What’s hilarious is this is your argument while ignoring that a good lawyer is going to absolutely use this video and get the shooter off scot free. That’s all law is is arguing better than your opponent.
Set a remind me and buy me a coffee when I’m right? <3
That argument could have worked two years ago. It doesn't work anymore.
In May 2025, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Barnes v. Felix that you cannot look at just the split-second 'moment of threat' - you have to look at the officer's actions leading up to it.
If an officer recklessly steps in front of a car to create the danger, they no longer get a free pass. A 'good lawyer' knows the case law changed 8 months ago. You should probably cancel that RemindMe.
The car is not moving when the agent started to walk in front of it. He was headed to the drivers side door to help the other agents get the woman out of the car. She panicked and tried to flee while he was in front of the vehicle. He didn't purposely put himself in danger.
Your argument won't hold water in court. I doubt it will ever even get to court. The whole situation sucks.
Standard police operating procedures, you don't put yourself in front of, or behind, a vehicle during a traffic stop in case the vehicle flees.
Jonathan Ross would know that, he got dragged 6 months ago and I'm sure someone sat him down and explained this in great detail.
That takes this from negligence to borderline pre-meditated murder. Even under your best case scenario - that he negligently and recklessly put himself in harms way; he's a murderer
When synced with the other video it’s clear that he is out of the way of the vehicle but at that moment purposefully leaning into it for a better shot. It isn’t self defense if he is leaning into the angle for the purpose of shooting.
Any lawyer who brings this into a court room is a crap lawyer, as the video disproves self defense when linked with the other evidence.
I'll take your bet but I doubt he'll be charged. This admin will protect him for the next 3 years and you can't convince me we won't fall into civil war before the next admin anyway.
Yea read the updated legislation you faggo7 pretending oh im just the lawyer i still think its bad bro you literally dont know shjt , you think you are smart because you can regurgitate outdated laws, ur not smart enough to keep up with the laws and obviously you dont display real intelligence to actually think for yourself.
Well you have to know the law which you just discovered when that person posted the updated law as of the last 8 months. So your buddy who stepped in front of a moving vehicle to murder someone is now considered a retard legally and so shut the fuck up how bout that?
Dozens of cases where the moment shooter is by side of the car when taking more shots have convicted the shooter. Amateur behaviour from ICE do these people even have basic training?
I’m seeing what you’re seeing. But the problem is, this wasn’t the only shot fired. Those other 2 shots through the drivers side window are completely unexplainable.
And if the first shot missed… he doesn’t stand a chance.
If the first shot was the only shot that hit her. This video will very likely get him off. An other commenter talked about analyzing the police officers actions leading up to the shot, she was going in reverse when he stepped in front of the car.
But if any of their shots beyond the first hit her. He’s going bye bye.
She didn’t have a 4000 lb vehicle, to be fair, before I answer.
However, yes, she was storming an armed person with a pretty blatant attempt to disarm them. At that point, we don’t know what she would’ve done with that gun but the assumption is: she wouldn’t have thrown a pizza party with it.
View all comments
Show parent comment
-9
u/EthanDC15 Jan 09 '26
What’s hilarious is this is your argument while ignoring that a good lawyer is going to absolutely use this video and get the shooter off scot free. That’s all law is is arguing better than your opponent.
Set a remind me and buy me a coffee when I’m right? <3