ANOTHER ICE SHOOTING IN Minneapolis

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, DCT said:

Big if at the end of the day.  If you violate the law the government will not protect you if it is outside the scope of your duties.  If you do violate  it can be costly.

I am usually humored on social media on how many people believe that Qualified Immunity protects an officer/agent  from being charged in a crime.

[OlDawg]

26 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

I am usually humored on social media on how many people believe that Qualified Immunity protects an officer/agent  from being charged in a crime.

It does happen. I don't know how many people remember this one. But, it put a big stain on HPD for a while.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

 

[OlDawg]

1 hour ago, thetragichippy said:

Welp……

Homan made it clear they are not walking away from Minneapolis….Staying until the problem is gone.

They will draw down agents ONLY if there is cooperation from local police and jails….

He ALSO mentioned and supported Kristi Noem 

 

Homan's full press conference with questions & answers. He also mentions the networks that are organizing people against law enforcement have justice coming. I’d believe him if I were them. He doesn’t impress me as a bluffer.

About 35 minutes. But, a good listen. 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, DCT said:

In your opinion did the officers violate the law?  

In both cases I believe that they are open to being charged in a crime. That is to say that they have no Qualified Immunity that protects them from criminal prosecution (as in all cases). 

Both cases resulted in intentionally or knowingly killing a person (Texas culpable mental states) so Murder unless under self defense which is the issue.  Everyone knows who did it and the results. The only real question in my opinion is whether there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that it was clearly not a case of self defense.

Without knowing Minnesota or federal laws on self defense, I will rely on Texas law only as a similar situation.

 The shooting of Good in my opinion clearly has reasonable doubt that it was not Murder. I don’t think the agent had the culpable mental state (as I have seen claimed numerous times) of, I know that I am not in danger but here’s a chance to take out a protester. If this incident happened locally, I would expect a No Bill from the grand jury.

I have no clear opinion on Pretti but I lean toward the same results but not as clear. In Good the agent was alone and we could see what happened for the most part. In Pretti at the speed in which it happened and agents (possibly including the shooter) yelling gun and the continued struggle, I believe that it would take some definitive information that the agent knew that no one was in danger and merely chose to take out a demonstrator. Unlike Good, we have no clear video of what happened in the scrum as the one video called it. 

As you know that the burden is always on the government to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Only as an anecdote, I was the supervisor on scene of a homicide where two guys confronted each other outside of a club about a block away from the entrance. One guy pulled a gun and fired it, possibly to scare the other guy away. It worked and the other guy left.

However…..

He walked about a block away in the other direction, got a pistol out of his car, came back and confronted the guy who fired the shot and then shot and killed him. I said at the scene that it was clearly Murder because it wasn’t a stand your ground case in my opinion. The suspect had left the scene and was out of danger since the guy who fired the shot didn’t follow him. He came back to the scene, now armed, to continue the argument and ended up killing the other guy. The DA did not get an indictment from the grand jury. Obviously by law it’s the grand jury‘s opinion and not the DA’s but it was clearly a Murder under Texas law (intentionally or knowingly took another person‘s life) but with self defense as a defense to prosecution. Obviously the DA could likely have pushed for an indictment and let a trial jury make the call (a principle which I do not believe in) but apparently there was a reasonable doubt in the opinion of the DA that they could not overcome in front of a jury.
 

It does not matter if the guy was guilty. What matters is the proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If a jury is 90% sure that a crime was committed, that to me is not guilty.

It is the same standard everywhere. The elements might change depending on jurisdiction. It is the same in the Pretti case for now. Is there body cameras which show a clear picture of what happened and the agent knew that no one was in danger? That’s possible but I believe that is what it would take to bring criminal charges. 

So Good in my opinion should be a No Bill unless there’s evidence that hasn’t been made public which is always possible.

Pretti is in limbo but that in my opinion means no case unless there is evidence that hasn’t been made public. The other agent grabbing Pretti’s pistol before the shots were fired will probably have no bearing unless it can be shown that the agent shooting knew that the danger had been removed and had time to respond.

More in a layman’s terms, if an issue is debatable then there is no proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If it is beyond debate or the evidence clearly shows that there was no reasonable belief of possible serious bodily injury or death, it should be brought to trial. Notwithstanding that a defense will always claim there is a reasonable doubt. 

Do you think there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, in what is now public information, that the agent knew that there was no threat under split second decision making under the Supreme Court ruling in Graham v. Connor? 

[tvc184]

42 minutes ago, OlDawg said:

It does happen. I don't know how many people remember this one. But, it put a big stain on HPD for a while.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

 

I remember it well and made a few social media posts about it.

It also showed that Qualified Immunity didn’t stop the police officer from a 60 prison sentence for falsifying a probable cause affidavit. Obviously that long sentence was not for perjury but that the perjury led to a Felony Murder charge. 

[Reagan]

True!  It's all about the cause!  As long as it's someone else dying, that is!!

[OlDawg]

I know there’s no expectation of privacy in public. But, I can see some of this being abused. This reminds me of The Patriot Act.

“The powerful tools in ICE’s arsenal to track suspects — and protesters

Biometric trackers, cellphone location databases and drones are among the surveillance technologies that federal agents are tapping in their deportation campaign.”

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

[DCT]

4 hours ago, tvc184 said:

In both cases I believe that they are open to being charged in a crime. That is to say that they have no Qualified Immunity that protects them from criminal prosecution (as in all cases). 

Both cases resulted in intentionally or knowingly killing a person (Texas culpable mental states) so Murder unless under self defense which is the issue.  Everyone knows who did it and the results. The only real question in my opinion is whether there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that it was clearly not a case of self defense.

Without knowing Minnesota or federal laws on self defense, I will rely on Texas law only as a similar situation.

 The shooting of Good in my opinion clearly has reasonable doubt that it was not Murder. I don’t think the agent had the culpable mental state (as I have seen claimed numerous times) of, I know that I am not in danger but here’s a chance to take out a protester. If this incident happened locally, I would expect a No Bill from the grand jury.

I have no clear opinion on Pretti but I lean toward the same results but not as clear. In Good the agent was alone and we could see what happened for the most part. In Pretti at the speed in which it happened and agents (possibly including the shooter) yelling gun and the continued struggle, I believe that it would take some definitive information that the agent knew that no one was in danger and merely chose to take out a demonstrator. Unlike Good, we have no clear video of what happened in the scrum as the one video called it. 

As you know that the burden is always on the government to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Only as an anecdote, I was the supervisor on scene of a homicide where two guys confronted each other outside of a club about a block away from the entrance. One guy pulled a gun and fired it, possibly to scare the other guy away. It worked and the other guy left.

However…..

He walked about a block away in the other direction, got a pistol out of his car, came back and confronted the guy who fired the shot and then shot and killed him. I said at the scene that it was clearly Murder because it wasn’t a stand your ground case in my opinion. The suspect had left the scene and was out of danger since the guy who fired the shot didn’t follow him. He came back to the scene, now armed, to continue the argument and ended up killing the other guy. The DA did not get an indictment from the grand jury. Obviously by law it’s the grand jury‘s opinion and not the DA’s but it was clearly a Murder under Texas law (intentionally or knowingly took another person‘s life) but with self defense as a defense to prosecution. Obviously the DA could likely have pushed for an indictment and let a trial jury make the call (a principle which I do not believe in) but apparently there was a reasonable doubt in the opinion of the DA that they could not overcome in front of a jury.
 

It does not matter if the guy was guilty. What matters is the proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If a jury is 90% sure that a crime was committed, that to me is not guilty.

It is the same standard everywhere. The elements might change depending on jurisdiction. It is the same in the Pretti case for now. Is there body cameras which show a clear picture of what happened and the agent knew that no one was in danger? That’s possible but I believe that is what it would take to bring criminal charges. 

So Good in my opinion should be a No Bill unless there’s evidence that hasn’t been made public which is always possible.

Pretti is in limbo but that in my opinion means no case unless there is evidence that hasn’t been made public. The other agent grabbing Pretti’s pistol before the shots were fired will probably have no bearing unless it can be shown that the agent shooting knew that the danger had been removed and had time to respond.

More in a layman’s terms, if an issue is debatable then there is no proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If it is beyond debate or the evidence clearly shows that there was no reasonable belief of possible serious bodily injury or death, it should be brought to trial. Notwithstanding that a defense will always claim there is a reasonable doubt. 

Do you think there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, in what is now public information, that the agent knew that there was no threat under split second decision making under the Supreme Court ruling in Graham v. Connor? 

The officers must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene not with the benefit of hindsight.

I believe at some point Grahams friend tried explaining his medical condition.

The two officers who fired there weapons in Minneapolis would not have known that the discharged weapon had come from the officer who retrieved the weapon based on the video of the weapon being retrieved from his backside away from the officer’s.  Was it excessive force? The courts will have to decide.

[OlDawg]

Slightly different perimeters in Texas

Protesters Hit with Tear Gas After Calling to Release 5 Year Old Liam Ramos (Video Link)

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

[Porter]

On 1/28/2026 at 4:54 PM, Porter said:

Seems like a nice gentle nurse. 
 

 

New angle of compassion.

 

[Reagan]

The real reason libs use the term fascist!  

@UT alum  @DCT

[Big girl]

9 hours ago, OlDawg said:

Yes. While LEO's operate under fairly static rules, the threats to them are as real as they were to me. The only difference is that my conduct under DOD was regulated differently on each assignment by mission specific Rules of Engagement. So, no interdiction was ever exactly the same from a legal standpoint.

Trump now feels differently about the killing, thoughts?

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

[Reagan]

 

[OlDawg]

35 minutes ago, Big girl said:

Trump now feels differently about the killing, thoughts?

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

I don’t remember him ever saying they were good or okay in the first place. Do you have a quote of him saying it was okay to shoot someone?

You need to read your own article fully before posting.

[thetragichippy]

28 minutes ago, OlDawg said:

I don’t remember him ever saying they were good or okay in the first place. Do you have a quote of him saying it was okay to shoot someone?

You need to read your own article fully before posting.

She always post that type of response. No one in this administration WANTED someone to die….but based on both situations, it was completely the fault of rioters, not protestors who caused their own death while it appears committing felony’s. 

[OlDawg]

39 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

She always post that type of response. No one in this administration WANTED someone to die….but based on both situations, it was completely the fault of rioters, not protestors who caused their own death while it appears committing felony’s. 

She’s still probably operating under the delusion that both of the deceased were angels merely helping innocent people. Instead, we now know that both were heavily involved in illegal activities, and Good committed at least 1 Felony, while Pretti committed—by my count—6 Felonies in two encounters. Three Felonies each encounter.

Good - Interfering/obstructing an active Federal enforcement activity.

Pretti - Interfering/obstructing an active Federal enforcement activity, resisting, and carrying a firearm while committing another crime on both occasions.

As you describe, they weren’t ’protesters or observers.’ They were active participants in crimes.

[Porter]

 

[Porter]

On 1/26/2026 at 7:32 PM, bullets13 said:

Capital police were protecting members of congress, and had barricaded doors and were posted up with guns drawn. An angry mob broke a window and she was the first one through, despite lawful commands to stop. Officers had no way of knowing whether she was armed or not, but they certainly knew she was breaking through despite their commands, and that if she led an angry mob through they could overpower officers and possibly hurt the people the officers are paid to protect. If she’d been a democrat a lot of guys would be saying she got what she deserved. It’s a very similar situation to this one, where everyone on here is saying “it wasn’t a great shoot, but if he’d just complied…” and what she was doing was way worse than what Pretti did. But even if you don’t agree with me (and the law, and the courts), what would you do if me and 20 buddies came over to your house and broke through your barricaded window and tried to come inside? You gonna let me get all the way in and try to find out if I’m armed? 

What about the officers behind Ashley Babbitt in this video? Did they feel threatened?

Here’s another video of her.

 

[LumRaiderFan]

15 minutes ago, Porter said:

What about the officers behind Ashley Babbitt in this video? Did they feel threatened?

Here’s another video of her.

 

The shooting was not justified, but if she hadn’t have been there with those idiots, wouldn’t have happened to her.  

[Porter]

Just now, LumRaiderFan said:

The shooting was not justified, but if she hadn’t have been there with those idiots, wouldn’t have happened to her.  

I agree but there were tactical officers behind her in the stairwell. So I was just wondering how the officer that shot her felt threatened.

[LumRaiderFan]

1 minute ago, Porter said:

I agree but there were tactical officers behind her in the stairwell. So I was just wondering how the officer that shot her felt threatened.

Yep, if I recall, they were at the door and walked away right before she was shot.

[Porter]

3 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Yep, if I recall, they were at the door and walked away right before she was shot.

The officers at one point were literally standing along the wall watching people break the glass. Those officers obviously didn’t feel threatened. The officer that shot her had to have seen them. 

[Reagan]

1 hour ago, Porter said:

 

Tampon Tim and Frey are commie morons.  But, the real reason for what going on in Minnesota is, as been said before, to shift focus away from the 9 billion dollar fraud that was exposed by a YouTube influencer!  

[UT alum]

12 hours ago, OlDawg said:

I know there’s no expectation of privacy in public. But, I can see some of this being abused. This reminds me of The Patriot Act.

“The powerful tools in ICE’s arsenal to track suspects — and protesters

Biometric trackers, cellphone location databases and drones are among the surveillance technologies that federal agents are tapping in their deportation campaign.”

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

Aren’t you Libertarian?

[OlDawg]

6 hours ago, UT alum said:

Aren’t you Libertarian?

My beliefs are best described as a fiscally conservative libertarian. Not the Libertarian Party.

I’m not a fan of the Patriot Act or some of the tools described in the articles I linked without heavy guardrails. Even then, I wouldn’t trust the guardrails being respected. These tools could easily be used similar to warrantless searches.

That’s why I posted the links. People should be aware and make their own judgement on their privacy concerns.

I support the immigration efforts, I think the paid agitators and those involved in the underground networks with a purpose of interfering with the immigration deportation efforts should be arrested, jailed, and forced to pay for any damages public or private.

Same token, I think body cams on all are good for authorities and the public. I think the agents should be able to wear masks if they choose. But, they should clearly identify themselves as their official capacity in a more standard fashion.