January 9, 2026
NOTE: The following is not legal advice. Please consult your own attorney on these matters as this is just my 1st amendment opinion.
My name is WLBJ, I've been a biblical scholar for over 37 years and I've been a section 1983 and constitutional scholar for 30 years, I majored in criminology and minored in sociology as an undergrad in college.
I have studied thousands of cases. I've litigated civil rights cases and have specialized in police, prosecutorial, and judicial misconduct, thoroughly studied in qualified immunity, prosecutorial immunity and judicial immunity. I've sued prosecutors and judges in their official capacity and their investigative and administrative capacity; there's a big difference between capacities. For reference see Kalina v Fletcher. I've studied police procedure under the late Russell Bintliff, former investigator for the Arkansas State Police, the CIA, and the army.
For starters let me just say that I voted for Donald Trump. Not only did I vote for him, but I strongly supported him, and you can go down the list of my articles before he won the election for his second term and read the articles that I wrote prior to his taking office and after he took office and you'll see how passionate I was.
I believe I understand the heart of the Lord Jesus Christ in this matter. Without understanding how God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ feel about the latest ICE shooting in Minneapolis, it's easy to be confused on who was in the right and who was in the wrong. Depending on what you want to see from the video, many people will see what they want to see, and they will hear what they want to hear depending on which way they lean, left or right.
Most Republicans see an ice agent who defended himself and most Democrats see an ice agent who needlessly shot a woman who was just trying to get away. Republicans will say she was there to agitate them and she tried to run him over. Democrats will say in the comments you can clearly see that she was trying to leave, she said she wasn't mad at him in the video, she was smiling etc.
Are you ready for the truth of the situation? The reality of the situation is both individuals are at fault but the officer's fault is FAR GREATER AND I WILL PROVE IT BEYOND DOUBT. First, yes, the young woman should not have been there agitating ice regardless of whether she disagrees with them or not. There may indeed be clear evidence she was a protester against ice and possibly even trying to block their progress in protest of what they were doing. Let me explain to you why the courts will disregard that.
Most arm chair wanna be legal experts and even some misguided lawyers are citing “Tennessee v. Garner (1985) which states “
Deadly force may not be used against a fleeing suspect unless the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses an immediate threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”. Folks this isn’t the strongest way to evaluate this situation as it leaves too much wiggle room for the officer's conduct as I will explain below. Still others may want to cite Graham v. Connor (1989) — Objective Reasonableness
Rule:
“Use of force is judged by what a reasonable officer would do at that moment”. But folks iv’e been evaluating these types of cases for decades and here’s how you can believe me when I say I am a section 1983 scholar. The proper case law in this area requires the “Manufactured Jeopardy Doctrine" which pretty much has Circuit Court Consensus.
Multiple federal circuits hold:
An officer cannot deliberately or recklessly create the circumstances that lead to deadly force and then rely on those circumstances to justify the shooting.
This applies when:
The officer steps into the path of a vehicle
When avoidance is available
When retreat is possible
When the threat is momentary and avoidable
"It is clear to me that the officer drew his gun as the woman was just finished backing up in anticipation of her coming forward, this is "mens rea" as he could have used this time to step away as he did anyway but instead he put her in a position by standing in front of her vehicle when he didn't need to, but instead he stood where he could commit murder By self defense. You can watch it from his angle all you want, and you can watch it in slow motion from behind the vehicle. He heard her wife say “drive baby drive”, he drew his gun IN ANTICIPATION just after she had finished backing up and began to turn away from him. He knew in his heart that she was going to be coming forward!! CHECKMATE FOR THE OFFICER UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.
He had time to step out of the way and the courts will look at the totality of the circumstances known to the officer. This wasn’t a woman the officer had reason to believe was a fleeing felon and he knew or should have known that she was trying to flee the scene and not hit him. This officer operated with mens rea which is the state of mind that makes an act criminal. He can see that she is turning away. He stands in the way making sure that she brushes him when she turns away and you can hear the fake tone of voice when the car makes contact with him when he says awoh!! Which was a “manufactured exclaim” of surprise. The fact that he drew his service weapon just as she started to pull forward shows he was not surprised at all but anticipated the collision.
The officer drew his weapon in anticipation, while the woman was finished backing up, before any forward motion, and instead of stepping away (which he later proves he could do), he positioned himself so that contact would occur and he could claim self-defense.
Legally, that matters because it supports two separate but related doctrines:
Manufactured jeopardy (objective constitutional analysis)
Evidence of intent / recklessness (mens rea for civil and possibly criminal liability)
Even though §1983 uses an objective standard, anticipatory weapon draw + deliberate positioning is routinely used by courts to infer that the threat was not unavoidable.
That is exactly how courts phrase it: avoidable danger ≠ imminent threat.
2. Manufactured Jeopardy Doctrine — what it is (precisely)
Manufactured jeopardy (sometimes called officer-created danger or self-created exigency) is the principle that:
An officer may not deliberately or recklessly create the circumstances that purportedly justify the use of deadly force.
Key idea:
Deadly force must respond to danger
Not create the danger and then respond to it
This doctrine is widely applied in the federal circuits, even though the Supreme Court has never used the exact phrase.
Federal Circuit cases that explicitly apply Manufactured Jeopardy
Sixth Circuit
Kirby v. Duva, 530 F.3d 475 (6th Cir. 2008)
Officer stepped into path of vehicle
Court held officer created the danger
Deadly force not justified
Tenth Circuit
Allen v. Muskogee, 119 F.3d 837 (10th Cir. 1997)
Officers rushed a suspect
Escalated confrontation
Court: officers recklessly created the situation
Qualified immunity denied
This is one of the classic manufactured jeopardy cases:
Ninth Circuit
Adams v. Speers, 473 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2007)
Officer placed himself in front of moving vehicle
Court: cannot rely on danger he created
Shooting unconstitutional
Fifth Circuit
Lytle v. Bexar County, 560 F.3d 404 (5th Cir. 2009)
Officer fired at fleeing vehicle
Vehicle posed no imminent threat
Shots fired after disengagement
Qualified immunity denied
The Eighth Circuit does recognize the substance of the “manufactured danger / officer-created jeopardy” doctrine, but it does so implicitly under Graham v. Connor, not as a standalone, named doctrine (similar to how SCOTUS handles it).
Below is the precise, citable Eighth Circuit law, with case names and holdings, and how they apply to these facts.
1. How the Eighth Circuit treats “manufactured danger”
The Eighth Circuit does not use the label “manufactured jeopardy” or “officer-created danger” as a free-standing test.
Instead, it repeatedly holds that:
An officer’s own tactical decisions leading up to the use of deadly force are part of the objective-reasonableness analysis under Graham.
In other words:
Officers cannot create or escalate the danger and then rely on that danger to justify deadly force.
The court asks whether the threat was avoidable given the officer’s positioning and choices.
That is manufactured jeopardy in substance.
2. Key Eighth Circuit cases recognizing the doctrine (implicitly)
Cole v. Bone, 993 F.2d 1328 (8th Cir. 1993)
Important limits case, often cited by defense — but it establishes the framework.
The court emphasized that deadly force must respond to an immediate threat, not officer impatience or positioning.
Later cases distinguish Cole when the officer steps into danger rather than responding to unavoidable danger.
Why it matters:
The Eighth Circuit treats officer choice and positioning as legally relevant.
Ludwig v. Anderson, 54 F.3d 465 (8th Cir. 1995)
This is one of the strongest Eighth Circuit cases for this argument.
Holding:
The court denied qualified immunity where officers unnecessarily escalated a confrontation.
Pre-seizure conduct was considered in assessing reasonableness.
Key language (paraphrased):
Officers are not entitled to immunity when their own actions recklessly create the need to use deadly force.
This is manufactured danger doctrine, even though the phrase is not used. The officer walked all the way around her car filming and then stood just in front of it to the left side giving himself ample room to move but get hit when he knew or should of known that existing case law requires him NOT TO USE HIS BODY TO BLOCK A VEHICLE!
Ellison v. Lesher, 796 F.3d 910 (8th Cir. 2015)
Highly relevant.
The court reaffirmed that officer conduct prior to the shooting matters.
Emphasized whether officers had time, distance, and alternatives.
This case is frequently cited for the proposition that:
Deadly force is unreasonable where officers move into harm’s way unnecessarily.
Applying Eighth Circuit law to these facts
Under Eighth Circuit precedent, the following facts (if credited) are legally decisive:
The officer drew his weapon in anticipation, not response
The officer positioned himself in front of the vehicle unnecessarily
The officer had time and space to step away
The officer did step away, proving avoidance was possible
Shots were fired as the vehicle disengaged
Additional shots were fired from the side/rear
Under Ludwig, Ellison, Thompson, and Banks, that sequence supports:
Unreasonable force
Denial of qualified immunity
Officer-created danger analysis under Graham
FURTHERMORE, there was also video out allegedly showing the same officer involved in the Minnesota shooting allegedly being dragged and injured by another vehicle about a year prior. Man looks at the outward appearance, but God sees the heart of every human being. 1 Samuel 16:7. God and the courts see the strife between the two groups. God knows that the officer in question was controlled by trauma and hatred towards the protesters, protesters that he has grown to hate and become burned out by their hate towards him. However, the law, the courts, and Jesus Christ expect him to remain professional and control his emotions during such a job, or he is not fit for duty.
The officer gets one round off on the side of the windshield, not directly in the front of the windshield but in the side of the windshield at an angle and is clearly able to maneuver himself out of the way of the vehicle, while he is filming the incident, he never drops his phone and he puts more rounds on her from the side of the vehicle as she is driving off. This officer is a cold-blooded murderer. He is a cold blooded murderer who put himself in the position to be able to shoot and kill her and claim self-defense. He is traumatized and burned out from all of the hate that has been coming at him and instead of giving it to Jesus Christ, he has absolutely had it and took his anger and rage out on Ms. Good!
Jesus said what is in the heart comes out of the mouth. Luke 6:45. After this woman was shot in the head and killed it is either this officer or one of his partners who yell effing b****. God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ would ask you “who says that after they have taken a human life?” The officer was not seriously hurt at all and yet he says such a hateful comment or his partner says such a hateful comment towards a woman who was just alive and smiling, who they have just shot and killed. That is how you can detect hatred coming out of their hearts because they have absolutely no sympathy or remorse for taking a life. Even if they had to take a life, no officer on any force in the United States should utter such words after a subject has been shot and killed in the line of duty.
This is how you know that officer should not have been on the job. He should have taken a leave of absence after his last physical confrontation that left him wounded and he should have been forced to go in for counseling and been evaluated to see if he could do his job without carrying a hateful grudge towards the protesters his supervisors knew or should have known he would have to encounter again.
Shooting a Fleeing Vehicle — Clear Constitutional Rule
Federal courts repeatedly hold:
Shooting at a vehicle that is driving away is presumptively unreasonable
Side or rear shots strongly undermine claims of imminent threat
Continued firing after the threat has passed is unconstitutional
shots were fired from the side, and after disengagement, is legally critical.
That alone defeats qualified immunity in many circuits.
5. Mens Rea and Emotional Animus (Key Insight)
I correctly focused on state of mind, not just mechanics.
While §1983 uses an objective standard, evidence of hatred, rage, or vindictiveness is relevant to:
credibility,
intent,
punitive damages,
supervisory liability,
and Monell claims.
The alleged post-shooting expletive:
does not prove guilt by itself, but it corroborates an inference of anger rather than necessity. Courts routinely consider such statements when evaluating:
whether force was reactive or punitive.
6. Prior Dragging Incident — Hurts the Defense, Not Helps It
Legally:
Prior injury does not expand authority
Prior trauma raises duty-to-intervene issues
Prior incidents may impose a duty to remove or reassign
If supervisors knew:
the officer had been dragged, was traumatized, and was re-deployed into similar confrontations, that supports: failure to supervise. deliberate indifference, Monell liability as well as "failure to train" which I have sued under section 1983.
It does not justify deadly force.
WHAT ELSE CAN WE LEARN FROM THIS AWFUL TRAGEDY
In the comments of some of these videos, a man from Poland stated "I'm from Poland and it is just shocking to me to watch the hatred and division between all of you in the United States." He said something to the effect of he “cannot believe how divided We Are.” He raised concerns about civil war. In my “speech that could save America” as well as in my book “The Republicrat - A Plea To Humanity,” I noted that Donald Trump was not the right person for the presidency of the United States because he was far too divisive and did not have what it took to unite the country. I explained in the chapter on Republicans and Democrats how we have allowed the forces of darkness to divide us in this country and how we are being controlled by hate and a spirit of implacability which is written about in Romans chapter 1.
The Bible makes it clear that implacability is a sin and all those who remain implacable towards one another will not see heaven but will burn in agony and weep and wail in the lake of fire for eternity. Some people in the comments are so hard-hearted, so cold-hearted and calloused that they have made comments that their biggest concern was for the dog in the car of the woman who was shot and killed. Make no mistake about it, the Lord Jesus Christ is coming back to judge the Nations and every one of you had better repent and show love and forgiveness towards your enemies or you all are going to hell. WIDE is the road that leads to destruction and many there be that are on it and narrow is the way that leads to life and few be there that find it. Matthew 7:13-14.
In conclusion, what can we learn about this situation? We can learn that what the Biden administration did by bringing in millions of immigrants from other countries in order to win the election was not right. But what the Trump administration has failed to realize is that it was the federal government nonetheless, via the NGOs who allowed this to happen even giving millions of them cell phones. If you are married and your wife signs a contract for say six month's worth of frozen food, and then you come home from a year of deployment and you learn about it and you are very upset, are you and your family not nonetheless bound by that contract that was made while she was in charge of decisions for the family?
God's word is very clear on this, and he tells countries how to treat foreigners. Leviticus 19:33-34. The Republicans AND democrats are so controlled by hate they cannot see straight. I'm very well aware of the vicious criminals that have also come in with the millions of other non-criminals who were enticed into this country by the former administration. It is not the peaceful nonviolent immigrants' fault who believed they were welcomed by the Biden administration and brought into this country and God is going to hold the Republicans accountable for that when they stand before him at the great white throne judgment.
Satan and his fallen angels have caused the Republicans to focus only on the bad things that the immigrants have done and not on all the good things that they have done for this country or may be able to do for this country. Make no mistake about it, the spirit of hatred flowing from Donald Trump has only intensified the strife and enmity between Republicans and Democrats and Jesus Christ was clear that a house divided cannot and will not stand Matthew (12:22-23) and at the great white throne Judgment, unless he repents, Donald trump will be weeping and whaling in terror and agony unless he changes course immediately.
People, @realDonaldTrump , it is clear that your Ice deportation plan is not working and is a moral failure and too much for the country to bear. The forceful deportation by Ice is not the way to handle the immigration problem in this country. I have written plenty of articles down my X wall to explain how I would have handled these things. I've also written in my book "The Republicrat - A Plea To Humanity " on how God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ expected us to pull the United States out of being in trillions of dollars in debt. I sent a copy of that book to president Donald Trump and while he thanked me, he did not follow the directives outlined in my book. He ignored my plan to bring our country and the Nations together through my plan called GEMV which is an acronym with two meanings, 1. Global Economic Mega Venture, and 2. Global E-commerce Manufacturing Venture.
Instead, out of the hatred, bitterness, and greed in his heart, Donald Trump has chosen to use aggressive destructive tariffs, military might, covert manipulation, and murder to try to advance the economic interests of the United States on the global stage and he has done nothing to unite the citizens of the United States. On the contrary, he's allowed himself to be controlled and manipulated by the country of Israel, specifically BB Netanyahu and the CIA/Israeli Mossad. God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ have told me that Trump is in fact correct to question whether or not he is going to heaven. Because at this stage in his life, at this very moment he is not going to go to heaven unless he repents from the wickedness that he has brought upon himself, the United States, and the world.
This is the non-biased perspective of God regarding the situation; I’m just the messenger who has been called to be a watchman for the last 37 years. You are free to disagree with this writing, but I know the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. I've been tried in the fire and refined as gold and I have removed the beams from my own eye enough so that God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ have qualified me to speak on these matters and remove the specs and beams from your eyes. You are put on notice to buy this gold that has been tried in the fire.
I warn all United States citizens, unless you unite and join together and impeach Donald Trump, put true America first candidates in the House of Representatives and in the senate for the 2026 midterms, who pledge to never take money from AIPAC, to stop hating democrats and republicans, the United States will face total collapse and destruction from God almighty due to our own sins as a nation, as a people. That is if President Donald Trump does not get us into a war before the midterms as a purposeful pretext to declare martial law and stay in power. President Donald Trump has lost his moral compass and like King Saul, God has rejected him from His kingdom.
Unless president Donald Trump makes a 180° u-turn regardless of whether he's being blackmailed to do the ungodly and unlawful things that he has done in his first year and one month as president, then the Lord Jesus Christ will tell president Trump when we all stand before Jesus, "depart from me you worker of iniquity into the everlasting lake of fire prepared for the devil and his angels".
The bible is clear that even if we follow people as leaders who were once on the right path we are not to follow them like whales following their leader into the shore. The apostle Paul said:
"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!"
God often tests us in matters similar to the present as is shown in Deuteronomy 13:1-3:
"If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul."
Granted, President Trump is no saint or prophet, so how much more then have we need to follow these principles and cease blindly following a man who has CLEARLY lost his way.
There is still time to repent. I caution everyone and urge everyone to read my book, "The Republicrat- A Plea To Humanity ", and scroll down my wall on my X account and read all of my articles and posts before it's too late because Revelation chapter 6 is almost upon us which will bring destruction to this world unlike anything any of you have ever prepared for.
@SusieWiles, @StephenMiller47, @PeteHegseth, and @marcorubio, you are apostates from the faith and the Lord Jesus Christ COMMANDS YOU TO REPENT AND REMEMBER YOUR FIRST LOVE! YOU HAVE A FORM OF GODLINESS BUT DENY THE POWER THEREOF! 2 Timothy 3:5-7.
You've been warned. Nothing in these writings constitutes a threat of any kind by me personally.
May the grace, mercy, and peace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.
In His Love,
WLBJ