stolen. Loyal Americans would be justified in hunting, harassing and killing domestic terrorists (people displaying signs of democratic support). Knowing they are unlikely to be charged, but if charged and convicted, would then be pardoned, it would embolden these patriots like Agent Ross to be pretty ruthless in suppressing the "illegal votes". "Dems in power" might be a few years off.
I'm thinking my sarcasm was too subtle Lauren. Just to be clear I don't believe any of the justifications I'm hearing out of the MAGAT administration have any basis in fact or ethics. However, Teflon Don and his cronies have bulldozed the US constitution, the world trading order, the rule of law, the western alliances and standards of human decency. I can't see them allowing the Dems to succeed if it means maintaining any of those principles.
I recognized the sarcasm. My concern is will we actually need to begin to defend ourselves? Take a moment and look up the video of trump supporters dangerously harassing a Joe Biden campaign bus in texas. If these defensive skirmishes begin, I don’t see how we’re going to head off a civil war, sans hyperbole. We can now clearly see trump supporters do and will act with impunity.
Wishful thinking.
How good is Asha's analysis, this from my Bluesky feed:
The Contrarian
Jen Rubin
@jenrubin.bsky.social
the best thing you will read on the shooting : asharangappa.substack.com/p/friday-rou...
If you live abroad you have to register to vote every year. U.S. citizens living, serving, or studying abroad—you can vote from wherever you are! 🌍 Visit https://votefromabroad.org to register and request your overseas ballot.
It’s quick, free, and valid for all elections in 2026. Need help? Write to help@votefromabroad.org.
Vote from Abroad volunteers are ready to assist you with any questions about requesting or returning your ballot. Don’t wait! Request your ballot today and make your voice heard! 🗳️
ICE Victims
Abelardo Avellaneda Delgado
Alex Jeffrey Pretti
Brayan Garzón-Rayo
Carlos Roberto Montoya Valdez
Chaofeng Ge
Delvin Francisco Rodriguez
Fouad Saeed Abdulkadir
Francisco Gaspar-Andrés
Gabriel Garcia Aviles
Hasan Ali Moh’D Saleh
Henry Ruiz Guillén
Huabing Xie
Isidro Pérez
Ismael Ayala-Uribe
Jean Wilson Brutus
Jesus Molina-Veya
Johnny Noviello
Josué Castro Rivera
Juan Alexis Tineo-Martinez
Kai Yin Wong
Keith Porter
Leo Cruz-Silva
Lorenzo Antonio Batrez Vargas
Maksym Chernyak
Marie Ange Blaise
Miguel Angel Garcia Medina
Nenko Stanev Gantchev
Nhon Ngoc Nguyen
Norlan Guzman-Fuentes
Oscar Rascon Duarte
Pete Sumalo Montejo
Renee Nicole Good
Santos Banegas Reyes
Serawit Gezahegn Dejene
Shirez Fatehall Sachwani
Silverio Villega Gonzalez
Tien Xuan Phan
Please add names of people who are missing from this list. We will be reading them at vigils in Indivisible Abroad and Democrats Abroad vigils.
Thank you for the list Linda. I had not seen this before just now.
Marcia. It is just tragic. I am attending a Democrats Abroad virtual vigil for all of these people in about half an hour. I know there are also vigils in person in Berlin and Strasbourg, and I believe in Italy as well. There may be more.
Alex Jeffrey Pretti
Thank you Gail. I have added him. ❤️
If I were Minnesota BCA, and I were told that the Feds (FBI) won't be sharing investigative information with me, rather than abdicate my responsibility to keep our Minnesota citizens safe, I would use all existing evidence and information to prepare a probable cause affidavit for the arrest of the suspect, using Asha's text verbatim in much of my affidavit, to obtain a warrant for murder. Many murder cases that are successfully prosecuted don't have the luxary of a video recording of it. Force the FBI to play and provide exculpatory evidence or information. PS, I wouild call former FBI Agen, Asha Rangappa as my star witness when and if needed. Or at the very least, present it to a Grand Jury!
Absolutely. The Minneapolis DA doesn't have to have all of his "beyond a reasonable doubt" ducks lined up in order to get an indictment of the Ross sandwich. Probable cause, more likely than not, is all it takes to get the ball rolling. These state justice system officials need to be thinking of the duties owed to the victims--Nicole Renee Good and the law abiding public at large--who have been injured by this ICE thug. There seems to be a bit too much deference being given to this out-of-control Brown Shirt agency because they are federal.
If need be, Gov. Waltz should call up his Nat'l Guard to protect the police making the arrest; and to provide escort for the other 2,000 ICE agents who should be asked to leave the state on account of being a threat to public safety and good order--a clearly established state function.
I had the same idea. The county or city DA should present these facts to a Grand Jury as soon as possible. Indicting Ross would, unfortunately, not be particularly difficult given the video evidence.
I know very little about the applicable Minnesota statues and I realize that it would cause a major political and legal confrontation with the DOJ (not to mention the Administration) but it would make a powerful statement in support of the people affected by these oppressive tactics. In Texas, there are several criminal homicide options including Criminally Negligent Homicide, Manslaughter, Murder and Capital Murder that could be presented to a Grand Jury.
Thanks for the background and analysis. I have another question. Was the confrontation with Renee Good properly legally predicated?
Please let me explain my thinking.
1) These were ICE agents. Presumably there are limitations to their jurisdiction (if that's the correct term), meaning the scope of laws they are authorized to enforce - federal immigration and customs enforcement - it's right in the name.
2) Ross was filming her on his phone and she spoke to him, in a non-threatening manner. He did not ask her for ID or if she was a US citizen. If he suspected she was in violation of immigration laws, he could have asked her. He walked away and continued filming her car suggesting he did not view her as a threat. Does his failure to ask her about her immigration status or treat her as a threat eliminate claims of reasonable suspicion or probable cause?
3) She was not unavoidably obstructing the vehicle that pulled up behind her out of which the other agents jumped. A vehicle passed by her car immediately before that. Law enforcement, especially with lights and siren which that vehicle had, routinely go into the oncoming lane around stopped cars. In fact, if there's no space to pull out of your lane, that's what you are supposed to do - stop and let them pass. They easily could have gone around her so it would seem claiming obstruction is demonstrably false.
4) If the above is all correct, did they even have legal authority to order her out of her car or to stop her in any way? If no, does that render the shooting illegal regardless?
Thanks if you have time to answer.
This is a one way street. Cars going around Renee’s SUV did not have to drive into oncoming traffic.
Thanks! So obstruction is completely off the table.
Good information analysis of the shooting of Renee Nicole Good, thanks for standing up for democracy asha ranpapa
I hope the MN AG or local DA takes your nine points as Exhibits A thru I in any prosecution of that ICE agent, because that was an excellent breakdown. Have not seen anything like that detailed analysis yet in the media.
Spot on. Jonathan Ross is a thug. He felt emasculated because someone didn’t fear him. In a fair and just world, he would be charged with murder and spend the rest of his life in prison.
I read in another'stack post that his wife left him for another woman. Emasculated, and still angry at the ex. He couldn't kill her, so any lesbian would do.
If true, Wow! Amazing how how deep the psychic shit is.
(Paragraph about 'Agents of Change'... 'what being a spy in the agency was really *like*? I think you might have left a word out.) Fascinating article. So informative... thanks.
Thank you, corrected!
Still processing article. Thanks so much for adding your professional opinion and clarity. Right now at Crucial Point #3, and am confused. If action beats reaction, isn't unholstering his weapon an in case action - so proactive not reactive. I agree 100% with your evidence based conclusion that this shoot wasn't justified, so I've obviously lost the thread here. Thanks for clarification.
Yes I am saying it was anticipatory
It is very helpful to have your detailed and clear explanations of what the law is and how Ross strayed from the law. I hope that the FBI can do the same when they investigate. It is important that you put this out there now, and hopefully you are publishing this in other forums as well. I will be sharing it. Thank you.
Unfortunately you are assuming the FBI under Kash Patel will provide an open and honest investigation
I am assuming they won't which is why it is so important that Asha got her story out there before they say anything. We do not trust the Trump FBI, whereas I trust Asha and have been sharing this post in my network and people have responded positively because it is so well written and clear.
Good point. This entire regime is lawless and incompetent.
The FBI isn’t going to investigate; they’re going to bury this case. In that regard, they’re not sharing any evidence with Minnesota, who will have to try the ICE agent without all the evidence, if they decide to go ahead with the case at this time.
AudreyRose, Yes they will. This is why Asha getting this out there before they say anything is so important. We know that the first person to tell the story owns the narrative that people most pay attention to. She was wise to use this to get the story out before the Trump FBI comes up with whatever they do. And we should all be sharing this with everyone we know. I have been doing that.
but in this instance, the anticipation is showing intent (given subsequent actions) rather than training? Sorry I'm so slow on the uptake :-/
The anticipation is showing that his going for the gun was not a response to her accelerating the vehicle, he was already reaching for it
So anticipatory actions here show (again especially in conjunction with the other crucial moments which come later), that his intent was to use his weapon but not in response to a perceived threat, i.e., he was creating the life threatening situation, not attempting to minimize it.
Quality of your analysis reflected by the comments on Bluesky and the impressive quality of those making them. Thanks so much for your insights, Asha. By far the best, most objective and most informed commentary I've read.
I watched a video and commentary of this horrific event on the BBC site. I too saw Ross unholster his weapon while standing in front of the vehicle before it moves forward. As it begins to move forward you can clearly see Good turning the steering wheel to the right AWAY from Ross. Nevertheless he shoots into the windshield at the lower driver's side. Then he steps to the right and shoots thru the open driver's side window as the vehicle PASSES him.
My conclusion is that Ross decided when he pulled his weapon that if Good didn't exit the vehicle he was going to start shooting. As soon as Ms Good put the vehicle in Drive she was dead.
Can one add signaling intent?
This is the first analysis I've seen that focuses on the moment when the shooter decides to move the camera to his left hand, allowing him to access his gun with his right (dominant) hand. For me, a retired prosecutor, this is when the intent to use deadly force is formed. He goes for the gun immediately after freeing his right hand. The only reason he is near the victim's car, is because he chose to be that close. What is his role in this citizen contact? Is it to document unlawful behavior? Is he there to assist the officer ordering the victim out of the car? Is this a traffic enforcement stop? What's the crime? Impeding traffic on a public roadway? Is that an infraction or a misdemeanor in MN? Neither justifies the use of deadly force. Did the citizen interaction give rise to a reasonable belief that the officer's safety was at risk of harm? The passenger was getting into the car when she dismissed the shooter with a snide remark, "Go have some lunch, dude". The victim attempts de-escalation by stating "I'm not mad at you, dude". The shooter's intent to kill was formed when he freed his right hand to get his gun. There was no legal justification to pull out his gun. He was angry and was looking for a fight. He fired his weapon because he was mad, not fearful. Male hysteria does not justify this killing. He should not have been cleared for return to duty after his last vehicle encounter. He was mentally and emotionally unfit to perform and presented a danger to the public safety and welfare. Not only is this officer criminally responsible for killing Renee Good, ICE is liable for its negligence in putting him back on the street.
Another 'stack i read said his wife left him for another woman. Emasculated from the taunt, and still angry at his ex. He couldn't kill her, so any lesbian would do.
Reacting to your statement: “Crucial moment #5. As Good drives away, Ross takes two additional shots. Any threat that existed has already passed at that point. I don’t see any way to get around this.”
As an experienced hunter and soldier, I see familiar behavior to my training as is necessary to finish off a kill. This suggests premeditation, and there is evidence of this. Notice the premeditation in the actions before the kill: go out of sight behind, then alongside the vehicle. Wait for the right time.
While the victim is preoccupied by cross traffic, the much louder approaching ICE truck coming from the left approaches (as if rehearsed) to immediately command her complete attention while the killer moves unnoticed across Good’s field of view into perfect position to appear nonthreatening with cellphone camera while preparing to draw his sidearm when he’s no longer in danger.
With my experience, watching all evidence online, this was a setup to execute Good unless she stopped her vehicle completely. Completely predictable.
Yep. He was enraged and looking for a woman to execute to make a point: that he is the manly man and the boss. Mens rea.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/mens_rea
So my best advice during your next noncooperation protests:
Be in the way, turn off your engine, then say MY ENGINE QUIT!
If you believe that will make a difference to a thug who wants to kill you, think again.
one thing I am wondering about: even if (sake of argument) shooting that person was justified, wasn't it still (procedurally) a reckless discharge because of the backdrop? It included his fellow officers, bystanders, and occupied vehicles.
You don’t even have to go there. In the first instance there is no argument that can be made that this was justified.
Another brilliant analysis ….
Thank you Asha !