Was Alex Pretti still armed when he was shot?
Executive summary
Multiple federal statements and a firearm recovered at the scene support the claim that Alex Pretti possessed a gun during the confrontation, but contemporaneous bystander videos and independent reporting create serious doubt about whether he was still armed—or was visibly wielding a weapon—at the exact moment he was shot [1] [2] [3]. Available footage suggests agents may have discovered or removed a gun while Pretti was already pinned, and there is no definitive public evidence showing Pretti brandishing or firing a weapon immediately before the shots that killed him [3] [4].
1. Federal account: possession and resistance
The Department of Homeland Security and Border Patrol officials have consistently stated Pretti was armed and that officers fired after an attempt to disarm him met violent resistance, and DHS released a photo of a handgun said to be recovered at the scene [5] [1] [6]. Senior Border Patrol spokespeople also described him as having additional magazines and framed the shooting as justified defensive force [6] [7].
2. What videos show — and what they do not
Multiple bystander videos reviewed and reported by national outlets do not show Pretti brandishing a firearm immediately before he was tackled and shot; instead, he is visible holding a phone when agents approach and pin him to the ground [3] [4]. The New York Times’ verification of footage indicates agents yell “he has a gun” several seconds after Pretti is pinned, not at the instant of approach, which suggests the gun may not have been obvious to officers at first [3].
3. Evidence that a gun was removed while he was restrained
Some footage and reporting indicate an agent removed an object from Pretti’s waistband while he was held down and that another agent then opened fire, which raises the question of whether Pretti was still in control of a weapon or already disarmed when the shots were fired [8] [3]. The New York Times specifically describes an agent pulling what appears to match the profile of the firearm DHS later identified from among the group after Pretti was pinned [3].
4. Conflicting official vs. eyewitness narratives
Local officials and witnesses have pushed back on parts of the federal narrative: Minneapolis police and multiple journalists note the gun is not visible in the videos they verified, witnesses filed affidavits disputing that Pretti ever brandished a weapon, and public officials have explicitly challenged claims that he threatened officers [2] [9] [3]. At the same time, DHS and Border Patrol maintain he was armed and resisted disarmament attempts [1] [6].
5. Why the gap in clarity matters
Whether Pretti still had effective control of a firearm when agents shot him is the central factual hinge for questions about the necessity and proportionality of the shooting; video evidence that he was pinned and that a gun was found only after he was restrained complicates the federal justification for immediate defensive force [3] [4]. Independent investigators and local prosecutors have asked for evidence and are accepting video submissions, indicating the official version remains under dispute and subject to review [1].
6. Bottom line and limits of public reporting
Publicly available evidence establishes that a firearm was recovered and federal officials assert Pretti was armed, but contemporaneous videos and eyewitness affidavits create material uncertainty about whether he still possessed or brandished that weapon at the precise moment shots were fired; no publicly released footage or independent forensic account definitively shows him firing or pointing a gun immediately before he was shot [1] [3] [4]. Until investigators release a full body-worn-camera, ballistic, and forensic timeline—or a court releases those findings—reporting must acknowledge both the federal claim of possession and the competing visual evidence that Pretti was not visibly armed when agents tackled and then shot him [6] [3].