What does the Bellingcat analysis of the Alex Pretti shooting actually show, step by step?
Executive summary
Bellingcat’s initial public mention in coverage of the Alex Pretti killing is reported as an independent, open-source examination that — according to secondary reporting — concluded the available video evidence “clearly contradict[s]” the Department of Homeland Security’s account that Pretti was shot after brandishing a firearm [1]. The full Bellingcat report, its raw material and stepwise methods are not present in the supplied sources, so the reconstruction below combines what mainstream outlets verified on video with what outlets report Bellingcat claimed, and it flags where original Bellingcat material is missing from the record provided here [2] [1].
1. The competing official and video narratives, side by side
Federal officials told reporters that Pretti “approached” Border Patrol officers with a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun and was shot after that confrontation [3] [4], while multiple news organizations that verified bystander video reported footage showing Pretti holding a cellphone and not a gun when agents initially stopped him and pulled him to the ground [2] [5]. That factual divergence — an official assertion about a handgun versus visual verification showing a phone in Pretti’s hand at the moment agents engaged him — is the central empirical tension that outside analysts, including Bellingcat as reported, investigated [2] [5].
2. What the verified videos demonstrably show, according to reporters
Newsroom visual analyses compiled by The New York Times and other outlets show Pretti filming agents with a phone in his right hand and an apparently empty left hand when officers approached, and depict him being wrestled to the ground before gunfire; the Times explicitly states the footage shows Pretti held a phone, not a weapon, at the time agents pulled him down [2] [5]. Multiple outlets and bystander clips circulated that corroborate those same moments and were the basis for public disputes about the DHS account that he “approached” officers with a handgun [5] [6].
3. What Bellingcat is reported to have concluded (as described in secondary reporting)
Independent site Bellingcat “took a very close look” and — according to reporting that cites Bellingcat’s findings — concluded its review “clearly contradict[s] the DHS narrative” that Pretti was shot only after brandishing a deadly firearm; one legal commentator publicly called Bellingcat’s findings “gold standard” [1]. Those summaries attribute to Bellingcat the conclusion that the man had been disarmed before the first shot, though the primary text of Bellingcat’s stepwise visual forensic argument is not included in the sources supplied here [1].
4. The step-by-step claims attributed to Bellingcat in available reporting
As reported, Bellingcat’s apparent sequence is: (a) verify and timestamp bystander video showing Pretti filming agents with a phone in hand; (b) trace the physical moments when agents pull him to the ground and when a firearm appears in footage; (c) determine — based on frame-by-frame inspection — that the gun was removed from a pile after Pretti was wrestled down, implying he was not firing or brandishing the weapon at the initial encounter; and (d) conclude those findings are inconsistent with DHS’s immediate claim he “approached” agents with a gun [2] [1]. Reported summaries present these as Bellingcat’s core contentions, but the raw visual frames, annotation, geolocation, and timestamps that would show the precise temporal ordering are not included in the supplied reporting so independent confirmation of each step from Bellingcat itself cannot be verified here [1].
5. Methodological strengths and the limits of the current record
Bellingcat is known for open-source video forensics and frame-level chronology, which is why legal analysts amplified its take, but the supplied reporting offers only a paraphrase of Bellingcat’s conclusions rather than the full annotated evidence package, methodology notes, or chain-of-custody statements that would allow replication [1]. Major outlets independently verified key video moments showing a phone in Pretti’s hand before he was taken down [2] [5], which aligns with the broad thrust of Bellingcat’s reported contradiction of DHS, but the absence of the original Bellingcat file and analytic steps in the provided sources is an important limitation to any definitive step-by-step claim here [2] [1].
6. Bottom line and outstanding questions
The materials available to reporters show a mismatch between DHS’s early description and what bystander video captures — and secondary coverage reports that Bellingcat’s closer open-source review sided with the video-based, contrary account [2] [1]. However, without the primary Bellingcat report, annotated frames and full methodology in the supplied sources, the precise stepwise technical proof Bellingcat used (timestamps, shot sequencing, frame-by-frame annotations, or geolocation crosschecks) cannot be independently reproduced from the material provided here, leaving important evidentiary steps publicly asserted but not shown in these sources [1] [2].