And a grindr account
this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2026
380 points (99.0% liked)
politics
27150 readers
3750 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
MURDER!
Vice President J.D. Vance on Thursday commented on the officer's history. He said the ICE officer "deserves a debt of gratitude,..."
What a fucking load. This is the same party that still cannot put up a fucking plaque honoring the cops that defended against the Jan 6 terrorists. Meanwhile, this waste of skin is saying this murderer deserves gratitude.
Fuck all these dickheads.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I heard that police are supposed to be trained not to get their bodies in front of moving vehicles.
Because if you get hit by a car, that's bad. And because it is escalating the problem. When a police officer stands in front of a vehicle to keep it from moving, they are turning a minor crime into a life-or-death situation.
This ICE officer did everything wrong, and a woman died because of his mistakes. The woman who died didn't do everything right, but it's not her job. She didn't do anything that deserved a death sentence. The ICE officer, on the other hand...
When you put completely incompetent, yet completely arrogant people into positions of power, you get situations like this and Venezuela.
I heard that police are supposed to be trained not to get their bodies in front of moving vehicles.
Fucking hell. Do they need to be trained not to look down the barrel of a gun to check if it's loaded or to make sure their dick is in their underwear before they zip their pants?
Watch fucking video he was nowhere near getting run over. Motherfucker was calm and stood still even after he killed her. Fucker psychopath who needs to burn for this.
Watch fucking video he was nowhere near getting run over.
He said he was dragged 100 feet.
Jonathan Ross, Drag Queen.
It was actually 50, but some news sources are saying 100 for their own reasons.
She was ordered to leave and she was leaving.
a woman died because of his mistakes
It wasn’t a mistake.
Not when you want to justify the escalation of force. There’s plenty of clips out there of officers deliberately placing themselves in front of vehicles.
It's weird how so many conservatives and a lot of cops are in favor of laws in which it is legal to drive over protesters if you feel endangered.
Let me guess, though, they don't think the same thing should apply to people driving over "officers" that they think are endangering them. Also, the protesters are probably only fodder for cars if they are deemed liberal protesters, most likely. If some Nazi douchebag that was out marching was driven over by a car, they'd catch feelings.
The murderer’s name is Jonathan Ross.
you spelled Coward wrong.
Are we talking about Jonathan Ross, the murderer?
Yes, I’m talking about murderer Jonathan Ross, who did a murder.
I was pretty sure when you had said that Jonathan Ross had murdered someone, that you were in fact talking about murderer Jonathan Ross, who did murder someone. Thanks for clarifying
Thanks.
The faster this murderer is in custody, the safer he will be.
Custody? lol. This piece of fascist shit it’s getting a promotion.
I personally don't want him safe. I want him to be vilified, hated, shunned, and to never have a moment of peace ever again. I want people throwing trash at him, spitting at him, tripping him on the sidewalk.
I want him to live the rest of his life, miserable and unloved by anyone. I want him to suffer until the moment the light leaves his twisted, crooked eyes.
Why hasn’t he been arrested by local authorities?
The law requires people who are arrested to be charged with a crime or released immediately. So in order to obtain an arrest warrant, prosecutors would need to file a criminal complaint followed by an indictment or an information. The accused could then assert their right to a speedy trial and demand an immediate trial. Depending on local court case loads, this could be scheduled in as little as a week (not typical; usually at least a fortnight up to six weeks).
Edit: A slight correction. An arrest warrant can be applied for without filing a complaint, but judges will require that a complaint or some other charging document be filed expeditiously after the accused is taken into custody. It is not legal to hold someone in jail without charge. Criminal procedure laws are not nationally uniform in the US; it varies by state.
So in a nutshell, once someone is arrested, the prosecutors are required, essentially, to already be ready to press charges and go to court. If they are not, then an early arrest followed by a judge ordering their release for lack of charges would be prejudicial to their case.
Funny how this literally never applies to normal people.
It does apply. It's just that for non-high-profile cases, prosecutors are pretty quick to make a decision to prosecute/not prosecute. Years ago, I was arrested and accused of assault, and I was released mere hours after getting to the police station because the prosecutor's office thought my self-defence claim was good and decided not to file charges. Generally speaking, this is what happens. You get arrested, taken to the police station or to the local jail, and then the police department refers the case to the prosecutor's office. Someone at the prosecutor's office reviews the evidence, and then they decide whether they will file charges. If they file one or more charges, then you're brought before a judge for a preliminary hearing, usually within 24 hours (depends on state law). At the hearing, you will make a plea of guild or not guilty, then either arrange for a lawyer, or the judge will appoint a public defender to represent you. Then your lawyer can make a demand for a speedy trial and/or make any other submissions to the court in your defence.
If the prosecutor's office decide not to prosecute, they will instruct the police department to release you. Failing that, someone can make a habeas corpus petition on your behalf and a judge will order your release.
I'm pretty sure the charge is 1st degree murder, however 'premeditation' is the key point of differentiation between 1st and 2nd degree.
Here's what I found from Minnesota Statutes Section 609.185: https://legalclarity.org/understanding-murder-charges-and-penalties-in-minnesota/
"In Minnesota, the criteria for murder charges are defined by state statutes, which outline the circumstances and intent required for each degree. Minnesota Statutes Section 609.185 outlines conditions for first-degree murder, including premeditated intent to kill, killing during certain felonies, or causing the death of a peace officer. Proving intent and premeditation is pivotal in distinguishing first-degree murder from other charges.
Second-degree murder, under Minnesota Statutes Section 609.19, involves intentional killing without premeditation or causing death while committing a felony not specified for first-degree murder. The absence of premeditation differentiates it from first-degree murder, yet intent remains crucial. This distinction highlights the importance of the defendant’s state of mind.
Third-degree murder, detailed in Minnesota Statutes Section 609.195, is characterized by acts that are dangerous to others and demonstrate a depraved mind, without regard for human life, but without intent to kill any particular person. This charge often applies when actions were reckless or negligent, leading to death. The focus is on the reckless nature of the act rather than specific intent to kill, differentiating it from higher degrees of murder."
He murdered someone on a video that only the sickest people on earth are defending
The problem is that he could also probably use a federal immunity defence. The prosecutors need time to plan out a good way to attack this defence. The worst possible outcome would be to file charges now, unprepared, and then the guy gets acquitted at trial which forever bars future state prosecution for that offence, or the case is dismissed because prosecutors failed to present a good argument for why the accused is not immune. Prosecutors have only one chance so they tend to make sure their case is as good as they can get before shooting their shot.
It's actually very rare for murder trials to be argued over whether the accused killed the person in question. Usually, the argument stems from whether the killing counts as murder or whether the evidence that the accused killed the victim is legally admissible.
He's not immune because he shot a woman in her head for no reason, not related to his duties whatsoever.
He will still try to argue that, and prosecutors need to come up with real reasons why it doesn't apply. Defence lawyers are not stupid and they will probably think of a way to argue immunity. Those arguments must be anticipated, researched, and rebutted.
Yeah I get that, but murder
Well, to put it simply, you say "murder" he says "nuh uh". Now you have to prove he's wrong and why or he gets off.
I seent it
load more comments
(3 replies)
What about in the situation where the person is considered a danger to the public?
Legally, the law says "too bad". American law does not recognise the concept of administrative detention. If someone is a danger to the public, then there must be probable cause to believe they have committed a crime before an arrest warrant can be issued. After they are arrested, they must be charged by prosecutors immediately. Or, at least, this is how the normative state works. There are many exceptions in fields like national security and military law.
I love that you're providing genuine answers to questions in this thread, it's always needed because the questions are often genuine, but coming from a place of very well-justified anguish or anger.
People wait yeeeeears in pretrial detention.
This is because defence lawyers often advise their clients to waive their right to a speedy trial, so they can get more time to prepare a defence. If you insist on the right to a speedy trial, then it is usually held in a month.
Given the footage available; shouldn't the prosecution be capable of meeting them with a speedy trial? This doesn't seem like the sort of thing that requires months and months of investigations.
I appreciate you giving genuine answers. They're often hard to get.
/edit: another of your replies clears this up. Thank you.
load more comments
(2 replies)
ICE are enemies of all Americans. If you’re ICE, you deserve prosecution. If our justice system is so broken that the law no longer applies to ICE, then Americans need to tear them to pieces.
Imagine what these fuckers do when they invade other countries.
You let a known pedo into the White House TWICE! your "justice system" has been broken for a long time, question is how many more innocent people have to die for you to do something.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Is this the Jonathan Ross who is the murderer of that innocent woman Renee Good, wnd who lives in Minnesota?
Or is it the Jonathan Ross of Minnesota who murdered Renee Good after she had just finished taking her child to school and got caught up by the Gestapo?
Edit: sorry. I think it's the Jonathan Ross of Minnesota that murdered Renee Good, who will do absolutely anything to protect paedophiles.
People need to be protected from these violent terrorists
view more: next ›