Crime Woman in Minneapolis Executed by ICE Officers; White House Reflexively Hand Waves Murder

[Other]

He created it by putting himself in the location his own internal policy and training explicitly states not to.

As I said earlier...

If the recent Barnes v Felix(2025) decision were applied in a proper investigation, then the entirety of his actions during his contact with her would come into question, and not just the moment where he "feared for [his] life." Which means he'd have to answer why he placed himself there.

 

[HereticBD]

He looks clearly to the side of it and you can see her cranking her wheel to go around him.

Dude, how many videos do you need to see of him getting struck by the car, to admit that he was in the path of the car? It does not matter if she's scrambling to get away. She still hits him. He's not gonna mind read her intent in the moment.

 

[Scerpi]

Like I've been saying, they targeted and attacked her because she and her wife had been talking shit and annoying them.

Not because of any crime she was committing or intended to commit.

It was personal.

Wrong again… lol

 

[SKYNET]

The agent who fired the fatal rounds had previously been hit by a car driven by a suspect and dragged down the road...

 

[Mr Holmes]

Here's an aerial photo the street.


1 way, 2 driving lanes, 1 bike lane and parking lanes on each side.

 

[Rational Poster]

She had no business being there in the first place. Her wife admitted it was her fault cause she called her down there. The ICE officers were targeted by the “victims”.

It's a public road in the city she lives in. She had every single right to be there and follow federal agents if she wanted to. By taking the job that serves the public you agreeing to be scrutinized by the public at their will.


You're not a serious person.

 

[HereticBD]

Honest question, no snark- do you think it matters at all that he placed himself in the path of the vehicle? We see him walk around and get in front of it

Maybe some protocol violation. It doesn't matter though, since it does not give her the right to run him down, regardless. It's not an excuse for her, no matter how badly you want it to be.

 

[b34stmode]

Why didn't any agents run to the one ran over and immediately ask if he needs an ambulance btw?

 

[cottagecheesefan]

I wouldn’t think a 10 year ICE vet would just give video of him shooting a woman to the local news, rather than mowing to keep it locked down until formally requested by his superior or fbi or however that chain of command goes.

Did he upload it to his own socials shortly after the event before evidence gathering happened?

Just a weird wrinkle in an already so messy case

Yea, I have no idea. My guess would be they released it ASAP to get ahead of any narrative.

Regardless of your take on the shooting, and it is obvious we disagree. But interesting strategy by ICE. The must of felt releasing this video will help their side of the story and exonerate the agent. And again, you may disagree and feel it makes it even more obvious it was a bad shot. I am just commenting on their motive

As I said, the state AG and county lady just held a press conference saying they willl be doing their own investigation, so I take it as a bit of a counter to their efforts. Rather than have them get a bunch of cut and spliced cell phone video that is potentially out of context, just release this up front

 

[Natural Order]

Wait… so you are acknowledging she was blocking traffic? lol

She was blocking one lane of traffic, who ever denied that? Since when does blocking traffic (intentionally or otherwise) result in cops physically trying to open your door? They didn't ask her to move once, just got out and said "get the fuck out of the car".

I know your only source of information is Tik Tok videos, but have you read the manuals for DHS and DOJ officers in regards to these situations? He violated EVERYTHING in them, lol.

 

[b34stmode]

Maybe some protocol violation. It doesn't matter though, since it does not give her the right to run him down, regardless. It's not an excuse for her, no matter how badly you want it to be.

So now, with all videos out. Your stance is she ran him over on purpose?

 

[Rational Poster]

Here's an aerial photo the street.


1 way, 2 driving lanes, 1 bike lane and parking lanes on each side.

So what you're saying is she was in the bike lane. Lmao

 

[Scerpi]

Dude, how many videos do you need to see of him getting struck by the car, to admit that he was in the path of the car? It does not matter if she's scrambling to get away. She still hits him. He's not gonna mind read her intent in the moment.

It’s gold dress meme… you see what you want to see

 

[b34stmode]

Yea, I have no idea. My guess would be they released it ASAP to get ahead of any narrative.

Regardless of your take on the shooting, and it is obvious we disagree. But interesting strategy by ICE. The must of felt releasing this video will help their side of the story and exonerate the agent. And again, you may disagree and feel it makes it even more obvious it was a bad shot. I am just commenting on their motive

As I said, the state AG and county lady just held a press conference saying they willl be doing their own investigation, so I take it as a bit of a counter to their efforts. Rather than have them get a bunch of cut and spliced cell phone video that is potentially out of context, just release this up front

You think the agent released this to the public himself, and it wasn't leaked by someone inside? This is on the same level as you calling that dog a pitt bull my guy. Pants on head retarded.

 

[Bob Gray]

She wasn't using the car as a weapon, nor was he in danger. Additionally, he clearly moved out of the path of the vehicle, while she was moving the vehicle away from him.

You can claim tha all you want, but youre attempting to argue what what she was thinking, and what the officer should have thought which is entirely assunption. Plus we have the advantage of both hindsight and multiple video angles.

This defense that he "moved out of the way" is ridiculous. He shouldn't have to move out of the way. She shouldn't drive in such a way that hed have to move to avoid being hit. She did a terrible job moving the vehicle away from him because the alternate camera angle clearly shows the car come in contact with him.

 

[Mr Holmes]

So what you're saying is she was in the bike lane. Lmao

Uh, no. We can see her front tires are near the dashed line. That would make her blocking 1 of the driving lanes.

 

[rikibobby]

It's a public road in the city she lives in. She had every single right to be there and follow federal agents if she wanted to. By taking the job that serves the public you agreeing to be scrutinized by the public at their will.


You're not a serious person.

So was she targeted? That is the idiotic statement I was replying to dummy.

 

[DoctorTaco]

Maybe some protocol violation. It doesn't matter though, since it does not give her the right to run him down, regardless.

Makes sense

It's not an excuse for her, no matter how badly you want it to be.

You were so close to having a discussion without being an asshole about it.

 

[Rational Poster]

Wrong again… lol

No, that's exactly what happened. Their conversation revealed a familiarity they had been doing this prior, they were annoyed by these ladies because they've been pestering them.

 

[Natural Order]

I already said the agent made mistakes and being in front of the car seems dumb. I dont think the agent is without blame and I've already said I dont think she should have been shot.

But the woman also made completey stupid decisions. Conflicting directions or not, she decided to drive away with an armed officer in the way and that was dumb.

This was a clusterfuck of escalation. But this woman wasn't simply driving down the street, minding her own business.

It's not dumb. It's explicitly against policy.

Poor judgement meathead cops have shown a history of using this tactic in order to engage violence, and policies were shifted dramatically as a result.

And I opened my entrance in this thread by acknowledging that this woman was acting a fool and did not handle the chaos like most people likely would. But even with her actions, there was ZERO reason to have a weapon drawn and shoot her in the face....because the cop should never have been at the front of the vehicle to begin with. Chronology of responsibility is at play here.

The honus of deescalation is on law enforcement in these situations....they did nothing of the sort, quite the opposite.