Emerging video evidence and eyewitness accounts sharply undermine the federal government’s claim that lethal force was justified in the killing of Alex Pretti.
According to multiple videos reviewed by witnesses and activists, Pretti was already disarmed at the time he was shot. The firearm that authorities later claimed justified the use of force appears to have been removed from his waistband by officers during the physical takedown. At no point in the publicly available footage does Pretti appear to raise, point, or fire a weapon.
Instead, video from several angles shows Pretti on the ground, restrained by multiple officers, with a cell phone in his hand — not a gun — when shots were fired. No visible weapon is seen in his hands at the moment lethal force was used.
Federal officials have stated agents fired “defensive shots” during a struggle with an armed individual. But if the weapon had already been secured — as video evidence strongly suggests — that justification collapses. Shooting a restrained, disarmed man holding a phone is not self-defense under any recognized legal standard.
The central question now confronting investigators is unavoidable: Why was deadly force used after the threat had been neutralized? If Pretti no longer had access to a weapon, the shooting shifts from a claim of officer safety to a potential unlawful use of force.
State authorities have demanded full access to all evidence, including body-camera footage and materials taken into federal custody. A judge has already intervened to prevent the destruction or alteration of evidence, underscoring the seriousness of concerns surrounding the incident.
Absent a credible explanation reconciling these facts, the evidence points toward a killing that cannot be justified by the presence of a firearm — because the firearm was no longer in Pretti’s possession when he was shot.
No comments:
Post a Comment