What official investigations and findings have been released about the Jan. 24 fatal shooting of Alex Pretti?

1. Federal investigative leads and who is in charge

Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), a component of the Department of Homeland Security, is leading the principal federal review of the shooting while the FBI has been reported as assisting with physical evidence and forensics; the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has also opened a civil-rights probe into the incident ^{[6] [4] [3]}. The decision to have HSI — an agency within the same department that oversees Customs and Border Protection — lead the investigation was characterized in reporting as atypical and has fueled concerns about transparency and the completeness of the review ^[6].

2. Medical examiner’s findings: cause, manner and limits of the ruling

The Hennepin County Medical Examiner concluded that Pretti died from multiple gunshot wounds and listed the manner of death as homicide, a medical classification meaning death was caused by another person but not itself a legal finding of criminality ^{[1] [2] [7]}. Public-facing autopsy data confirmed the cause and manner but disclosed no additional forensic detail in the report released so far, leaving unanswered questions about trajectory, distance, intermediate injuries and timing that typically inform culpability determinations ^[1].

3. Identified agents, administrative actions and DOJ involvement

Federal notices to Congress acknowledged that two agents fired their service pistols during the altercation, and DHS placed the two agents on administrative leave; investigative reporting identified the officers named in government records as Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and CBP officer Raymundo Gutierrez, details the agencies acknowledged only in part ^{[3] [8]}. The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division opening a probe signals potential federal criminal scrutiny beyond administrative reviews, but those investigations are ongoing and have not yet produced public charging decisions or indictments ^{[4] [3]}.

4. Evidence preservation and conflicts with state and local officials

Minnesota officials sought access to evidence and sued federal agencies, leading a federal judge to order DHS and its agents not to destroy or alter evidence connected to the shooting; state and local authorities have said their investigation was being impeded by federal actions, a dispute that has produced judicial intervention to preserve materials while investigations continue ^[5]. That order is one public example of legal friction over evidence control between federal agencies operating under DHS and state investigative authorities seeking a parallel or joint inquiry ^[5].

5. Video analyses, contested narratives and forensic gaps

Multiple independent analyses of bystander and surveillance video — including a moment-by-moment timeline reconstruction published by The New York Times and frame-by-frame reviews by other outlets — indicate Pretti was restrained or had been disarmed in the moments before shots were fired, a chronology that appears to contradict initial public statements from DHS leadership; fact-checking organizations have noted key DHS claims lack publicly presented evidence and that available videos raise questions about assertions that Pretti “approached” agents while brandishing a weapon ^{[9] [10] [11]}. Those discrepancies are central to both criminal and civil-rights investigations because they bear on whether the use of lethal force was reasonable under the circumstances.

6. What official findings exist now — and what remains unresolved

Official, public findings so far are a medical-legal determination of homicide by the county examiner and the initiation of federal administrative and civil-rights investigations led by HSI and the DOJ; administrative leave of involved agents and court-ordered evidence preservation are additional concrete actions ^{[1] [2] [3] [5]}. What remains unresolved and not yet publicly determined are the legal conclusions — whether the shooting violated criminal statutes or civil-rights laws — and detailed forensic determinations (wound trajectories, timing, who fired first, whether a gun was accidentally discharged) that investigative agencies are still examining and have not released in full to the public ^{[4] [1]}.