On September 12, 2025, ICE agents conducting a “targeted enforcement mission” and attempted to stop a vehicle driven by Silverio Villegas-Gonzalez, a 38-year-old Mexican national, in Franklin Park, Illinois. The encounter escalated when Villegas-Gonzalez refused to comply with commands and attempted to flee in his vehicle. At this point however, the government’s narrative and surveillance footage diverge.

Department of Homeland Security and ICE officials stated that Villegas-Gonzalez “struck an officer” and “dragged him a significant distance,” causing “severe injuries.” If you watch the footage, that’s not the case at all. Surveillance footage from a nearby nail salon and body camera video from Franklin Park police (who arrived after the shooting) do not show an agent being dragged or trapped on the hood of the car. Instead, the footage shows agents on both sides of the vehicle. As Villegas-Gonzalez reverses and attempts to drive away, one agent moves along with the car for a moment while holding the window frame; the officer is not trapped or pulled under. Not to mention, in the Franklin Park police body cam video, the ICE agent who fired the shots is heard describing his own injuries as “nothing major,” telling other officers he was “dragged a little bit.” This directly contradicted the “severe injuries” initially reported by federal officials. 

Additionally, the autopsy later revealed that Villegas-Gonzalez was shot at close range through the back of his neck, which suggests that the officer was standing behind the vehicle when firing shots. It seems like the officer was “holding” onto the vehicle window frame and being dragged along slightly before getting off and firing shots. His injuries were small (a left knee scratch, minor lacerations to his hands, minor elbow injury, torn clothing; i.e. nothing more significant than what would happen if he fell of riding a bike). 

Ultimately, was the officer truly facing an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury?  

In Graham v. Connor (1989), the Supreme Court established that an officer’s use of force must be judged based on “objective reasonableness” from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the benefit of hindsight. Here, if the facts demonstrate that the agent was indeed being dragged by a moving vehicle, a court would likely find that a reasonable officer in that same position would possess a reasonable belief of an imminent threat serious bodily injury. But to argue here that he was “fearful of death” is a very long shot. If you look at the surveillance, the vehicle was moving slowly, what looks like approximately 15 miles per hour. 

A vehicle is legally treated as a deadly weapon because its mass and velocity are capable of crushing or dragging a person to death. But what’s potential and what’s actually occurring are two different things. If Villegas-Gonzalez had the officer on top of his car and was driving very fast, then it makes sense, but that’s not the case here. Sounds more like an ICE agent who lost his cool and used this as an excuse for fire his weapon. I still don’t understand why aren’t cops just trained to fire shots at the tires and then get in their car to chase. That will always be a safer option. 

The standard for “justification of deadly force” extends beyond the presence of a firearm to include any object that can be usedas a deadly weapon. A firearm is the most clear-cut example, but there are less lethal instruments that can meet the threshold for a deadly threat depending on the circumstances. A (high-speed) vehicle is one of them. A blunt object like a baton, heavy stick, or baseball bat may not automatically justify a lethal response from a distance, but it becomes a deadly weapon if a suspect attempts to strike an officer in a vulnerable area, such as the head or neck, where a single blow could cause a permanent or fatal injury. Ultimately, the legality of the force hinges on whether the suspect possesses the immediate capability and intent to cause grave physical harm, regardless of whether that threat is delivered via a bullet, a blade, or a blunt instrument.

Here, Villegas-Gonzalez does not seem to have the capability (low-speed) nor the intent to kill or cause serious bodily injury. 

***

This is an excerpt of Forever Improving, 4.26.26