Is this the Jonathan Ross who is the murderer of that innocent woman Renee Good, wnd who lives in Minnesota?
Or is it the Jonathan Ross of Minnesota who murdered Renee Good after she had just finished taking her child to school and got caught up by the Gestapo?
Edit: sorry. I think it’s the Jonathan Ross of Minnesota that murdered Renee Good, who will do absolutely anything to protect paedophiles.
And a grindr account
I heard that police are supposed to be trained not to get their bodies in front of moving vehicles.
Because if you get hit by a car, that’s bad. And because it is escalating the problem. When a police officer stands in front of a vehicle to keep it from moving, they are turning a minor crime into a life-or-death situation.
This ICE officer did everything wrong, and a woman died because of his mistakes. The woman who died didn’t do everything right, but it’s not her job. She didn’t do anything that deserved a death sentence. The ICE officer, on the other hand…
When you put completely incompetent, yet completely arrogant people into positions of power, you get situations like this and Venezuela.
I heard that police are supposed to be trained not to get their bodies in front of moving vehicles.
Fucking hell. Do they need to be trained not to look down the barrel of a gun to check if it’s loaded or to make sure their dick is in their underwear before they zip their pants?
She was ordered to leave and she was leaving.
Watch fucking video he was nowhere near getting run over. Motherfucker was calm and stood still even after he killed her. Fucker psychopath who needs to burn for this.
Watch fucking video he was nowhere near getting run over.
He said he was dragged 100 feet.
Jonathan Ross, Drag Queen.
It was actually 50, but some news sources are saying 100 for their own reasons.
a woman died because of his mistakes
It wasn’t a mistake.
Not when you want to justify the escalation of force. There’s plenty of clips out there of officers deliberately placing themselves in front of vehicles.
It’s weird how so many conservatives and a lot of cops are in favor of laws in which it is legal to drive over protesters if you feel endangered.
Let me guess, though, they don’t think the same thing should apply to people driving over “officers” that they think are endangering them. Also, the protesters are probably only fodder for cars if they are deemed liberal protesters, most likely. If some Nazi douchebag that was out marching was driven over by a car, they’d catch feelings.
deleted by creator
The murderer’s name is Jonathan Ross.
Are we talking about Jonathan Ross, the murderer?
Yes, I’m talking about murderer Jonathan Ross, who did a murder.
I was pretty sure when you had said that Jonathan Ross had murdered someone, that you were in fact talking about murderer Jonathan Ross, who did murder someone. Thanks for clarifying
Thanks.
The faster this murderer is in custody, the safer he will be.
I personally don’t want him safe. I want him to be vilified, hated, shunned, and to never have a moment of peace ever again. I want people throwing trash at him, spitting at him, tripping him on the sidewalk.
I want him to live the rest of his life, miserable and unloved by anyone. I want him to suffer until the moment the light leaves his twisted, crooked eyes.
Custody? lol. This piece of fascist shit it’s getting a promotion.
you spelled Coward wrong.
Vice President J.D. Vance on Thursday commented on the officer’s history. He said the ICE officer “deserves a debt of gratitude,…”
What a fucking load. This is the same party that still cannot put up a fucking plaque honoring the cops that defended against the Jan 6 terrorists. Meanwhile, this waste of skin is saying this murderer deserves gratitude.
Fuck all these dickheads.
I am not joking even a little when I say I would not be surprised if this dude is given a high position in the government after this.
ICE are enemies of all Americans. If you’re ICE, you deserve prosecution. If our justice system is so broken that the law no longer applies to ICE, then Americans need to tear them to pieces.
Imagine what these fuckers do when they invade other countries.
You let a known pedo into the White House TWICE! your “justice system” has been broken for a long time, question is how many more innocent people have to die for you to do something.
The American voting public is full of sheep who don’t realize when they’re being taken for a ride by their rulers.
‘I didnt vote for him. And genocide! Kamala said no deviation! Im a fucking dumbass who cant see the forest for the trees!’
Why hasn’t he been arrested by local authorities?
The law requires people who are arrested to be charged with a crime or released immediately. So in order to obtain an arrest warrant, prosecutors would need to file a criminal complaint followed by an indictment or an information. The accused could then assert their right to a speedy trial and demand an immediate trial. Depending on local court case loads, this could be scheduled in as little as a week (not typical; usually at least a fortnight up to six weeks).
Edit: A slight correction. An arrest warrant can be applied for without filing a complaint, but judges will require that a complaint or some other charging document be filed expeditiously after the accused is taken into custody. It is not legal to hold someone in jail without charge. Criminal procedure laws are not nationally uniform in the US; it varies by state.
So in a nutshell, once someone is arrested, the prosecutors are required, essentially, to already be ready to press charges and go to court. If they are not, then an early arrest followed by a judge ordering their release for lack of charges would be prejudicial to their case.
I’m pretty sure the charge is 1st degree murder, however ‘premeditation’ is the key point of differentiation between 1st and 2nd degree.
Here’s what I found from Minnesota Statutes Section 609.185: https://legalclarity.org/understanding-murder-charges-and-penalties-in-minnesota/
"In Minnesota, the criteria for murder charges are defined by state statutes, which outline the circumstances and intent required for each degree. Minnesota Statutes Section 609.185 outlines conditions for first-degree murder, including premeditated intent to kill, killing during certain felonies, or causing the death of a peace officer. Proving intent and premeditation is pivotal in distinguishing first-degree murder from other charges.
Second-degree murder, under Minnesota Statutes Section 609.19, involves intentional killing without premeditation or causing death while committing a felony not specified for first-degree murder. The absence of premeditation differentiates it from first-degree murder, yet intent remains crucial. This distinction highlights the importance of the defendant’s state of mind.
Third-degree murder, detailed in Minnesota Statutes Section 609.195, is characterized by acts that are dangerous to others and demonstrate a depraved mind, without regard for human life, but without intent to kill any particular person. This charge often applies when actions were reckless or negligent, leading to death. The focus is on the reckless nature of the act rather than specific intent to kill, differentiating it from higher degrees of murder."
Funny how this literally never applies to normal people.
It does apply. It’s just that for non-high-profile cases, prosecutors are pretty quick to make a decision to prosecute/not prosecute. Years ago, I was arrested and accused of assault, and I was released mere hours after getting to the police station because the prosecutor’s office thought my self-defence claim was good and decided not to file charges. Generally speaking, this is what happens. You get arrested, taken to the police station or to the local jail, and then the police department refers the case to the prosecutor’s office. Someone at the prosecutor’s office reviews the evidence, and then they decide whether they will file charges. If they file one or more charges, then you’re brought before a judge for a preliminary hearing, usually within 24 hours (depends on state law). At the hearing, you will make a plea of guild or not guilty, then either arrange for a lawyer, or the judge will appoint a public defender to represent you. Then your lawyer can make a demand for a speedy trial and/or make any other submissions to the court in your defence.
If the prosecutor’s office decide not to prosecute, they will instruct the police department to release you. Failing that, someone can make a habeas corpus petition on your behalf and a judge will order your release.
He murdered someone on a video that only the sickest people on earth are defending
The problem is that he could also probably use a federal immunity defence. The prosecutors need time to plan out a good way to attack this defence. The worst possible outcome would be to file charges now, unprepared, and then the guy gets acquitted at trial which forever bars future state prosecution for that offence, or the case is dismissed because prosecutors failed to present a good argument for why the accused is not immune. Prosecutors have only one chance so they tend to make sure their case is as good as they can get before shooting their shot.
It’s actually very rare for murder trials to be argued over whether the accused killed the person in question. Usually, the argument stems from whether the killing counts as murder or whether the evidence that the accused killed the victim is legally admissible.
He’s not immune because he shot a woman in her head for no reason, not related to his duties whatsoever.
He will still try to argue that, and prosecutors need to come up with real reasons why it doesn’t apply. Defence lawyers are not stupid and they will probably think of a way to argue immunity. Those arguments must be anticipated, researched, and rebutted.
Yeah I get that, but murder
Well, to put it simply, you say “murder” he says “nuh uh”. Now you have to prove he’s wrong and why or he gets off.
What happens if he just leaves the state?
Generally speaking, law enforcement can arrest someone based on arrest warrants nationwide, although typically, what happens is that the governor of the state where the crime was committed will make a written extradition demand to the governor of the state where the accused fled to. The receiving governor is constitutionally bound to turn over the person in question, although in reality, for political cases, this can get bogged down in political arguments, and it can result in the governor or attorney-general of one state suing another to force them to arrest the person in question.
Thank you. I assumed this would become political and difficult if he was allowed to leave the state.
I appreciate your insight here, all of your responses show how the legal system in the US is supposed to work, and apply to all citizens equally. But what this analysis ignores is that the Trump Administration is building up its own “in group”, to which these restraints no longer apply. Both sides are playing by different rules now, enforced by an Administration and DoJ which is taking sides.
Consider the case if someone (maybe even a sworn law officer with their own qualified immunity) steps in front of a car driven by an ICE agent and kills them in cold blood. The US justice system is supposed to work the same for that person as for the Minnesota ICE agent. But we all know what will happen. The surrounding ICE agents will render their own vengeful (and biblical) verdict on the spot, Kristi Noem will spout some bullshit, and nobody involved will ever see a courtroom.
That’s the problem. The rules are changing, and the courts can’t keep up.
One would describe those as the actions of the prerogative state
What about in the situation where the person is considered a danger to the public?
Legally, the law says “too bad”. American law does not recognise the concept of administrative detention. If someone is a danger to the public, then there must be probable cause to believe they have committed a crime before an arrest warrant can be issued. After they are arrested, they must be charged by prosecutors immediately. Or, at least, this is how the normative state works. There are many exceptions in fields like national security and military law.
I love that you’re providing genuine answers to questions in this thread, it’s always needed because the questions are often genuine, but coming from a place of very well-justified anguish or anger.
People wait yeeeeears in pretrial detention.
This is because defence lawyers often advise their clients to waive their right to a speedy trial, so they can get more time to prepare a defence. If you insist on the right to a speedy trial, then it is usually held in a month.
Given the footage available; shouldn’t the prosecution be capable of meeting them with a speedy trial? This doesn’t seem like the sort of thing that requires months and months of investigations.
I appreciate you giving genuine answers. They’re often hard to get.
/edit: another of your replies clears this up. Thank you.
You know why.
It’s the same people.
I don’t think it is in this case. The one who kicked over the memorial was federal.
We sure as hell need some allies, and it’d be nice to have state and local authorities on our side.
And he’s still alive?
Not for long hopefully
Not too soon though. I want him to suffer until he dies, socially and physically, so much so that his last thought in this world to be, ‘I’m terrified, I’m going to die,’ just like Renee’s likely were.
People need to be protected from these violent terrorists
MURDER!
