- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bovino just told reporters the suspect was on scene several minutes interfering...
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Stupidly incorrect
Most of this is irrelevant.
0
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You don't understand the standard.
Scream it to the top of your lungs. You don't matter.
Supreme Court explicitly refused to set a fixed "clock" on how far back the "totality of the circumstances" goes. Instead, they ruled that there is no implied time limit.
Department of Justice (DOJ) has applied the Barnes standard to argue that the "atmosphere of resistance" created by local officials is a relevant factor that makes an agent’s use of force "objectively reasonable."
nder the old "moment-of-threat" rule, investigators would only look at the 1–2 seconds before the agent fired. Because of Barnes v. Felix, the timeframe has expanded to include the entire lead-up to the confrontation.
The "Atmosphere" as Context: Federal attorneys are arguing that the "totality" must include Governor Tim Walz’s public calls for citizens to "get in the faces" of agents. They contend that a "reasonable officer" in Minnesota is now operating under a higher baseline of fear than an agent in a cooperative state, which justifies quicker escalations of force.
Prior "Hostile Encounters": In the Renee Good investigation, the defense has cited a previous incident from six months ago where the same agent was "dragged by a car" during an arrest. Under Barnes, this past experience is now a "relevant event" that informs why the agent perceived Good’s car movement as a lethal threat.
YOU are wrong!
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Of course it's relevant.
That stuff isn't relevant
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You have to provide a lot more details like the time frame, superseding behaviors, etc.
No I don’t. Quit being dense, just layer that hypothetical on top of what you know. The hypothetical would simply be relevant - I wasn’t asking you I’m telling you that it would be.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:07 pm to rocksteady
quote:
at what point should a mob of people screaming frick you and die, with guns, physically obstructing and striking you, be considered shootable?
Big fan of the Boston Massacre of 1770?
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:08 pm to OceanMan
quote:
You said (at least I think you were trying to say) that hearing “gun” caused the shooting,
It's that, an accidental discharge, or a combination of both.
quote:
if the shooting officer saw an empty holster before he saw a gun, he may have assumed he had already drawn it.
And that's a problem. Legally, the LEO may be covered b/c the law is so slanted to protect LEO at the expense of citizens.
quote:
All of that is relevant in both written and case law, you are wrong and being told this by basically everyone.
I agree with you THESE facts are relevant.
What I'm disagreeing with is the factors outside of this incident being relevant.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:that is an assumption on your part.
There was nothing operational on that side of the street for the LEOs. Moving there was about reactions/response/vengeance (whatever word you want to frame it) and not immigration duties.
To me it appears gray hoodie and another person, on both sides of the street, or doing everything they can to keep the feds from going to that side of the street for one reason or another. The agitator for protecting something on the side of the street where the shooting happened. They kept getting between those buildings and officers. Multiple people did everything they could to keep ice on that side of the street
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:08 pm to BCreed1
quote:Do you know who you're responding to? SFP doesn't care about any of that. SFP gets fixated on one thing and the obfuscates for dozens of pages when realizing the original thought was stupidly wrong
So I am going to lay it out step by step for you
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:09 pm to BCreed1
quote:
Supreme Court explicitly refused to set a fixed "clock" on how far back the "totality of the circumstances" goes. Instead, they ruled that there is no implied time limit.
Department of Justice (DOJ) has applied the Barnes standard to argue that the "atmosphere of resistance" created by local officials is a relevant factor that makes an agent’s use of force "objectively reasonable."
nder the old "moment-of-threat" rule, investigators would only look at the 1–2 seconds before the agent fired. Because of Barnes v. Felix, the timeframe has expanded to include the entire lead-up to the confrontation.
The "Atmosphere" as Context: Federal attorneys are arguing that the "totality" must include Governor Tim Walz’s public calls for citizens to "get in the faces" of agents. They contend that a "reasonable officer" in Minnesota is now operating under a higher baseline of fear than an agent in a cooperative state, which justifies quicker escalations of force.
Prior "Hostile Encounters": In the Renee Good investigation, the defense has cited a previous incident from six months ago where the same agent was "dragged by a car" during an arrest. Under Barnes, this past experience is now a "relevant event" that informs why the agent perceived Good’s car movement as a lethal threat.
Which AI did you copy this from?
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:09 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
Do you know who you're responding to? SFP doesn't care about any of that. SFP gets fixated on one thing and the obfuscates for dozens of pages when realizing the original thought was stupidly wrong
Didn't you bring up the 14th Amendment in this thread?
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:And here is the obligatory obfuscation/distraction
Like with most of the facts being repeated by NPCs....
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:10 pm to loogaroo
That’s not justifying killing him. There still has to be a hostile act at the time of the shooting.
This is where I don’t understand why ICE isn’t wearing body cams.
This is where I don’t understand why ICE isn’t wearing body cams.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:10 pm to I20goon
quote:
that is an assumption on your part.
Well earlier I did clarify if they thought the woman was an illegal immigrant from Denmark, then it's operationally-related.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
No no . Stop with the side stepping.
SHOW us in the ruling where the events leading up to is on seconds. Minutes. Hours..
You can't because they did not set that limit.
Show us.
SHOW us in the ruling where the events leading up to is on seconds. Minutes. Hours..
You can't because they did not set that limit.
Show us.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:12 pm to jimmy the leg
Is that supposed to be a gotcha?
He was shot after being disarmed. Kind of a pivotal point to ignore.
Guy who shot him might have thought the arm was his and not another officer. Who knows. I’ve said I don’t know if it’s criminal but I’m pretty confident it’s wrongful death.
He was shot after being disarmed. Kind of a pivotal point to ignore.
Guy who shot him might have thought the arm was his and not another officer. Who knows. I’ve said I don’t know if it’s criminal but I’m pretty confident it’s wrongful death.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:12 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:whether or not they had an operational reason to be on that side of the street or not is simply extraneous information that does not matter and is irrelevant because she was impeding a federal law enforcement officer in the execution of his duties
Well earlier I did clarify if they thought the woman was an illegal immigrant from Denmark, then it's operationally-related.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:And this is where you need to stop making stupid statements. You weren't there in the scrum. You weren't wrestling with an armed deranged person after spending days being harrassed by lunatics. But you're incorrigible and won't admit you're wrong so I know you will keep going
If LEO didn't know of another weapon, how could they articulate an objective belief of fear of threat of death?
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:13 pm to slackster
quote:
Well then he deserved to be shot
He interfered with government officials in the performance of their duty, unlawfully, and then resisted arrest with violence and a loaded weapon.
If that's not FAFO, I don't know what is.
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
We have video
No video available shows that the shooting was unjustified and of course, you know this. You're just being you
Posted on 1/25/26 at 4:15 pm to slackster
quote:
Guy who shot him might have thought the arm was his and not another officer. Who knows. I’ve said I don’t know if it’s criminal but I’m pretty confident it’s wrongful death.
Nope. Once the gun was seen, they have no way of knowing if he had another weapon. Do you need cases like SFP?
Page 9 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News