American Death Squad? (Part 1)

Tough questions about the death of Renee Good.

The violence, the masks, the impunity and open contempt for law ... that’s the point.

Or so it seems. After all, that’s the way America’s dictatorial allies—in places like Indonesia, Latin America, the Philippines, and occupied Palestine—have terrorized their populations for many years. Does it make you feel frightened, brutalized, powerless?

That might just mean it’s working.

The Facts

But first things first: Everybody who is politically active, from left to right, should be scrupulous about the facts. I don’t want to call the death of Renee Good “state murder” or anything of the kind without a clear grasp of the facts.

(Anyone with journalist DNA is clinically depressed for days if they get even an minor wrong. Every reporter I respect feels that way; I wish more mainstream media employees did, too.)

I’ve spent hours watching every available video of the killing, from every angle. I watched and re-watched one grainy video of the masked agent who fired the shots because it looked like he might conceivably have been threatened by the moving vehicle. But cross-comparing it with another video (the New York Times synchronized them) made it clear that the vehicle was angled away from the officer when he fired multiple point-blank shots at the driver’s head.

That appears to eliminate one of the standards the Supreme Court has established for justifying the use of lethal force; that it is permissible when “the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer”—which video evidence in this case disproves—”or to others.‍” (There was nothing to suggest that Ms. Good might harm anyone else.)

Another standard is the nature of the suspected crime. As the Justice Department’s guidelines on the use of force explain, the Supreme Court also requires officers to consider “the severity of the crime at issue.”

It’s hard to see what Ms. Good’s crime was at that point beyond a possible traffic infraction. Yes, she might have faced a more serious charge involving interference with law enforcement, especially under this Justice Department. But she was leaving the scene at the time, removing any further possibility of interference or threat.

Ms. Good was also apparently given conflicting instructions, with some agents telling her to leave and others telling her to leave the vehicle. (One agent appears to wave her forward before she is killed.) Either way, she was leaving.

Then there’s the matter of state law in Minnesota, where the shooting took place. It’s even stricter than the Federal standard. Minnesota Statute § 609.066, passed after George Floyd’s death, explicitly forbids officers from shooting at a moving vehicle or directly at a civilian unless it is necessary to “protect the peace officer or another from death or great bodily harm” (which has been disproven in this case), and only if the threat

• “can be articulated with specificity”: e.g., “This is who I believe Robin Good would have hurt had she driven away”;

• “is reasonably likely to occur absent action by the law enforcement officer”: In other words, a reasonable person would hear that explanation and think “Yeah, that makes sense”;

• and, if the officer “knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony ...”

None of these apply in this case.

A police officer who failed to meet these standards in Minnesota (and many other states) could face murder charges. The federal government is almost certain to assert jurisdiction over this case, however, since ICE agents work for the federal government. Minnesota could appeal that by arguing that his actions were illegal, outside his normal duties, or “objectively unreasonable.”

But the administration has already tipped its hand by proclaiming the agent’s innocence, against all evidence and reason, and by making statements that are clearly false. In a departure from normal practice, it is also seizing all evidence in this case and denying state and local authorities access to it.

Recent reports have indicated that the agent suspected of the shooting, who has now been identified, was dragged by a car and injured in a previous case. Unfortunately, we can’t be confident of that information, since it comes from the same agency that just misled the public on the facts of this case. If he was injured in the way the indictment in the earlier case stated, it was of course unfortunate. It wouldn’t constitute a criminal defense, but it might call for mitigation in sentencing. So would the apparently unpremeditated nature of the act.

But that’s getting ahead of ourselves. Only the courts can decide whether this or any shooting was a murder. In this case, however, it looks like they may never get the chance. If they don’t, it will leave the ICE agent under a permanent cloud of suspicion—and the American public under the lingering shadow of suppressive state violence.

Next: Is this an isolated incident? How does it fit with the history of ICE and Homeland Security. Is it going overboard to compare them to the “death squads” of historical infamy? These are fair questions.

Coming: the case for ICE “premeditation”; and, are they really “death squads”?