What does the released video footage show about the sequence of disarmament and shots in other recent federal-agent shootings in Minneapolis?
Executive summary
Video from the two most recent federal-agent shootings in Minneapolis — the Jan. 7 killing of Renee Nicole Good and the Jan. 24 killing of Alex Jeffrey Pretti — has been widely circulated and analyzed, and those analyses show key moments that contradict some federal narratives: Good’s vehicle appears to be turning away as an ICE agent fires, and Pretti appears to have been subdued or disarmed and was holding a phone, not a gun, at the time bystanders recorded the fatal shots [1] [2] [3]. Independent and newsroom analyses stress that video can establish timing and positioning but cannot by itself reveal an agent’s subjective perception or intent, and investigations remain open [4] [1].
1. The Good footage: positioning, vehicle movement and the timing of shots
A synchronized, multi-angle review of the ICE agent’s cellphone video and other clips — conducted by outlets including The New York Times and Bellingcat — shows the ICE officer outside his vehicle near Renee Good’s S.U.V., then firing as the vehicle moves; The Times’ frame-by-frame work finds “no indication” the agent had been run over and reports the vehicle appears to be turning away as shots are fired, a detail that undercuts claims the agent was crushed or imminently run down [1] [5]. The Department of Homeland Security released a version of video arguing Good had “weaponized” her car and impeded an operation, a characterization emphasized by some federal officials, but that claim has been disputed by local leaders and contradicted by visual analyses that show the trajectory and timing of the S.U.V. relative to the officer [6] [1].
2. The Pretti footage: phone, restraint and the question of disarmament
Multiple bystander videos of the Jan. 24 incident, obtained and reviewed by outlets including The New York Times, The Guardian and NPR, show Alex Pretti holding what appears to be a phone when agents tackle and restrain him, and they capture agents punching and restraining him on the pavement shortly before a fatal shot is fired; The Guardian highlights that Pretti was filmed with a phone, not a gun, and eyewitness affidavits submitted in court assert he never brandished a weapon, while NPR’s reporting describes agents surrounding and repeatedly restraining him before the shooting [2] [3] [7]. Some analysts — and at least one open-source investigator cited by The Guardian — argue the video suggests agents may have fired moments after Pretti had been disarmed or while he was on the ground [3].
3. Conflicting official narratives and the evidentiary limits of video
Federal officials, including DHS spokespeople and administration allies, have characterized these incidents as agents acting in self‑defense against “weaponized” vehicles or violent threats, language repeated in some briefings and press statements [6] [1]. News organizations and fact-checkers counter that video evidence appears to contradict those characterizations in crucial respects — while also cautioning, as FactCheck.org notes, that video cannot disclose an officer’s subjective fear or split‑second decision-making, which are central to legal and administrative determinations [4] [1].
4. Pattern and public reaction: sequence, escalation and accountability
Taken together, the released footage of the two Minneapolis incidents highlights a recurring sequence that alarms critics: officers confront civilians during federal operations, physical confrontations and restraints follow in view of multiple cameras, and lethal shots are captured in close temporal proximity to restraint or a vehicle’s departure — moments that have sparked protests and calls for independent investigation [3] [7] [8]. Authorities have responded with formal investigations and by moving more personnel into Minneapolis, while city and state officials have requested outside probes; reporting stresses that more footage could emerge and that official conclusions will hinge on agency inquiries and forensic review [8] [1].
Conclusion
Released videos from these federal‑agent encounters in Minneapolis consistently show that timing, positioning and the apparent state of the civilians at the moments shots were fired complicate the federal narrative of clear, immediate threats — in Good’s case the vehicle appears to be turning away as shots are fired, and in Pretti’s case bystanders and multiple videos depict him with a phone and being restrained immediately prior to the lethal shot — but the ultimate legal and administrative judgments must grapple with what the recordings cannot show: the shooter’s perceived threat at the split second decisions were made [1] [3] [4].