Did Renee good try to run over agent

Checked on January 25, 2026
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Publicly released videos and multiple news analyses do not corroborate federal officials’ assertions that Renee Good deliberately attempted to run over an ICE agent; footage from the agent’s phone and other clips show her vehicle moving away or not clearly aimed at striking the officer, while federal spokespeople maintain she “weaponized” her car — a factual disagreement that hinges on interpretation of limited video evidence and unresolved investigatory findings [1] [2] [3].

1. What the agent’s phone video shows — and does not show

A 47‑second cellphone clip published by Alpha News and verified by outlets like CBC captures the ICE officer’s perspective in the seconds before he fired; defenders of the agent say it corroborates DHS’s claim that Good “weaponized” her vehicle, but analysts and some independent observers conclude the footage does not depict a clear, intentional attempt to run him over and instead shows movements consistent with steering away as she tried to leave the scene [1] [2].

2. Official assertions versus independent readings of the tapes

DHS and senior administration figures publicly described the incident as an attempted vehicular assault and even framed it as “domestic terrorism,” while civil‑liberties and legal analysts, as well as visual examinations by multiple news organizations, have argued that the videos “do not depict an individual trying to kill a law enforcement officer” and that the available clips contradict the forceful characterizations offered by officials [3] [2].

3. Conflicting witness statements and partisan narratives

At least one partisan outlet published an account claiming Good’s partner urged her to “drive, baby, drive” and that Good struck the agent, a version used by some commentators to justify criminal charges, but that claim conflicts with other video evidence and reporting; federal investigators have also scrutinized Good’s partner, adding to the politically charged competing narratives about what occurred in the moments before the shooting [4] [5].

4. The legal and investigative aftermath that shapes interpretation

The Justice Department and associated officials have steered parts of the probe — with reporting that FBI agents were at one point directed to shift language away from a civil‑rights inquiry toward a potential assault investigation — and the BCA’s access and the framing of the inquiry have been contested, which complicates public confidence in a neutral fact‑finding process [6] [7].

5. Medical and forensic facts that are undisputed

Autopsy reporting and the county medical examiner’s ruling establish that Renee Good was shot multiple times and that her death has been ruled a homicide, facts that are not in dispute in coverage even as parties fight over the conduct that led to the shooting [2] [8].

6. Bottom line: the evidence on intent is inconclusive but leans against the claim she deliberately tried to run an agent over

Based on available, publicly released video and sober legal analysis, the more defensible reading is that the record does not support the administration’s strong claim that Good intentionally drove to kill an officer; however, absent the full archive of body‑cam and other high‑quality footage, forensic reconstructions, and final prosecutorial determinations, definitive adjudication of Good’s subjective intent is not possible from the public record alone — and official moves to reframe the investigation and to investigate Good’s partner reveal political stakes that further muddy conclusions [1] [3] [6].

Want to dive deeper?
What additional video and forensic evidence have investigators collected in the Renee Good case and what do they show?
How have federal agencies historically classified vehicular encounters with protesters, and what guidance governs use of lethal force?
What legal standards determine whether an officer’s use of deadly force is justified when a vehicle is involved?