Modern-Day Debate DEBATE: Was Renee Good Murdered by ICE? | @1stamender Vs @alexxandermedeiros
Jan 17, 2026
In a recent debate, First Amender, a progressive YouTuber, and Alexander Medeiros, a commentator on constitutional law, dive deep into the controversial case of Renee Good. They discuss evidence suggesting that an officer's actions leading to her death may not have been justified. The two engage in a spirited analysis of legal standards for deadly force, with First Amender arguing negligence and Medeiros defending the officer's reasoning. They explore whether nonlethal resolutions could have been pursued and unpack the complexities of federal versus state jurisdiction in such cases.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Video Frames Drive The Murder Claim
- Video evidence was central to First Amender's claim that Officer Jonathan Ross manufactured risk by standing in front of Renee Good's vehicle.
- He argued the officer had feet planted beside the car and fired after being out of danger, challenging self-defense justification.
Courts Treat Vehicles As Deadly Weapons
- Alexander Medeiros defended the shooting as constitutionally reasonable when an officer faces an immediate threat from a vehicle.
- He cited multiple federal cases establishing that a car can be treated as a deadly weapon and justify deadly force in split-second decisions.
Assess Force From A Reasonable-Officer View
- Evaluate use-of-force from a reasonable-officer perspective without 20/20 hindsight, per Graham v. Connor.
- When faced with vehicle threats, officers must rapidly assess imminent risk and act within split seconds under legal precedent.