Did ICE agent Ross let out a loud cry just before he shot Renee Good?
Executive summary
The available reporting contains no documented, credible claim that ICE agent Jonathan Ross “let out a loud cry” immediately before firing at Renee Good; instead, audio and video analyses published by national outlets identify a male voice captured on the agent’s recording saying an expletive, and visual evidence shows Ross standing and moving after the shots were fired [1] [2]. Competing narratives about injuries to Ross and the dynamics of the encounter exist in the press, but none of the provided sources reports a loud cry by Ross as a factual event [3] [4].
1. What the recordings actually captured
News organizations that analyzed the agent’s phone recording and other footage report a male voice saying “fucking bitch” as the vehicle crashed and as Ross returned to colleagues, and the New York Times’s voice and video analysis concluded the voice was Ross’s rather than a cry or anguished exclamation [1] [2]. Multiple outlets note that the agent’s own recording includes that language and that Ross approached the crashed SUV, told colleagues to call 911 and remained on scene for more than a minute—details that align with an audible expletive rather than a “loud cry” immediately before the shooting [1].
2. What visual evidence shows about Ross’s posture and movement
Video analyses by The New York Times and others emphasize that Ross stayed upright and mobile throughout the episode and that there is “no indication” he had been run over or incapacitated immediately before firing—findings that undercut depictions of a panicked, wounded cry triggering the shooting [2]. Local reporting and Star Tribune analysis reached similar conclusions about Ross’s movement after the shooting, and incident reports contain no documentation that he required on-scene medical attention after Good was killed [1] [5].
3. Conflicting claims about injuries and the impulse to frame the moment
Federal officials and some outlets reported Ross later suffered internal bleeding, a claim repeated in several news stories but treated with caution inside newsrooms and by other analysts; CBS’s reporting of internal bleeding drew internal skepticism at that network, while DHS and The Hill also cited a DHS official saying Ross experienced internal bleeding—none of which establishes a loud cry immediately before the shooting [3] [4]. The presence of competing accounts about Ross’s post-incident condition demonstrates how narratives about what motivated the shooting can be shaped by selective emphasis on different fragments of reporting.
4. Where the “loud cry” assertion appears—and where it does not
Among the provided sources—mainstream outlets that examined video and audio—none documented a loud cry by Ross just before he fired; instead, press reporting focuses on the audible expletive on Ross’s recording, the shots being fired into a moving SUV, the number and placement of Good’s wounds, and the chaotic aftermath captured in emergency and police reports [1] [6] [7] [5]. Social and partisan commentary has amplified various characterizations of the moment for political purposes, but the reviewed investigative and on-the-record reporting does not support the specific claim of a loud cry immediately preceding the shooting [1] [2].
5. Limits of the record and why precision matters
Reporting to date is constrained by the available footage, redactions in official reports, and the early circulation of anonymously sourced briefings about injuries; while analyses agree on an expletive captured on audio and on Ross’s continued mobility after the shooting, definitive forensic audio evidence of any emotional utterance labeled a “loud cry” is not present in the cited accounts, and the sources do not claim such a cry occurred [1] [3] [2]. Given the stakes—legal inquiries, public protests, and competing political narratives—precise description of what the recordings show (expletive, movement, shots fired) is essential, and the public record provided here does not substantiate the “loud cry” formulation.