Uvalde officer Gonzales may have suffered from ‘tunnel vision,’ defense witness says
A memorial dedicated to the 19 children and two adults murdered on May 24,2022 during a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School is seen on January 05, 2026 in Uvalde, Texas. Brandon Bell/Getty Images
(CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas) — Former Uvalde, Texas, school police officer Adrian Gonzales could have suffered from “inattentive blindness” and “tunnel vision” when he responded to the Robb Elementary School shooting, a former officer testified for the defense on Tuesday.
Former San Antonio police officer Willie Cantu said the jurors are unlikely to “understand just how bad” the tunnel vision could be during an emergency response.
To describe “inattentive blindness,” Cantu compared the experience to struggling to find your car keys when you are running late for work.
“It’s like when you get stressed. I’m late for work and I need to find my keys to my car. I can’t find my keys, and you have them in your hand,” he said.
Cantu attempted to defend Gonzales’ actions on May 24, 2022 — citing the real-time challenges he faced as one of the first officers to respond — as defense lawyers pushed back on the prosecution’s allegation that Gonzales “intentionally, knowingly, recklessly and with criminal negligence” endangered students.
Cantu also tried to cast doubt on the reliability of teaching aide Melodye Flores, who testified for the prosecution that she tried to warn Gonzales about the location of the shooter.
“No disrespect to Flores at all, she was definitely there, experienced all the trauma that was going on, but people process that type of stuff differently,” Cantu said.
Cantu also attempted to highlight the inaction of other officers, including one who monitored the perimeter of the school when he arrived.
“It really surprised me that he was right there and just pretty much taken, I’d say a tertiary role,” he remarked.
The only other defense witness was Claudia Rodriguez, a secretary at the funeral home that neighbored Robb.
Rodriguez told jurors that she witnessed gunman Salvador Ramos exit his car with a rifle after crashing into a ditch, and she said Ramos ducked behind a nearby parked car when Gonzales drove by him. That move, defense lawyers allege, prevented Gonzales from being able to clearly spot the gunman when he first arrived at the school.
“And at the time you see the white car [driven by Gonzales], you see the figure, kind of ducking down between the cars. Is that how you remember seeing it?” defense attorney Jason Goss asked.
“Yes sir,” Rodriguez replied.
Rodriguez also testified that she tried to warn other arriving officers that the shooter entered the school, but they did not run in to stop him.
“Gilbert [Limones, another funeral home employee,] and I are yelling at them upon their arrival and after they exited their car that he’s already inside,” she said.
“Did those officers then go immediately to where you told them and run inside the building?” Goss asked.
“No. I believe, if I remember correctly, they got back into the car and went around the school towards the front of Robb,” she said.
Defense lawyers rested their case on Tuesday after testimony from Cantu and Rodriguez. Closing statements are set for Wednesday.
Prosecutors allege Gonzales, who is charged with 29 counts of child endangerment, did not follow his training and endangered the 19 students who died and an additional 10 surviving students.
Flores, the teaching aide, testified that she repeatedly urged Gonzales to intervene in the shooting, but said he did “nothing” in those crucial moments.
Gonzales has pleaded not guilty and his lawyers argue he is being unfairly blamed for a broader law enforcement failure that day. He could face the rest of his life in prison if convicted of all counts.
(NEW YORK) — Commodities from Indonesia beyond shrimp will almost certainly test positive for a radioactive isotope in the coming weeks and months, according to a new intelligence bulletin that follows a recall last month of 84,000 bags of frozen raw shrimp imported from Indonesia.
Federal regulators announced the recall on Dec. 19, after finding the shrimp may have been prepared, packed or held under conditions that could have exposed them to cesium-137, a radioactive isotope.
The new Homeland Security bulletin, a copy of which was obtained by ABC News, said the contamination is “very likely” to continue for the foreseeable future and spread beyond Indonesian imports that have already been interdicted — including shrimp, as well as spices and sneakers.
“Due to the high number of factories and wide variety of goods produced at facilities in the area of the contamination, additional commodities from Indonesia will almost certainly test positive for Cs-137 in the coming weeks and months,” the bulletin said. “While improbable, we cannot rule out the potential that Cs-137 contaminated goods will arrive in the United States via tourism or passenger travel.”
The bulletin noted that the U.S. is “nearly certain” the contamination was not intentional and that Customs and Border Protection is “well postured to detect and interdict all impacted bulk cargo shipments, reducing the likelihood that the public will encounter contaminated commodities shipped in bulk from Indonesia.”
The December shrimp recall followed a recall of imported shrimp that began in August and was processed by the same Indonesian company, PT. Bahari Makmur Sejati, according to the FDA.
The FDA said it has also detected the presence of cesium-137 in one sample of cloves from the Indonesian-based company PT Natural Java Spice.
Contaminated sneakers originating from Indonesia were also interdicted at several U.S. ports last summer, according to the DHS bulletin.
At this time, no product that has tested positive or alerted for cesium-137 has entered the U.S. marketplace, the FDA said.
U.S. Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem looks on during a meeting of the Cabinet in the Cabinet Room of the White House on January 29, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
(MINNEAPOLIS) — Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Thursday said that in the aftermath of the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday, federal officials issued public statements about the incident based on “the best information” they had at the time and “what we knew to be true on the ground.”
Noem previously suggested on the day of the shooting that the agents’ actions were justified, claiming at a press briefing that Pretti had “attacked” officers and was “wishing to inflict harm” on them. But appearing Thursday on Fox News, Noem offered no evidence to support such claims, saying instead that the scene was “chaotic.”
After her initial statements, Minnesota officials were quick to push back on her public comments, pointing to the multiple videos from witnesses which appeared to tell a different story.
She said the FBI is now leading the investigation, though officials previously said DHS was investigating, with assistance from the FBI.
Noem’s shift in tone comes amid growing criticism of how quickly officials characterized the shooting. Some critics told ABC News that issuing definitive conclusions following immigration enforcement shootings is “incredibly irresponsible” and may undermine the long-term credibility of federal agencies.
The critics warned that rushing to label suspects as “domestic terrorists” — as White House adviser Stephen Miller and Noem did in the aftermath of the shooting deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good — or declaring shootings justified before evidence is reviewed represents a departure from the norm.
“It’s just incredibly irresponsible to rush to conclusions,” said John Sandweg, the former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement during the Obama administration. “When you have a senior adviser to the president and the cabinet secretary saying, ‘These are the facts, this is what happened’ … you’ve now undermined all the credibility and really made it impossible for the public to have confidence in that investigation.”
‘Public trust is everything’ An ABC News review of several recent incidents involving federal immigration agents found a consistent pattern: high-level officials publicized findings within hours of gunfire, only for those initial accounts to be challenged later by body camera footage, witness videos or court filings.
In at least five major cases, officials appeared to make public declarations about the incidents before formal investigations had reached final conclusions about those assertions.
“Public trust is everything to these agencies, and it just destroys them when you tell something that is so visibly and obviously contradicted by the video evidence,” Sandweg said.
Jason Houser, a former ICE chief of staff under the Biden administration, told ABC News that the rush to conclusions suggests the focus has shifted away from public safety toward a political narrative.
“It just shows that this is about the political debate. It’s not about actually arresting the most convicted criminals,” Houser said. “It should … create a lot of distrust that can tear at the core trust in law enforcement, especially federal law enforcement.”
In response to questions regarding the swiftness of the administration’s public comments and the information released following major incidents, a DHS spokesperson said, “DHS follows proper legal processes and protocols for all statements disseminated by the Department.”
What Pretti video shows In the shooting involving Pretti, DHS officials released a detailed statement just two and a half hours after the incident, claiming he “approached” officers with a handgun. Miller labeled Pretti a “domestic terrorist” and a “would-be assassin” on social media less than four hours after the gunfire.
Noem, during her Thursday interview, responded to critics on Capitol Hill calling for her resignation by stating she is “following the law, and enforcing the laws like President Trump promised he would do.”
Video analyzed by ABC News showed agents pinning Pretti down and removing a weapon from his waist before the shooting occurred — contradicting the initial claims from officials. Three days later, Miller issued a statement acknowledging that the initial DHS account was based on “reports from CBP on the ground” and suggested protocol may not have been followed.
“Any experienced law enforcement professional will understand that initial information coming from the scene of a major incident is usually flawed, so you have to sort of take it with a grain of salt,” said John Cohen, an ABC News contributor who served as acting DHS undersecretary for intelligence and analysis under the Biden administration.
During Thursday’s appearance on Fox News, Noem said, “We will continue to follow the investigation that the FBI is leading and give them all the information that they need to bring that to conclusion and make sure the American people know the truth of the situation,” she said.
After announcing on Friday that the Justice Department opened a civil rights investigation into the shooting Pretti, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters that “a single video should not determine an entire investigation.”
“We have said repeatedly over the past week that of course this is something that we are investigating and that is what we would always do in circumstances like this,” Blanche said.
Earlier shootings: Renee Good, Marimar Martinez Following the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis on Jan. 7, DHS issued a statement within two hours declaring that a “violent rioter” had “weaponized her vehicle” in an “act of domestic terrorism.” According to an ABC News analysis of verified video, Good can be seen turning her steering wheel to the right — away from the ICE agent — just over one second before the first of three gunshots was fired.
In October, less than four hours after Marimar Martinez was shot five times by a Border Patrol agent in Chicago, a DHS assistant secretary posted that law enforcement was “forced” to fire defensive shots. A DHS statement that day labeled Martinez and another individual “domestic terrorists,” while Noem later characterized the incident as a “ten-car caravan” that “ambushed” and “stalked” agents.
During court hearings, an attorney representing Martinez told the court that body-worn camera footage did not align with the government’s allegations. A federal judge later dismissed the indictment against Martinez after the Department of Justice abruptly filed a motion to withdraw the case.
That same month, in an incident in California, DHS issued a statement claiming that during a vehicle stop, an “unknown individual” attempted to “run officers over by reversing directly at them without stopping.” The statement asserted that an ICE officer, “fearing for his life, fired defensive shots.”
However, a lawyer for Carlos Jimenez told ABC News that after an agent pulled out pepper spray, Jimenez began to maneuver his vehicle “to get around” and was shot in his back shoulder through the back passenger window.
Chicago shooting In another incident in September, an ICE officer shot and killed Silverio Villegas-Gonzalez outside Chicago. According to a lawsuit filed by the state of Illinois, Villegas-Gonzalez, a 38-year-old father, was driving home from dropping his three-year-old son at day care. A DHS statement issued hours after the shooting claimed an officer “fearing for his life” was “seriously injured.”
But the Illinois complaint and body camera video obtained by ABC owned station WLS-TV revealed the agent who fired the weapon described his own injuries as “nothing major.”
“Videos of the incident did not corroborate DHS’s assertion that the shooting officer was ‘seriously injured’ by a ‘criminal illegal alien,'” the lawsuit states.
Cohen, the former DHS official, noted that describing incidents as domestic terrorism before an investigation is complete could later be viewed in court as prejudicial.
“When you make commentary on these types of incidents to advance an ideological or political narrative or objective, you run the risk of putting out inaccurate information and as a result, losing the public’s confidence,” Cohen said.
Sandweg, the former ICE official, told ABC News the only responsible approach for officials is to remain restrained in their public statements until there is reliable information.
“The only approach is … ‘We’re aware, we are conducting a full investigation,'” Sandweg said. “Public trust … is everything to these agencies. Once you destroy that, it bleeds over into everything else they do.”
Lindsey Halligan, attorney for US President Donald Trump, holds ceremonial proclamations to be signed by US President Donald Trump, not pictured, in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, March 6, 2025. Trump exempted Canadian goods covered by the North American trade agreement known as USMCA from his 25% tariffs, offering major reprieves to the US’s two largest trading partners. (Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge on Tuesday ordered that Lindsey Halligan, President Donald Trump’s appointee as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, must stop using that title before the court or face disciplinary action.
“Ms. Halligan’s continued identification of herself as the United States Attorney for this District ignores a binding court order and may not continue,” the order from U.S. District Judge David Novak stated.
Judge Novak earlier this month ordered Halligan to explain to the court why she was using the title of U.S. attorney after a judge in that district found that her appointment was improper and violated the Constitution.
The Justice Department’s fiery reply to that order, which included Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche as signatories, drew Judge Novak’s ire.
“Ms. Halligan’s response, in which she was joined by both the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General, contains a level of vitriol more appropriate for a cable news talk show and falls far beneath the level of advocacy expected from litigants in this Court, particularly the Department of Justice,” Novak wrote Tuesday.
Halligan, who was a White House aide before being appointed interim U.S. attorney by President Trump, secured indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, only to have them thrown out when U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie determined in November that she had been unlawfully appointed without being either Senate confirmed or appointed by the federal judiciary.
“The Court finds it inconceivable that the Department of Justice, which holds a duty to faithfully execute the laws of the United States even those with which it may have disagreement would repeatedly ignore court orders, while simultaneously prosecuting citizens for breaking the law,” Judge Novak wrote in Tuesday’s order. “If the Court were to allow Ms. Halligan and the Department of Justice to pick and choose which orders that they will follow, the same would have to be true for other litigants and our system of justice would crumble.”
The judge warned that if Halligan continues to use the U.S. attorney title, she will be subject to disciplinary proceedings.
“Ms. Halligan and anyone who joins her on a pleading containing the improper moniker subjects themselves to potential disciplinary action in this Court pursuant to the Court’s Local Rules,” Tuesday’s order said.
The Eastern District of Virginia also issued a job posting to fill the vacancy left by Halligan’s improper appointment.
A spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office for the Eastern District of Virginia declined to comment when contacted by ABC News.
