Did the officer Ross actually have internal Bleeding
Executive summary
The Department of Homeland Security and multiple U.S. outlets reported that ICE agent Jonathan Ross suffered internal bleeding after the Jan. 7 Minneapolis encounter in which he shot Renee Good, but officials have not disclosed the extent or medical details of that bleeding and available video does not clearly show him being struck by the vehicle [1] [2] [3].
1. Official confirmations: DHS and federal spokespeople say internal bleeding occurred
Multiple national outlets quoting DHS officials report that Jonathan Ross sustained internal bleeding to his torso after the incident, with DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin confirming the injury to news organizations and DHS sources telling CBS News and ABC News the same [1] [2] [4]; USA TODAY and Newsweek likewise cite a DHS confirmation that Ross “suffered internal bleeding” though they emphasize officials would not specify severity [3] [5].
2. What officials have made public — treatment and release, but no clinical specifics
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and other federal officials said Ross went to a hospital the day of the shooting, was treated and released the same day and returned home, but they declined to provide clinical details about the internal bleeding, leaving the degree and medical implications unspecified in public statements [1] [3] [6].
3. The evidentiary picture: video, witness accounts, and the limits of footage
Footage from the scene shows Ross walking away after the shooting, and multiple reports note that the video circulating so far does not clearly show the vehicle making contact with him; outlets including ABC News and Fox 9 cite officials saying available video doesn’t conclusively depict a strike even as DHS says he was struck by the vehicle [2] [7] [4].
4. Conflicting narratives and political framing around the injury
Federal officials have framed Ross’s injuries as the result of being struck by Good’s vehicle and used that account to justify law enforcement actions and depict the encounter as dangerous to officers [4] [6], while local critics and some analysts emphasize that video does not clearly corroborate a strike and therefore caution against relying solely on federal characterization — reporting from The Independent and local outlets highlights that discrepancy [8] [9].
5. Media consistency: broad coverage but a consistent gap on severity
Across CBS, ABC, Fox, USA TODAY, Newsweek, The Hill and regional outlets, the core factual claims are consistent: DHS or U.S. officials say Ross suffered internal bleeding, but virtually every outlet also notes the extent and seriousness of that bleeding remain unclear because officials have declined to provide more detail [1] [2] [4] [3] [5] [10].
6. What reporting does not show — unanswered medical and forensic questions
No provided reporting supplies medical records, a treating physician’s report, forensic evidence tying the internal bleeding directly to vehicle contact, or a clear video showing the impact; therefore it is not possible from the available sources to independently verify how severe the internal bleeding was, precisely how it was caused, or whether it affected Ross’s ability to act during the encounter [1] [7] [3] [2].
7. Bottom line: did Ross actually have internal bleeding?
Yes — multiple DHS officials and mainstream outlets report that Jonathan Ross suffered internal bleeding to his torso following the Jan. 7 encounter, and DHS has repeatedly confirmed that account to news organizations [1] [2] [3]. However, the extent, medical significance and direct causal chain (for example, whether video evidence corroborates a vehicle strike causing the bleeding) remain publicly undocumented in the sources provided, leaving important factual gaps that federal officials have not filled [7] [3] [8].