What official medical documentation has been released about Jonathan Ross’s injuries, and how can the public access it?
Executive summary
Officially released, verifiable medical documentation confirming that ICE agent Jonathan Ross suffered internal bleeding after the Jan. 7 Minneapolis shooting does not exist in the public record; reporting that Ross experienced “internal bleeding” is based on anonymous government officials and statements that he was taken to a hospital and released the same day [1] [2] [3], while publicly accessible court records and incident reports document an earlier June dragging that resulted in stitches and abrasions [4] [5] [6].
1. What reporters and officials have publicly said about Ross’s injuries
Major news outlets have reported that two U.S. officials briefed on Ross’s condition told CBS News and ABC News that he suffered internal bleeding to the torso after the January encounter [1] [2], and the Department of Homeland Security and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Ross was taken to a hospital and released the same day [1] [3]; those accounts rely on unnamed sources and agency statements rather than on released medical records [1] [7].
2. What has been entered into the public record: court records and police exhibits
What is publicly documented in court and police records is from a separate June incident in which an agent identified as Jonathan Ross was dragged by a fleeing vehicle and later required stitches and suffered abrasions, details that appear in federal court filings and were reported by outlets including the BBC and The Washington Post [5] [4], and local reporting from KSTP states that incident reports and 911 transcripts naming “Officer Ross” were obtained by the news outlet and that an exhibit list described photos of his injuries [8].
3. What has not been produced or verified: medical records and “internal bleeding” claims
Independent fact-checking and public statements indicate there is no publicly released or independently verified medical documentation—no hospital records or physician reports—confirming that Ross suffered internal bleeding after the January shooting; a social-media fact check asserted medical records are private and that the internal-bleeding claim has not been documented in released records [9], and multiple outlets note that the DHS did not provide details on severity, timing, diagnosis, or treatment when asked [3].
4. How the public can access the existing documentation that does exist
Members of the public can access the court records and related exhibits tied to the June dragging incident through the federal court system and through the reporting outlets that obtained and published those records—news organizations have cited specific court filings and trial transcripts that are part of the public docket [4] [6] [8]; local police incident reports and 911 transcripts that news organizations have obtained may also be available through public records requests to the relevant municipal agencies or via the outlets that published them [8], but there is no indication in available reporting that hospital medical records from the January encounter have been released.
5. Limits of public reporting and what would be required to change the record
Because medical records are generally private unless a patient waives release or they are entered into evidence in court, the absence of hospital documentation in the public record means that media reports of “internal bleeding” rest on anonymous official briefings rather than on disclosed medical files [9] [1]; absent a court filing that includes medical records or an official release from Ross or the treating facility, the public cannot verify the internal-bleeding claim beyond the anonymous-source reports and agency statements that an officer received treatment and was released the same day [1] [3].