«Do not tell us what our eyes do not see. Don't try to tell us that what we see isn't there. In America, government officials should never lie to the public about what they see»
«Renee Good's case was breaking the dam. And now Alex Pretti's case is what we call the waterfall», attorney Antonio Romanucci told me. After representing the family of George Floyd, he is now working on behalf of the Good family to pursue truth and justice.
This case is not just about a 37-year-old woman killed by an ICE agent. Its significance concerns the fate of America, and indirectly ours. That is why the interview, first published in Italian, is now available here in an extended version and in its original language (English).
What is your goal with Renee Good’s case?
There is no doubt that we have goals for the Renee Good family. Number one is to achieve justice, and that would be through the civil case, through the lawsuit that we will file against the government, holding them accountable for Renee’s death, and ultimately, once we achieve transparency we feel very comfortable bringing this case to trial: that would be an accomplishment in and of itself, because then the people can decide - with all the facts and evidence - what happened. That’s our goal.
How did you end up handling this case?
I have a lot of experience in Minnesota, I represented the family of George Floyd along with my dear brother Benjamin Cramp. Because of my presence in Minnesota and because of our success there, I think people realized that I am the right person for the job, and I feel very honored to be representing the Renee Good family.
Both George Floyd and Renee Good’s killings are related to state violence, they sparked protests and became turning points. In 2020 collective uproar was related to racial discrimination and police brutality. Minneapolis is now experiencing indiscriminate violence against anyone who dissents, anyone who cares about their community. Is an authoritarian shift underway in the United States?
Here's what I can say about my experience between the representation of Floyd in America and now the representation of Good. When George Floyd happened, on May 25th of 2020, it was a very uncertain time, not only in America, but in the world. We were in the middle of a COVID-19 breakout. We were in a lockdown situation. George Floyd captured the attention of the world because he narrated his own death over the five minutes that he was being held down on the ground. He told the police over and over he could not breathe. He told the police over and over that he wanted his mama. And eventually we know he died as a result of being murdered. And so there was worldwide dissent over police practices, over the racism that they felt that they saw of white police officers holding down a black man and suffocating him and killing him. What happened there was that there were a lot of people in this country, Congress, senators, representatives, governors, people, they all wanted change. They wanted something to change. And we did get change. Police departments across the country modified their police directives and orders so that the type of death that George Floyd underwent, which was a neck hold and a choke hold, could never happen again. So that when you restrain somebody, you make sure that you don't kill them.
And so there was an appetite for change. The local government, whether it was the mayor, the governor, the senators of Minneapolis, were all united in this quest for change. And now when we come to Renée, we see that there really are two different factions that are fighting here. And they're fighting each other so that now the people of Minneapolis are suffering. The people of Minneapolis cannot leave. They live there. ICE and Border Patrol can leave and they should leave. There should be a hard reset where they leave and they reassess their mission because there isn't the unification, there isn't the cooperation that existed five and a half years ago when George was murdered. There is division. There's a war going on, so to speak, between our own federal government and the invasion of an American city. It doesn't make sense. It's uncharted. It's not to be described. The people of Minneapolis are good people. They are nice people. They should not be treated in a way that violates their rights hundreds of times per day in this way.
You say there is an ongoing war. But Minnesota didn’t choose to fight it: is the Trump administration pursuing a deliberate strategy of chaos?
This government clearly went into Minnesota wanting to create chaos. Why? Well, let's hope it wasn't for any retribution because the governor was a candidate for vice president against this president. Let's hope that there wasn't chaos created because they wanted to do it. But either way, there is chaos right now, and when there is chaos, the good minds then hold back, and they reassess, and they figure out what they can do which is better so that they don’t have a chaotic moment. I’ve heard earlier that President Obama - when he was in office - he deported three million people during his presidency; did anyone see this sort of behavior by ICE or Border Patrol? Nobody could even get the definition of what ICE and BP are, but we know what they are now.
What we saw with Good and Pretti’s shootings is that the Trump administration didn’t even wait for an investigation before jumping to conclusions, which were then contradicted by videos. Concerns have been raised about evidence being destroyed or altered. Do you feel you are operating in a fair environment?
It's very problematic right now that we know that the evidence that ultimately could be required to prove our case is only under the control of the federal government, and that they will not allow anybody else to share in their investigation. Now, I am not saying that the federal government must allow us to participate in their investigation. However, because we are concerned that they have not responded to us for our letter of preservation of the important evidence, because they have said in the Rene Good case that they are not investigating the officer, that raises concerns in my eyes as an attorney whether or not the evidence that they have in their possession will not only be preserved, but maintained, so that it doesn't get destroyed or altered or modified in order for us to prove our case.
I know as a practicing lawyer that when there is the anticipation of litigation, that you must, you have a duty to preserve evidence. And I am hoping that my American government, my federal government, understands that they must do what is legally and morally correct in this case, and preserve evidence; and if they are closing the investigation, they should release the evidence to us.
What is your strategy to get justice?
Well, with the consent of Renée's family, we have tried to be the voice of reason and the voice of truth. And that's why we've said that we are going to remain transparent with what our investigation comes up with. That's why we released our preservation letter after it was sent out. That's why we released our autopsy findings after they came out last week. Because we want the American people, the citizens of Minneapolis to see what we're doing so they can understand the truth. Now, your question is: how do we get justice? Well, we get justice through transparency. Let us see the evidence. Don't hide it from us. Show us what you're talking about us.
Do not gaslight us. Do not tell us what our eyes do not see. Okay? We see what we see on those videos. Don't try to tell us that what we see isn't there. That is not what we do in America. In America, government officials should never lie to the public about what they see. And everybody can see it. It's on video. Don't lie. Don't tell us that Alex Pretti was brandishing a weapon when he was not. He never had it in his hand. He was carrying it lawfully in his side holster.
So that is how we get to justice, by being truthful and by not drawing conclusions before all the facts are in, like we saw what Kristi Noem did or Gregory Bovino or even our Vice President J.D. Vance, drawing conclusions before the evidence was in and saying that both were terrible things. I won't even dignify to repeat what they said that they were because it's slanderous. And I won't say it. But they said terrible things about both of them as to who they were not and instead never said who they really were, human beings with souls.
I can remember the US President accusing a bystander at Good shooting of being a «professional» agitator. Would you give us a couple examples of lies and gaslighting?
Well, as I said, I can, be very specific as to the lies about Renee, one of them being that she was intentionally trying to run over Jonathan Ross. The car was moving in the opposite direction of Jonathan Ross. The wheels were not turned in the direction towards him. That's a lie. That's a false narrative that is put out there, so that part of the base here in America says, oh, look, she was trying to run him over, therefore, she deserved to die. No.
The second thing that they do is classic. And that's always blaming the victim. This blaming the victim, I think to me is one of the most hurtful things that any family who has suffered a loss like this can hear. Are you telling me that Renee didn't have the right to be on the streets of Minneapolis? That Alex did not have a right to be on the streets? That everybody is saying had they not been there, it wouldn't have happened? Well, I guess if I wouldn't have come to work this morning, I might not have been hit by a car.
That's not how life works. So, stop with the lies. Please tell the truth. Do not gaslight us and be transparent. And that's how you gain the trust of people. And maybe you'll see the people of Minneapolis be more accepting of immigration enforcement as opposed to not wanting it there.
You’ve just made the name of Rene Good's shooter, although there was no investigation bringing to light such a name. Is this administration granting a de facto impunity to the agents, which are not even identifiable?
There is no doubt that what’s happening in this country with these immigration enforcement agents is that they are creating another lie by telling the American people and the agents that they have absolute immunity. By saying that, these agents then act with absolute impunity because they know that there is no fear or repercussion for either discipline or criminal charges. Because if they don't investigate, if the government doesn't investigate, like they said what will happen in Renee's case - they don't investigate. There are no criminal charges. They're trying to block the civil investigation. There's no administrative investigation because they said they won't investigate. In fact, everybody's still doing their job. So therefore, these agents, knowing that there's no repercussions because they think they have absolute immunity, really will act with 100% impunity. And they'll continue to make the same mistakes over and over again.
With Renee, think of what happened: we thought that there was a lesson learned there. We thought that Rene's death would have stopped all this escalation and deadly force. Instead, it happened again less than two weeks later. Renee's case was breaking the dam. And now Alex's case is what we call the waterfall.
So, if I understand it correctly, you're saying that in legal terms, no impunity has been introduced. But the way the case was handled seems designed to cover up responsibilities.
Exactly.
Is there any counter power to that? What are the limits to the arbitrariness of this administration?
I don’t know what the limits are of this administration in making its own decision, deciding whether to investigate or not. I can tell you in all the years and decades that I’ve been handling these types of cases, I have never seen an agency not to investigate a law enforcement shooting of a citizen. That is standard protocol, because we always must see whether, number one, civil rights were violated. And number two, if the civil rights were not violated, is there a teaching moment in that encounter that could prevent another loss of life? And of course, if there is a civil rights violation, there are consequences. That's why we hold people accountable, criminally, administratively, and civilly. So those are the avenues that we pursue. And for them to say no investigation is uncharted territory. It is not protocol. And what it does is it eliminates accountability.
Do you have any leeway, in such a context, with no criminal charges?
Criminal charges, if indeed there is criminal charges to be brought here, it can be brought next month, in one year, in five years. So, the period to bring murder charges, whether it's first degree or second degree or manslaughter, there's time here to do that. What we do hope is that between the investigation that the state brings, the one that we bring, that we can at least gain enough evidence where somebody brings charges. If it's not the federal government, then the state could bring charges.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) reported that a witness in Pretti shooting was afraid: «Only hours have passed since they shot a man right in front of me and I don't feel like I can go home because I heard agents were looking for me. I do know that they're not telling the truth about what happened. I've heard that other witnesses might have been arrested». Is the right to properly testify at risk too?
There is no doubt that witness testimony is very important, and for witnesses to be afraid to speak because they know that immigration agents or border patrol agents are looking for them or even hunting them, what is the consequence there? Something could happen to the witness where they're intimidated to change their story. There's a lot going on here, and I place the blame at the feet of the federal government for not being transparent and allowing these agents to act with impunity.
Several resignations have been reported in connection with the handling of the investigation related to Renee Good’s case.
Yes, there have been many resignations in Minneapolis of very important government officials, many of them being federal prosecutors. And I commend them for having the dignity and the ethics and the morality of them doing their job as opposed to being told what their job should be. Federal prosecutors have a sworn duty that they are to prosecute crimes with evidence in front of them. They do not prosecute crimes when there's no evidence and they certainly do not drum up charges against anybody without evidence. And so, the fact that there was no investigation here of the police, of the law enforcement officer in Renee Good's case is very significant. They felt that it was a departure from what is standard operating procedure. They are resigning because of their morals, because they feel that the standards that they have in their job are not being upheld and they cannot do their job. So, they were not forced to resign, they did it because of their own voluntariness. The fact that they resigned is very significant and tells a tale about what the government is doing in Minneapolis.
I have seen testimonies from people who do not leave their homes for fear of the agents: a sort of lockdown induced by terror. And even at home you are no longer safe, as agents break in without a warrant. This is not a fight against illegal migration, this seems a way to impose a regime of terror. What about the US Constitution?
Francesca, I can’t even begin to tell you how many violations there are: the violations that we are seeing here are so vast! The first amendment violations, the right to peacefully assemble and the freedom of speech; the second amendment violation of legally baring arms as Pretti was. The fourth: being free from unlawful search and seizure of your person and property; the fourteenth, having due process, and the list goes on and on. There are hundreds of these constitutional violations happening daily, and as a civil rights lawyer I can tell you we look at this and it sickens us.
© Riproduzione riservata
