Jonathan Ross
Max Nesterak Video Screenshot on X

The fatal shooting of 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis on January 7 has ignited fierce debate over the circumstances surrounding her death—and newly emerged details about injuries sustained by the agent who fired the fatal shots are adding another layer of complexity to an already controversial incident. According to Department of Homeland Security officials, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Jonathan Ross suffered internal bleeding during the encounter with Good, hospitalised immediately following the incident and released the same day.

According to the account provided by DHS, Good's vehicle struck Ross in the stomach area, causing the torso injuries that warranted medical attention. 'He went to the hospital, a doctor did treat him, he has been released, but he's gonna spend some time with his family,' Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem stated at a press conference, confirming the hospitalisation without elaborating on the severity of Ross's condition.

Yet the revelation of Ross's injuries has only intensified scrutiny of how the shooting unfolded—and raised uncomfortable questions about the justification offered by Trump administration officials for the use of lethal force.

The Video Evidence That Challenges the Official Narrative

ICE Minnesota
Newly released first-person footage from ICE agent Jonathan Ross's mobile phone shows his perspective moments before he fatally shot Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis on 7th January 2026 Chad Davis/WikiMedia Commons

Multiple video recordings captured in the minutes before the shooting paint a starkly different picture from the characterisation offered by Noem, President Donald Trump, and Vice President J.D. Vance, who swiftly labelled Good a 'domestic terrorist' and declared the shooting justified.

One video angle showed Good sitting calmly in the driver's seat of her vehicle, seemingly composed whilst speaking with agents. 'I'm not upset,' she reportedly told them moments before the situation escalated dramatically.

Yet in the same footage, an agent can be heard shouting a slur at Good as her car moved forward, colliding with a parked vehicle and a telephone pole. Additional footage revealed that the vehicle's front wheels had begun turning away from the agents before shots rang out, a detail that social media users pointed out contradicted claims that Good had 'weaponised' her car against federal officers.

The agent seen filming the initial encounter appeared to drop his phone just as gunshots erupted, with Ross then captured on video walking away from the scene. These recordings have become central to widespread criticism of how the incident was handled and how it has been characterised publicly.

Immigration Crackdown Amid Nationwide Controversy

Ross is among thousands of DHS agents stationed in Minnesota as part of the Trump administration's intensified immigration enforcement operation, a policy that has sparked intense backlash and large-scale protests across the United States. The controversial crackdown has become a flashpoint in national debate over immigration enforcement practices and civil liberties.

The apparent contradiction between video evidence and official statements has prompted accusations that the White House has attempted to reframe the incident in a more favourable light. Social media critics pointed to recently aired CBS News coverage, in which unnamed officials confirmed Ross's hospitalisation for internal bleeding, suggesting the outlet was amplifying an official narrative without sufficiently examining the video record.

Moreover, DHS policy itself appears relevant to this scrutiny. The department's own guidelines on use of force explicitly prohibit agents from 'discharging firearms solely' to 'disable moving vehicles, vessels, aircraft, or other conveyances'—suggesting that lethal force against Good's vehicle may not have aligned with departmental protocols on de-escalation and proportional response.

As the incident remains under examination and public debate continues, the question of whether the shooting was justified increasingly hinges not on abstract claims of threat, but on what the recorded evidence actually shows.