Thank you Barbara Thorniley, Zelda Zulu, Lynette, and many others for tuning into my live video! Join me for my next live video in the app.
Opening Note to Readers
For those who are unfamiliar with my background, I spent 20 years as patrol officer before I became XPLisset. I also served in the Army. Those experiences taught me that a use-of-force case lives or dies on details that rarely fit inside an agency’s first press release: the threat, the officer’s position, the available alternatives, the physical evidence, and the seconds before a weapon was fired.
They also taught me something about vetting. During my police background investigation, an investigator interviewed my ex wife and even my current neighbors. My experience cannot define ICE’s rules, but it shows how ordinary it is for an agency to look beyond a résumé before giving someone a badge, a gun, and state power.
Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero is dead. The available surveillance footage misses the instant an ICE officer fired. No officer body camera recorded it. Meanwhile, Brouillette’s former wives have described years of alleged abuse, threats, and intimidation, and one says he asked her to stay quiet because his character had become central to the case. Those are separate evidentiary questions. Both deserve answers.
TLDR
The public video does not show the shooting. It shows vehicles moving, people converging, and officers removing Durán Guerrero from his car afterward. It does not reveal the trigger pull, the officer’s exact position, or the car’s direction at that instant. [1]
Durán Guerrero was not the warrant target, and there is no officer body-camera recording. The Maine attorney general’s initial account says a vehicle moved in an officer’s direction, but the investigation remains active. [2] [4]
Ashley Brouillette says her former husband admitted firing. She says he claimed Durán Guerrero tried to run him over. Their adult daughter separately told the Associated Press that he admitted the shooting and described it as self-defense. [3]
The same former wife alleges he asked her to hide abusive conduct. If substantiated, that claim matters to credibility and vetting. Shooting legality still rests on the physical evidence. [4]
The hiring question is now on DHS’s desk. On July 20, Angus King and 38 Senate colleagues demanded that DHS explain how ICE vets new officers and whether it examines family-court records involving domestic violence or abuse. [5]
The honest verdict is incomplete. The public still needs the additional footage, ballistics, trajectories, officer and witness statements, radio traffic, the underlying warrant, the current use-of-force policy, and Brouillette’s training and vetting records.
Restack this evidence-first account and send it to one person before an official or viral narrative hardens into accepted fact. A man is dead, his family is waiting, and government power cannot be allowed to turn missing evidence into paperwork. Paid subscriptions let XVOA inspect footage, compare local reporting, and build a record readers can test. Become a paid subscriber,
or use Buy Me a Coffee if a recurring commitment is not right for you.
Video Chapters
0:00 | The Missing Record in Maine
1:29 | Content Warning: What the Video Misses
1:58 | Surveillance Footage and the Aftermath
2:28 | What the First Angle Actually Shows
3:53 | The Decisive Seconds Are Missing
5:16 | Not the Warrant Target and No Bodycam
5:52 | Ex-Wife Says Agent Admitted Firing
6:31 | The ICE Vetting Question
9:45 | “It Was a Justified Shooting”
10:27 | Alleged Request to Conceal Abuse
12:31 | Court Records and Prior Allegations
14:18 | Firsthand Account vs. Speculation
15:40 | Questions About Training and Employment
17:42 | The Recorded Threatening Voicemail
18:44 | Second Ex-Wife Speaks Out
20:05 | ICE Announces a New Bodycam Rule
21:00 | What the Public Record Can Prove
22:06 | Evidence Investigators Still Need
22:45 | Conclusion: Demand the Record
23:59 | Outro
The Video Shows the Aftermath, Not the Trigger Pull
On July 13, 2026, an ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations officer fatally shot 25-year-old Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Biddeford, Maine. The Maine attorney general said initial statements indicated that an officer was conducting an operation related to a final removal order when a person attempted to flee in a vehicle in the officer’s direction. The office also made clear that its investigation was active. [2]
The surveillance footage cannot complete that account. One angle shows Durán Guerrero’s sedan moving through the intersection while another SUV blocks its path. People converge. Later footage shows officers removing Durán Guerrero. Other cameras captured gunfire and the aftermath, but the Portland Press Herald has found no substantiated public video of the shooting itself. [1]
That gap is decisive. The public cannot see where Brouillette stood, whether the car was moving toward him when he fired, how quickly the positions changed, or which alternatives remained available. We cannot work backward from the extraction and pretend we saw what caused the officer to fire. Anyone claiming those images alone prove either murder or a justified shooting is outrunning the evidence.
An Initial Account Is Not a Final Use-of-Force Finding
A proper review asks what threat existed at the instant the trigger was pulled, whether it was imminent, where officers and civilians were positioned, whether the officer could safely disengage, and whether firing created additional danger. Those questions protect the public and the officer. They force the conclusion to follow the evidence.
The publicly available 2023 DHS department-wide policy says deadly force must be necessary and tied to a reasonable belief that a person poses an imminent threat of death or serious injury. It restricts firing at a moving vehicle’s operator to circumstances in which deadly force is otherwise justified. [6]
That policy does not answer what happened in Biddeford. It tells us what evidence matters. A statement that a vehicle moved “in the direction of” an officer leaves open the distance, speed, angle, timing, escape routes, and exact moment force became deadly. The current operative ICE policy and Brouillette’s own account belong in the public record because a short official phrase cannot carry the weight of a completed investigation.
What Ashley Brouillette Says He Admitted
The Portland Press Herald and Associated Press identified David Michael Brouillette through relatives, records, former colleagues, and sources familiar with the case. ICE has declined to confirm his identity. The agency said the officer involved had nearly a decade of federal law-enforcement experience and required training, including use-of-force training. Brouillette did not respond to the news organizations’ requests for comment. [3] [4]
Ashley Brouillette says her former husband called after the shooting, acknowledged that he had fired, and claimed Durán Guerrero tried to run him over. The Press Herald reviewed a screenshot of incoming calls that she said came through his current wife’s Facebook account. Their 18-year-old daughter separately told the AP that Brouillette called her and said he had killed Durán Guerrero because he had to protect himself. [3]
Those accounts meaningfully corroborate who fired while leaving the legal question open. An admission identifies the shooter. Ballistics, positioning, witness accounts, medical findings, radio traffic, and the full sequence must test his self-defense claim.
The Alleged Request to Hide His History
Ashley’s account becomes more consequential when she describes what Brouillette allegedly wanted from her. She says he asked her to avoid discussing abuse she says she endured because his character was at issue. She refused, telling him she would no longer remain silent after a man had lost his life. [4]
If that conversation occurred as described, it creates a credibility question and a vetting question. It still cannot substitute for the mechanics of the shooting. Character evidence cannot replace trajectories, officer positioning, witness statements, and the exact sequence of force.
The AP reviewed hundreds of pages of family-court records containing years of allegations involving Brouillette’s second former wife and his daughters. Some temporary protection requests were granted, while most were later dismissed. AP’s Maine records check found no criminal record for him. [3] [7] Allegations are not convictions. A dismissed petition is not a finding that every underlying claim was false. Investigators must determine what was substantiated, what Brouillette disclosed, and what ICE’s process required.
Two Former Wives, a Recorded Message, and a Necessary Boundary
Ashley also supplied reporters with a voicemail from late November 2025. In it, a man she identifies as Brouillette uses violent, misogynistic language and says women in her family should have their “throats cut,” while disclaiming that he would personally carry it out. The recording is direct evidence of the words spoken. Whether it met a criminal definition of a threat is a separate legal question. The immediate oversight question is whether federal vetting found or examined the conduct behind it. [3]
On July 18, Lucinda Brouillette, another former wife, issued a statement describing what she says was a long pattern of abuse, intimidation, manipulation, fear, and control. She said she had repeatedly raised concerns through courts, law enforcement, and the state health department. The Press Herald reported that some protection requests were temporarily granted, most were later dismissed, and a judge declined her newest request after a hearing Brouillette attended. [7]
Lucinda also preserved the boundary this case requires. She said she did not witness the shooting and would not speculate about exactly what happened. Her statement adds a separate firsthand allegation about past conduct. It does not decide criminal guilt or lawful force.
The same discipline applies to reported mental-health diagnoses. A diagnosis alone tells us nothing about violence, misconduct, or professional fitness. The relevant questions concern documented behavior, truthful disclosure, agency review, job performance, training, and the decision to entrust a person with federal authority and a firearm.
What Did ICE Examine Before Issuing the Gun?
Brouillette’s reported employment history includes Army and Maine National Guard service, work for the Maine Department of Corrections, and federal police work at the Togus VA facility. ICE says he completed the training required for his position. The public has not seen the training file. [4]
The right question is therefore larger than “Was he trained?” Which courses did he complete? Which exemptions or equivalencies, if any, applied? Did the background investigation review family-court filings, prior complaints, employment disputes, and available witnesses? Did Brouillette disclose the matters the application required him to disclose? What did ICE know when it placed him in the field?
On July 20, that question moved from commentary into formal congressional oversight. Sen. Angus King and 38 Senate colleagues asked DHS to explain how it vets new ICE officers and whether family-court records involving domestic violence or abuse are considered. They also demanded independent investigations, body-camera deployment, clearer ICE identification, and review of vehicle-stop and training protocols. [5]
The letter does not prove ICE ignored a warning. It confirms that the vetting gap is concrete enough to demand an agency answer.
A Body-Camera Rule Arrives After the Evidence Gap
On July 19, border czar Tom Homan announced that ICE vehicle stops must be recorded by at least one body camera. He said cameras had been purchased and nationwide training and deployment were underway. Reuters reported that neither the Biddeford shooting nor a fatal ICE shooting six days earlier in Houston was recorded by an officer body camera. [8]
The rule matters, but it cannot reconstruct July 13. It also does not mean every officer is equipped today. The public should track deployment dates, activation rules, retention requirements, supervisor audits, discipline for noncompliance, and release procedures. A camera policy without those mechanics can become another promise that produces no usable record when power turns deadly.
This case still needs any additional or unreleased government-held video and native files, doorbell and security-camera audio, ballistics and trajectory analysis, medical findings, officer and witness statements, radio traffic, the warrant and operational plan, the current ICE use-of-force policy, and Brouillette’s training and vetting record. Together, they can establish what happened.
Closing Argument
Here is what the public can responsibly say. Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero was killed during an ICE operation even though he was not the warrant target. Strong local and national reporting identifies David Brouillette as the officer who fired, while ICE still refuses to publicly name him. No officer body camera captured the encounter, and the available surveillance footage misses the decisive instant.
The former wives’ accounts, the court records, the violent voicemail, and the unresolved training questions create a serious oversight case. They do not establish the legality of the gunfire. The physical evidence and complete investigative record must do that work.
Government agencies benefit when the public is pushed into choosing between blind trust and instant certainty. Durán Guerrero’s family pays the price for that false choice. The answer is to demand the record, examine it honestly, and refuse to claim more than it proves. Certainty without the evidence is commentary pretending to be an investigation.
Evidence does not weaken the moral argument. Evidence is what keeps the moral argument from becoming another myth.
Support XVOA
This kind of work requires time that the algorithm does not reward: reviewing the footage frame by frame, comparing an initial government statement with local reporting, separating allegations from findings, and rebuilding a broadcast so readers lose nothing by skipping the video. Paid subscriptions are the dependable base that keeps that work possible. Thank you to every current paid reader already carrying this desk.
If you want more reporting that follows the evidence beyond the first headline, become a paid subscriber.
Buy Me a Coffee is the flexible lane for anyone who cannot take on another subscription, prefers a one-time contribution, or already subscribes and wants to add extra support.
Like, comment, share, and Restack this investigation so the demand for the record travels farther than the agency’s first account.
Sources
Portland Press Herald, “Videos show moments before and after ICE agents shot man in Biddeford,” July 14, 2026. Compiles the available surveillance and bystander footage and identifies the gaps in what cameras captured.
Maine Attorney General, “Federal Law Enforcement Fatal Use of Deadly Force in Biddeford, Maine,” July 13, 2026. Provides the state’s initial account and confirms the continuing investigation.
Associated Press, “ICE officer in Maine shooting has history of violent behavior, family and records say,” July 16, 2026. Reports the family interviews, court-record review, voicemail, reported admissions, and ICE response.
Portland Press Herald, “ICE agent who killed man in Biddeford identified as former Maine law enforcement officer,” July 16, 2026. Establishes Brouillette’s identity through local reporting and details Ashley Brouillette’s account and his employment history.
WMTW, “Maine senator demands ICE reforms after Biddeford shooting,” July 20, 2026. Details the senators’ demands concerning body cameras, training, independent investigation, identification, and vetting.
Department of Homeland Security, “DHS Updates Department-Wide Use of Force Policy,” February 7, 2023. Summarizes the public department-wide standards governing deadly force, training, and accountability.
Portland Press Herald, “Second ex-wife of ICE agent who shot man in Biddeford recounts history of violent behavior,” July 18, 2026. Publishes Lucinda Brouillette’s statement and explains the mixed procedural outcomes in prior protection filings.
Reuters, “ICE officers to wear body cameras during vehicle stops, border czar says,” July 19, 2026. Reports the new recording requirement, the deployment status, and the absence of body-camera footage in the Maine and Texas shootings.
