Was hit in the face multiple times with a gun, surrounded by 8+ agents and then 8+ shots unloaded on them.
Executive summary
Multiple independently verified videos and analyses show that Alex Pretti was pepper‑sprayed and struck in the head during a scuffle with federal agents, that as many as eight agents engaged him on the ground, and that a rapid volley of roughly 10 shots was fired — with footage suggesting a gun was removed from Pretti’s waistband about a second before the first shot [1] shooting-video-gun/" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">[2] [3] [4]. Federal officials describe the encounter differently, saying agents were disarming an armed and violent subject, a claim that remains central to the dispute over whether the shooting was justified [4] [5].
1. The physical contact: pepper spray and blows to the head
Bystander and surveillance video reviewed by multiple outlets show an agent spraying Pretti with a chemical agent and at least one agent striking or hitting him in the head during the struggle; descriptions across BBC, The Washington Post and others note an agent “striking at his head” and footage indicating a close‑range blow before Pretti was pinned [1] [2] [3]. Several outlets also describe him being “wrestled to the ground” and disoriented after the spray, and some eyewitnesses and family statements say he was holding a phone, not brandishing a weapon, at least until the point agents say they attempted to disarm him [4] [1] [6].
2. How many agents and who removed the gun
Independent video analysts and news organizations report that as many as eight federal agents were involved in the takedown, with multiple officers atop or around Pretti as he lay on the pavement [2] [1]. Several outlets — including The Washington Post, ABC News and others — recorded a sequence in which an agent appears to extract a handgun from Pretti’s waistband and briefly moves away from the scrum holding the weapon, seconds before shots ring out [2] [3] [4].
3. The shooting: number, timing and direction
Reporting consistently indicates a rapid volley of shots — often counted as about 10 — fired in a short span (roughly five seconds in some analyses), with at least one source saying ten shots were fired and others describing “a volley” after an initial close‑range discharge [4] [6] [7]. The New York Times and other frame‑by‑frame analyses note the first shot comes roughly one second after the gun is seen removed from Pretti’s waistband, and that subsequent rounds hit him while he was on the ground and as he moved to his knees [7] [3].
4. The official account vs. what video shows
DHS and Border Patrol officials immediately said Pretti “approached” officers with a 9mm and violently resisted as agents tried to disarm him, framing the shooting as defensive; the agency and allied voices circulated images and statements emphasizing a recovered firearm and ammunition [4] [8]. But multiple news organizations that verified and parsed video — Reuters, BBC, The Washington Post, The New York Times, AP and others — report footage that contradicts the narrative that Pretti was actively brandishing a weapon throughout the encounter and that shows the gun being removed before the fatal shots [4] [2] [6].
5. Direct answer to the central claim
Based on the available, independently verified video and multiple news analyses, the record shows Pretti was pepper‑sprayed and struck in the head during the detainment, was surrounded by up to eight agents during the struggle, and was then struck by a rapid series of roughly 10 shots fired in quick succession — with visual evidence indicating a gun was removed from his person about one second before the first shot [1] [2] [3] [4] [7]. DHS disputes elements of that read‑out and contends agents faced an armed threat; that official claim is part of ongoing investigations and public debate [4] [5].
6. What remains unresolved and why it matters
Video establishes the sequence of spray, blows, disarmament and immediate gunfire, but it cannot definitively reveal each agent’s perception or split‑second judgments about threat, nor does it substitute for an official, transparent investigatory accounting; federal and state probes, witness interviews, ballistic and forensics work, and agency internal reviews are still needed to determine legal culpability and policy implications [4] [9] [7]. The conflicting narratives and rapid dissemination of agency statements make the shooting a focal point for debates about federal enforcement tactics, accountability, and the political framing of law enforcement actions [9] [5].