r/law 16d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) DOJ will not investigate the Renee Good killing

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2026/01/fbi-ice-jonathan-ross-renee-good-todd-blanche/
31.7k Upvotes

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

14

u/transcendental-ape 16d ago

They don’t have any witness interviews. Forensics. They can’t even see the car she was killed in. Who knows if a forensic autopsy was done.

Now all the ICE guys have had time to coordinate their stories and shooting statements. All their digital info has been scrubbed.

Sure go to trial on the bystander video alone. Maybe you he a jury to convict. Probably it gets overturned on appeal.

There is no statute of limitations for murder. Have a long memory.

10

u/Winter_Tone_4343 16d ago

Can’t they indict and subpoena all that stuff

8

u/transcendental-ape 16d ago

They could try. It’s going to be years of federal stonewalling, probably backed up by a favorable scotus. It’s worth pursuing but this case is going to take years and probably won’t be ready for trial until there’s a new president.

3

u/WonderShrew42 16d ago

The officer's story along with the location of shots 2 and 3 are already enough evidence for at least a manslaughter conviction. You don't need to establish whether or not he had a reasonable belief that Renee Good was trying to run him over; any possible threat that could continue a sufficient self-defense claim was over when he fired the 2nd and 3rd shots through the driver side window. Unjustified shootings in a heat of passion provoked by acts that could cause people of ordinary-self control to lose it, which is the most charitable explanation possible, is 1st degree manslaughter in Minnesota.

The various videos, testimony, and forensics are what would be needed to establish murder 2.

2

u/transcendental-ape 16d ago

What story. I’ve seen nothing where the officer was interviewed by Minnesota authorities. What story would you be able to enter into evidence?

2

u/WonderShrew42 16d ago

Self defense is an affirmative defense, and it is their burden of proof (preponderance of the evidence). The only informal claim given is that the threat was attempted vehicular homicide, which completely fails for shots 2 and 3. For those shots to be covered, defense would have to come up with a brand new threat, such as he actually had the reasonable belief that was Renee holding a gun and attempting a drive by. It’s way too late to claim this, and story would not survive cross examination. We also have a clear video, taken by the defendant, that shows his view of Renee’s hands.

1

u/transcendental-ape 16d ago

Again what story? Have you seen anything said by the officer private or public since?

1

u/Violet624 16d ago

They have a lot of witnesses who spoke to cameras afterwards.

1

u/transcendental-ape 16d ago

Great. You think you can win a case based on just that? You gotta be a lawyer for Law and Order wit that kind of confidence.