At a Glance
- FBI Special Agent Bernardo Medellin testified he never heard Roberto Carlos Muñoz-Guatemala request an attorney during a June 2023 operation.
- ICE Agent Jonathan Ross previously claimed under oath that Muñoz-Guatemala asked for a lawyer.
- The operation ultimately led to the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good last week.
- Why it matters: The contradiction raises questions about whether Ross followed federal training protocols and could impact the credibility of his testimony.
A federal agent’s testimony last month in a Minnesota courtroom directly contradicts a key claim made by ICE Agent Jonathan Ross about a June 2023 operation that preceded the recent fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother.
The Contradiction
Medellin’s testimony challenges Ross’s sworn statement that Muñoz-Guatemala had requested legal counsel during their initial encounter. Ross had testified that after following Muñoz-Guatemala in an unmarked vehicle, he approached the man wearing ranger green and gray with his badge visible on his belt.
According to Ross’s testimony, he asked Muñoz-Guatemala to roll down his window and open the door. When the man refused, Ross used a special tool to break the rear driver side window and reached into the vehicle. Muñoz-Guatemala then accelerated, eventually shaking Ross who had fired his Taser at the moving vehicle.
Ross testified that he required 33 stitches due to injuries sustained during the incident. Muñoz-Guatemala was later convicted of assault on a federal officer with a dangerous weapon.
The Attorney Request Claim
During the trial, prosecutors attempted to establish that Muñoz-Guatemala understood Ross was a federal law enforcement officer. Ross testified that he repeatedly identified himself as law enforcement in both English and Spanish, stating he had “no concerns” about language barriers since Muñoz-Guatemala replied to him in English.
Assistant US Attorney Raphael Coburn questioned Ross about these interactions: “When you say, ‘replied back in English,’ what do you mean?”
“He would-he would reply back he wants his attorney, I believe he said,” Ross responded.
This claim surprised both Muñoz-Guatemala’s defense attorney, Eric Newmark, and federal prosecutors, as it had never been mentioned during pretrial interviews or previous statements.
“I was, frankly, quite shocked that he said it,” Newmark told District Court Judge Jeffrey Bryan. “It was not in any of his previous statements, and it’s my understanding he never-the government was as surprised as I was that he said it.”
Newmark explained that Ross’s claim was significant because it related to whether Muñoz-Guatemala “believed he was talking to law enforcement or someone who was trying to do him harm.”
During cross-examination, Newmark pressed Ross on why this alleged attorney request had never been mentioned during his FBI interview or pretrial preparation. Ross conceded it was “fair to say” he had not previously made this claim.
The FBI Agent’s Testimony
The contradiction emerged when Newmark cross-examined Medellin, who participated in the operation under Ross’s leadership. Medellin described Muñoz-Guatemala’s English as limited, noting the court provided an interpreter during the two-day trial.
“You never heard Mr. Muñoz-Guatemala ask for an attorney, did you?” Newmark asked.
“No,” Medellin replied, confirming he had overheard most or all of the conversation and never heard Muñoz-Guatemala request a lawyer.
Medellin also testified that Muñoz-Guatemala had repeatedly asked Ross to identify himself during the encounter.
Connections to the Fatal Shooting
The court testimony takes on new significance following the February 2025 fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good. Multiple media outlets have identified Ross as the shooter, though the Trump administration has not confirmed these reports.
Vice President JD Vance’s description of the shooter’s biography matches details of Ross’s background, according to News Of Fort Worth‘s reporting.
The shooting occurred during what appears to be a related operation, raising questions about whether Ross followed proper federal protocols and training during high-stakes encounters with civilians.
Legal Implications
The discrepancy between Ross’s and Medellin’s testimony could have significant implications for ongoing legal proceedings and internal investigations. The contradiction centers on a crucial detail that affects the credibility of Ross’s account and his adherence to federal training protocols.
When asked by News Of Fort Worth about Ross’s credibility, Newmark declined to comment directly but indicated his cross-examination strategy spoke for itself: “I’m not commenting about this case as it is still pending, but I think you can tell by my questioning of him and others what I thought about that.”
The case highlights ongoing concerns about transparency and accountability in federal law enforcement operations, particularly those involving immigration enforcement and the use of deadly force.
Federal training protocols emphasize the importance of accurate reporting and following proper procedures during civilian encounters. Medellin’s testimony about these training requirements raises questions about whether they were properly followed during the June 2023 operation.
The fatal shooting of Good and the contradictions in Ross’s testimony may prompt additional scrutiny of ICE operations and the agency’s oversight of its agents’ conduct during high-risk encounters.
