Note from the author: Much of what follows will be familiar. The facts of Renée Nicole Good’s killing have been reported extensively over the past five weeks. This piece is about whether the publicly available evidence, right now, supports immediate criminal charges against the man who killed her. Keith Ellison’s office told us that charging Jonathan Ross is Mary Moriarty’s job; she says she needs more evidence. I explored her claim in good faith. The prosecution memorandum attached at the end of this article shows sufficient justification to put Ross away for the rest of his natural life, built entirely from publicly available evidence and existing legal precedent.
On January 12, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty told CBS News: “Let me be clear, we have no preconceived opinion on what the evidence will show.” On January 26, she told MPR News her office had received “substantial” information and that the state “will have sufficient evidence to make a charging decision.” Sufficient. Not strong. Not overwhelming. Sufficient. Two days later, she told Law Dork: “I know enough now to feel pretty confident that we will be able to make a decision about charges.” Then on February 4, she sent formal letters to DOJ and DHS requesting more evidence: firearms, shell casings, video, agent statements. “The federal government has been clear that they are not conducting an investigation into Renee Good’s death,” she said. “But we are.”
So on January 12 she had no preconceived opinion. By January 28 she felt “pretty confident” about a charging decision. Then a week later she was asking for more evidence. As of this writing, Renée Nicole Good was killed 38 days ago. Jonathan Ross has not been charged.
I wanted to know if Moriarty actually needs what she says she needs. Former Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman charged Derek Chauvin in the same courthouse under the same statutes. Freeman had one bystander video, a handful of witnesses, and no autopsy. He filed in four days. Moriarty has five synchronized videos, at least four named eyewitnesses, a completed autopsy, expert testimony, the shooter’s own footage, DHS policies contradicting the conduct on camera, and an agent who fled the scene instead of submitting to a debrief. It has been 38 days. So I went through the publicly available evidence, the statutes, the case law, and the blueprint that sent Chauvin to prison for 22.5 years, genuinely asking: can a prosecution be built with what we already have?
The encounter between Jonathan Ross and Renée Nicole Good lasted approximately 40 seconds. The shooting, three rounds, took 698 milliseconds. Five verified video angles analyzed frame by frame by ABC News, the New York Times, Bellingcat, CNN, and the Washington Post produce an unambiguous sequence.
On the morning of January 7, DHS deployed roughly 2,000 agents to Minneapolis and St. Paul. Good and her wife, Becca, drove to the Central neighborhood near an elementary school to, in Becca’s words, “support our neighbors. We had whistles. They had guns.” Good’s Honda Pilot sat diagonally on Portland Avenue. Multiple vehicles, including one driven by Ross himself, drove around it. She was not blocking a path that could not be navigated.
At 9:36:51 a.m., Ross approached her vehicle on foot, phone in his left hand, filming. Good smiled at him. “That’s fine dude. I’m not mad at you,” she said. Seventeen seconds later, two agents from a second vehicle charged her car. One grabbed the door handle and reached through her open window while both screamed “Get out of the car. Get out of the fucking car” over and over. Eyewitness Caitlin Callenson told MPR the agents gave Good conflicting orders: one told her to drive away while the other screamed at her to get out. She could not comply with both. Good reversed a few feet, then pulled forward. Her steering wheel turned to the right, away from Ross, just over one second before the first shot. ABC News confirmed this through metadata analysis. The New York Times confirmed it through millisecond-by-millisecond video synchronization.
At 9:37:13, Ross fired the first round through her windshield. The second followed 399 milliseconds later. The third, 299 milliseconds after that, fired at close range through her open driver-side window as he moved alongside the car. Someone on the audio said “fucking bitch.”
Ross remained standing on his feet throughout the entire encounter. The New York Times found “no indication Agent Jonathan Ross got run over.” Bellingcat confirmed Ross “moved out of the way and to the side of the vehicle as he fires.” Forty-five seconds after shooting her, the camera app was still visible on his phone as he walked away from her car.
A family-commissioned autopsy found three gunshot wounds: left forearm, right breast, and a shot that entered the left side of her head near the temple and exited the right side. She was 37, a mother of three, a poet, and a U.S. citizen.
Then Ross walked away while she bled to death.
APM Reports reconstructed the post-shooting timeline second by second. Ross was the first person to approach Good’s crashed vehicle. He looked at her, then he walked away. He yelled “Hey, call 911!” to other agents, adjusted his mask, and left the scene in a Chevy Tahoe. By 10:03 a.m., 26 minutes after firing, he was at the federal building.
Good was still alive. When firefighters reached her more than six minutes after the shooting, they found her unresponsive but with a “thready and irregular” pulse. She was not breathing. CPR did not begin until more than ten minutes after the shooting. In the interval, ICE agents assessed her briefly, then closed her car door and walked away. A man across the street identified himself as a physician and offered to help. Agents blocked him. “Stop the bleeding!” he shouted. When he tried again, agents yelled “Back the fuck up” and moved toward him. He put his hands in the air and retreated.
Dr. Adam Armbruster, reviewing the timeline for APM Reports: “I’m just appalled by the lack of immediate first aid and initial resuscitation attempts. Somebody with a thready or diminished pulse is not deceased, and to walk away from an individual at that point is somewhat mind-boggling.”
John P. Gross of the University of Wisconsin Law School, speaking to NPR: “If you are an officer who views this woman as a threat, you don’t have one hand on a cellphone. You don’t walk around this supposed weapon, casually filming. The video demonstrates that the officers didn’t perceive Good to be a threat.” Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara called the shooting “predictable” and “entirely preventable” and told the New York Times: “The No. 1 rule is: You don’t place yourself in the path of the vehicle. That’s like traffic stop 101.” The consensus against shooting at moving vehicles stretches back more than 50 years. DHS’s own policy states agents are “generally” prohibited from doing it and “should always avoid intentionally and unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force.”
This was not Ross’s first use of force against a person in a vehicle. On June 17, 2025, he led agents to arrest Roberto Carlos Muñoz-Guatemala in Bloomington, Minnesota. Muñoz-Guatemala accelerated, dragging Ross approximately 100 yards. Ross was hospitalized with 33 stitches. VP Vance explicitly connected the two events: “That very ICE officer nearly had his life ended six months ago. You think maybe he’s a little bit sensitive about somebody ramming him with an automobile.” Former FBI agent Michael Harrigan rejected this: “Every incident has to stand alone. It doesn’t really matter what they went through before. It’s never going to be a justification for something else. They know that.”
None of that evidence is in dispute. None of it requires federal cooperation to obtain. All of it points in one direction. The question is what a prosecutor does with it.
The same Minnesota criminal statutes that convicted Derek Chauvin apply to Jonathan Ross. The same courthouse would hear the case.
I spent years in law enforcement watching how charging decisions actually work. Here is something prosecutors do not advertise: overcharging is one of the most reliable ways to make sure an officer walks. You file first-degree murder. The jury looks at the evidence, decides it falls short of premeditation, and the defendant is acquitted. Not convicted of a lesser charge. Acquitted. The system works exactly as designed, just not for the victim. The smarter move, and the move that worked against Chauvin, is to file the most serious charge the evidence reliably supports, layer lesser charges underneath as a floor, and pursue the maximum sentence on conviction. Second-degree unintentional murder in Minnesota carries up to 40 years. Jonathan Ross is 43.
Second-degree unintentional murder under § 609.19 is the lead charge. It requires causing death while committing a felony. The predicate felony is third-degree assault: Ross intentionally discharged his firearm at Good, inflicting three gunshot wounds including one to the head. That is substantial bodily harm. Good died. No intent to kill need be proven. Minnesota law does not follow the merger doctrine, meaning assault can serve as the predicate felony for felony murder. This is the precise legal architecture Keith Ellison used to convict Chauvin. Presumptive sentence for a first-time offender: 12.5 years, with aggravating factors pushing significantly higher.
Second-degree manslaughter under § 609.205 is the floor charge, the prosecution’s insurance policy. It requires culpable negligence creating an unreasonable risk of death. Firing a weapon at an unarmed woman turning away from you while you film with your phone in a residential neighborhood near an elementary school meets that standard. This charge survived appeal in the Noor case even after the murder conviction was overturned. Maximum sentence: 10 years.
Failure to render aid under § 609.662 is the additional charge. Minnesota law requires anyone who discharges a firearm and knows the discharge caused bodily harm to immediately investigate and render reasonable assistance. Ross looked at Good, turned around, and drove away. Violation where the victim dies: up to two years.
Freeman filed that Chauvin complaint without a grand jury. Ellison upgraded the charges by amended complaint, not grand jury either. On April 20, 2021, the jury convicted on all three counts. Judge Cahill departed upward to 22.5 years. A different prosecutor sat in Moriarty’s chair and proved this could be done, in the same courthouse, with the same jury pool.
The administration says none of this matters because federal agents have “absolute immunity.” Vance said it at a press conference. Noem said Minnesota has no jurisdiction. Stephen Miller told ICE agents they are immune. Carolyn Shapiro, professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law and former Illinois solicitor general, dismantled each claim in Lawfare: “Vance and Noem are completely wrong as a matter of law.” She added: “The notion that Minnesota cannot investigate or prosecute a violation of its criminal laws within its borders is flatly inconsistent with our federalist system.”
Supremacy Clause immunity under In re Neagle (1890) requires that a federal officer was authorized to act and did so in a manner that was “necessary and proper,” meaning objectively reasonable. It is a two-part test, not a blanket shield. Firing three rounds at an unarmed woman whose vehicle was turning away while filming with your phone is not necessary and proper by any standard. States have prosecuted federal agents since the early 1800s. During Prohibition, states brought murder charges against federal officers who killed a passenger while shooting at a departing car they alleged was transporting whiskey.
If charged, Ross would likely remove the case to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442. But removal is not dismissal. After removal, state law still applies, state prosecutors still prosecute, and a conviction is still a state conviction. Under Gamble v. United States (2019), state and federal governments are separate sovereigns. A state conviction cannot be pardoned by the president. Minnesota murder charges against Jonathan Ross, even adjudicated in federal court, remain beyond the president’s reach.
Seventeen days after Good’s death, with no charges filed against Ross, federal agents killed Alex Pretti, 37, in the Whittier neighborhood of Minneapolis. Pretti was an ICU nurse. He had spent his career keeping people alive. Agents fired 10 shots at him as he lay on the ground. That is what impunity looks like in practice. Not as a theory. Not as a warning. As a body count. Moriarty herself told MSNBC that agents are being given a message “they can do absolutely anything they want without consequences.” She was describing the result of her own inaction. Every day Ross walks free is a day the next agent with a gun and no training understands the math: you can shoot someone in Minneapolis and nothing will happen to you.
Moriarty has announced coalitions, sent letters, and pledged transparency. She has not filed charges. She announced in August 2025 she would not seek reelection. Her term ends January 4, 2027. Minnesota Statute § 628.26(a) eliminates any time limit for crimes resulting in death, so a future prosecutor can pick this up. But every day without charges is a day all federal agents believe they can act with total impunity.
Moriarty can file a criminal complaint charging Jonathan Ross with second-degree unintentional murder, second-degree manslaughter, and failure to render aid. She can do this tomorrow. None of that requires a grand jury, FBI cooperation, or federal permission. If Ross removes to federal court, the prosecution continues under state law. If he is convicted, the president cannot pardon him.
Renée Nicole Good’s three children are waiting. Everything Moriarty needs to file charges is already sitting on her desk.
Attached is the full 15-page prosecution memorandum. Everything above is a summary. The memorandum runs more than three times longer over the same ground, into the case law, the statutory elements, the evidentiary record at a level of detail a prosecutor could actually use. I’d suggest you read it, because it provides the kind of granular command of the evidence that cuts straight through the gaslighting every time someone tells you there just isn’t enough to file charges.
Find the document by clicking this sentence.
Send that document to the three people who can act on it.
Governor Tim Walz: https://mn.gov/governor/contact/ (contact form) or call 651-201-3400
Attorney General Keith Ellison: https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Office/ContactUs.asp or call 651-296-3353
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty: citizeninfo@hennepin.us or call 612-348-5550
Pro-Democracy merch and Existentialist Republic books at TheExistentialistRepublic.com
Let me take your claims one at a time because I think some of them hold up better than others.
First, that a federal judge granting immunity is "quite likely." After removal, the judge applies the two-part test from In re Neagle: was the agent authorized to act, and was the conduct necessary and proper, meaning objectively reasonable. Ross clears part one easily. He was a federal agent on an enforcement operation. Part two is where it becomes a genuine fight. Five independent video analyses show the car turning away from Ross before the first shot. He was filming with his phone in one hand. DHS's own policy prohibits shooting at moving vehicles. The Minneapolis police chief called it entirely preventable. Multiple use-of-force experts rejected the shooting. Federal judges do sometimes defer to law enforcement on use-of-force questions, and I won't pretend the current political environment doesn't factor in. But "quite likely" overstates the case. This is a real legal contest with strong evidence on the prosecution's side. The Ninth Circuit reversed immunity on weaker facts in Idaho v. Horiuchi.
Second, that the case "will be dismissed with prejudice." Even if a district judge granted immunity, that ruling is appealable. The Ninth Circuit reversed exactly this kind of dismissal in Horiuchi. I'll acknowledge that Horiuchi is Ninth Circuit, not Eighth, so it's persuasive authority in Minnesota rather than binding. There's genuine uncertainty about how the Eighth Circuit would rule. But a district court dismissal is not the end of the road.
Third, that it "cannot be reopened." This is factually wrong regardless of what happens on the first two claims. If the case is dismissed before trial, jeopardy has not attached. Double jeopardy does not bar a future filing. Minnesota Statute § 628.26(a) eliminates any statute of limitations for crimes resulting in death. A future administration releasing evidence, a different judicial composition, or an appellate reversal all keep the door open.
So yes, immunity is a real risk. I take it seriously, and the prosecution memorandum attached to the article addresses it in detail. But prosecutors don't decline to file cases because the defense might win. They file the strongest case the evidence supports and litigate it. The alternative is what we have right now: 38 days, no charges, and Alex Pretti shot ten times while lying on the ground 17 days later. The cost of inaction is not theoretical. We already know what it looks like.
Thank you for this, Christopher. I will forward this to Moriarty‘s office. I also plan on calling her office Monday and fiercely castigating her.