Billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman has publicly defended his decision to donate $10,000 to a fundraiser for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent who fatally shot 37-year-old mother-of-three Renee Good in Minneapolis.
Ackman's Public Defence on Social Media
In a lengthy post on X, the founder and CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management addressed the significant backlash he has received since being listed as the top donor to a GoFundMe campaign for agent Jonathan Ross. Ackman claimed he has been 'widely reviled (and worse) by many on social and mainstream media' for his contribution.
He argued that his donation has been mischaracterised as 'giving a reward to the murderer of Renee Good', suggesting this framing was used to generate clicks and advance political agendas. Ackman insisted his purpose was not political but rather a continuation of his longstanding commitment to assisting those accused of crimes by helping fund their legal defence.
The billionaire also revealed he attempted to donate to an online fundraiser for Good's family but found it had already closed after raising more than $1.5 million.
Personal Experience Informs Principle
Ackman linked his support for Ross to his own experience facing a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into his former hedge fund, Gotham Partners, in 2003. He described being 'convicted in the headlines' for nearly a year before the investigation ended with no finding of wrongdoing, though public exoneration took years.
'I have real-life perspective on what life is like for the accused, particularly someone who believes and/or knows that they are innocent,' Ackman wrote. He painted a grim picture of the accused becoming unemployed, facing public scorn, financial pressure, death threats, and abandoned by friends and family in the social media era.
This experience, he stated, made him a 'fierce advocate for the American legal principle that one is presumed innocent until proven guilty'. He urged the public not to rush to judgment and to let the justice system work.
The Shooting Incident and Aftermath
The controversy stems from an incident last week where agent Jonathan Ross was captured on camera firing his weapon at Renee Good as she drove away. Video shows Ross approaching Good's stopped Honda Pilot, grabbing the handle, and allegedly demanding she open the door.
When the vehicle began to pull forward, Ross fired three shots, jumping back as it moved toward him. It remains unclear if the vehicle made contact. After the shooting, the SUV crashed into two parked cars. Later surveillance footage showed Good had apparently been blocking the road with her SUV for four minutes prior.
A passenger, believed to be Good's wife Rebecca, exited the vehicle about 20 seconds after they arrived and began filming. There is speculation she exited specifically to document any potential clash with federal agents.
Trump administration officials have defended Ross's actions. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem stated he was an experienced professional who followed his training, believing Good was trying to run him over, an act she labelled 'domestic terrorism'. Former President Donald Trump called Good a 'professional agitator' and claimed the shooting was in 'self-defence'.
Legal and Investigative Context
Ackman noted in a follow-up post that Ross has not been charged with any crime and has only been 'convicted by some in the world of public opinion'. According to The New York Times, it is now unlikely Ross will face criminal charges.
Sources indicate the Justice Department's civil rights division, which typically probes police-involved shootings, has not opened an investigation into whether Ross violated Good's federal rights. Instead, the department is reportedly planning to investigate a wider group of activists involved in Minneapolis neighbourhood ICE watch activities, whom they believe were 'instigators' of the incident.
The US Attorney's Office in Minnesota has been ordered to investigate Rebecca Good, though the specific suspected crimes are unclear.
Concluding his defence, Ackman warned: 'One day you may find yourself accused of a crime you did not commit without the financial resources needed to defend yourself.' He framed the ability to fund a defence as one of the greatest aspects of the country, stating a world where the accused cannot afford representation is not one anyone should want.
