Listen to the article
Contradictions Mount in Minneapolis Shooting as Video Evidence Challenges Official Account
Federal authorities are facing intensifying scrutiny over the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, as video evidence appears to contradict key statements made by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about the incident.
During a news conference, Secretary Noem claimed that “an individual approached US Border Patrol officers with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun,” adding that the suspect was “brandishing” a firearm. However, video footage shows Pretti had no visible firearm in his hands or on his body in the minutes before interacting with immigration officers. Instead, he appears to be using a cell phone to record immigration raids in the area—an activity protected under the First Amendment, provided it doesn’t interfere with law enforcement operations.
Notably, the officers did not draw their weapons when initially approaching Pretti, which contradicts standard protocol when confronting an armed suspect. While the federal legal definition of “brandishing” is broad and doesn’t require a weapon to be directly visible, the available video evidence doesn’t support claims that Pretti was using a firearm to intimidate officers.
Secretary Noem further escalated her characterization of the incident, stating, “This looks like a situation where an individual arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and kill law enforcement.” Yet video footage tells a different story.
One recording shows Pretti carrying a cell phone in his right hand, apparently filming immigration officers in the area. In another clip, he attempts to help a woman who had been pushed to the ground on an icy curb by a masked officer. When Pretti steps between them, the officer pepper sprays him. Pretti briefly raises his left arm before turning toward the woman, at which point the officer knocks him to the ground with assistance from several other agents.
The Secretary’s claim that “the officers attempted to disarm this individual, but the armed suspect reacted violently” also appears at odds with video evidence. Footage shows Pretti initially struggling when at least three officers knock him to the ground, later joined by four more. However, he appears largely subdued with his stomach on the ground and his arms in front of his body.
Several moments into the detention, an officer can be heard calling out “gun,” apparently alerting fellow officers. Within seconds, an agent fires the first shot, causing Pretti’s body to crumple to the ground.
A source close to the DHS investigation told MS NOW that Pretti had a firearm in a holster, which agents retrieved during the interaction. Minneapolis Police Chief confirmed that Pretti was a legal gun owner with a permit to carry.
Secretary Noem’s final assertion that an agent fired “defensive shots” while “fearing for his life and the lives of his fellow officers” is particularly contested by the video evidence. Footage shows Pretti’s hands pinned in front of him on the ground until he is shot, with no visual indication that he reached for a weapon. Some video clips appear to show another officer reaching toward Pretti’s waistband, retrieving what looks like a gun, and stepping away. It’s approximately at this moment that someone can be heard saying “gun,” followed almost immediately by gunfire.
The shooting has raised serious questions about the use of force by federal immigration officers and the accuracy of official statements describing the incident. As investigations continue, the discrepancies between the Secretary’s characterization of events and the video evidence are likely to face increasing scrutiny from the public, media, and potentially, from lawmakers.
Civil rights advocates are calling for an independent investigation into the incident, citing concerns about transparency and accountability in federal law enforcement operations. The case also highlights the increasingly complex interactions between immigration enforcement activities and community members in areas where such operations are taking place.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
18 Comments
While the full details remain unclear, the video evidence does seem to cast doubt on the DHS narrative. I’ll be following this case closely to see if the investigation can reconcile these conflicting accounts.
You make a fair point. It’s wise to withhold judgment until all the facts are established. A thorough, impartial inquiry is needed to determine exactly what transpired.
This is a complex and troubling situation. While the full details remain uncertain, the video footage does appear to undermine the official narrative. A comprehensive, impartial inquiry is essential to determine what actually occurred.
I agree, it’s crucial that the investigation examines all the evidence objectively and reaches conclusions based on the facts, not preconceptions. Transparency and accountability are vital in cases like this.
The discrepancies between the official narrative and the video evidence are deeply concerning. A comprehensive, impartial investigation is essential to uncover the truth and restore public confidence in the handling of this incident.
Well said. Transparency and accountability must be the top priorities here. The public has a right to know what actually happened, without any attempt to obscure or distort the facts.
The conflicting accounts in this case are deeply concerning. I hope the authorities conduct a rigorous, unbiased investigation that gets to the bottom of what really happened, regardless of any initial claims made.
Absolutely. When there are discrepancies between official statements and video evidence, it’s critical that the investigation follows the facts wherever they lead. Public trust hinges on this kind of impartial inquiry.
This is a disturbing case that highlights the importance of objective, fact-based reporting. I hope the authorities conduct a comprehensive investigation that gets to the truth, regardless of any initial claims made.
Absolutely. Transparency and accountability are crucial, especially when it comes to the use of force by law enforcement. The public deserves a clear and credible account of what happened.
This is a troubling situation that warrants a thorough, independent investigation. The contradictions between the video footage and the DHS claims raise serious questions that need to be answered transparently.
I agree, the public deserves a clear, credible accounting of the events. Authorities must examine all the evidence objectively and hold any responsible parties accountable, regardless of their position.
The contradictions between the video evidence and the DHS statements are very concerning. I’m glad to see this case is receiving scrutiny, as it’s critical that the full truth comes to light.
You’re right, this discrepancy demands a thorough, independent investigation. The public needs to have confidence that incidents like this are being handled fairly and responsibly.
This seems like a concerning case with conflicting accounts. The video evidence certainly raises questions about the official narrative. I’m curious to see how this investigation unfolds and whether it leads to greater transparency around such incidents.
You’re right, the video evidence does appear to contradict the DHS claims. It’s important these types of cases are thoroughly investigated to ensure the truth comes to light.
The discrepancies between the video footage and the DHS statements are troubling. I hope this leads to a more rigorous and impartial investigation to determine exactly what happened and hold any responsible parties accountable.
Agreed, the public deserves a full and transparent accounting of the facts. Contradictory claims from authorities only erode public trust, so it’s critical this is examined thoroughly.