Original True Justice editorial artwork with symbolic scales of justice. Not a photograph, legal finding or reconstruction of the shooting.
TRUE JUSTICE · OPINION, REMEMBRANCE & ACCOUNTABILITY
Alex Pretti deserves justice. The federal government’s power to take a life must never become the power to bury the evidence or define the person it killed. Alex was a 37-year-old Minneapolis VA intensive-care nurse. Federal Customs and Border Protection personnel shot and killed him on January 24, 2026. The people who knew his care deserve more than a government narrative and a closed door. University of Minnesota remembrance.
By DaddyBruce95 · Published November 11, 2026 · Public sources reviewed November 11, 2026. This is an editorial informed by linked investigations, official statements and court records. It is not original field reporting or a criminal verdict. The latest charging-status reporting checked is dated November 8; the accessible evidence-access docket was checked through November 11.
Content note: This article discusses a fatal shooting and physical violence. It includes no graphic imagery. The cover is original symbolic editorial artwork, not a photograph or reconstruction.
Remember the nurse before the footage
Alex cared for critically ill veterans and helped teach the next generation of nurses. The University of Minnesota School of Nursing records his work as a preceptor for its students. Clinical Associate Professor Mary DeGrote Goering remembered how he helped students attempt unfamiliar skills with reassurance and close supervision. His former student Ben Matson said: “He taught me what it means to care for our neighbors when they were at the most vulnerable point of their lives.” The school’s March 24 account.
Dr. Dimitri Drekonja, who worked with Alex at the Minneapolis VA, remembered professional skill alongside kindness: “He was an incredibly competent person. He was incredibly good at his job.” He also remembered Alex’s enjoyment of mountain biking and the outdoors. Those are a colleague’s memories, not a fictional portrait supplied by this website. MPR’s firsthand colleague interview, January 24.
The public has seen the violence that ended his life. It should also know what that violence took away: care, teaching, friendship and the ordinary future a person should have been able to keep. A life is not reduced to the worst seconds captured on someone else’s phone. Alex’s name belongs beside his work, not beneath an official accusation left unexamined.
What the cameras show—and what they cannot tell us
Bellingcat synchronized multiple recordings of the January 24 encounter. Its analysis shows Alex holding a phone, moving between an agent and a woman who had been pushed, being sprayed, and being forced to the ground. An agent in a grey jacket removes a handgun from Alex’s rear-waist holster and moves away immediately before gunfire. The analysis identifies two agents apparently firing and later shots directed at Alex while he is motionless. It finds no video evidence that the recovered pistol fired. These are Bellingcat’s video-analysis findings, not a ballistics report produced by this site. Bellingcat, January 25: synchronized sequence and limitations.
The Associated Press independently reviewed bystander recordings. Its account describes a phone, pepper spray, repeated blows during a struggle, and an officer backing away with what appears to be a gun immediately before shooting. AP did not see Alex holding a weapon in the footage it reviewed. It also reported that he had a concealed-carry license. Hidden possession and visible brandishing are different facts. AP’s original video review, syndicated by CityNews.
The removal of the gun is central to the demand for accountability. Investigators must determine who saw it, what was communicated, what each firing officer reasonably perceived and why firing continued. The available angles do not read anyone’s mind. That limit makes the complete recordings, statements and ballistic evidence essential. It does not make the visible violence disappear.
We condemn the lethal violence shown in this record and the rush to cast the dead man as the explanation for it. The people with guns and government authority owe a complete account of each decision to use force. A badge cannot write its own acquittal.
The official account must answer the evidence
DHS initially described defensive fire and violent resistance. Senior officials accused Alex of attacking officers and suggested an intention to kill law enforcement. AP’s reviewed videos did not show Alex brandishing a gun or establish the claimed murderous intent. An allegation announced from a podium does not become evidence because the speaker has a federal title. The initial claims and the video record.
A preliminary CBP notification to Congress, obtained by ABC News, says an agent repeatedly shouted a gun warning and that roughly five seconds later one Border Patrol agent and one CBP officer fired. It says an agent advised others after the shooting that he had the gun; it does not specify when the weapon was physically secured or say Alex reached for it. A later announcement of possession is not proof of a later removal. The civilian videos place that removal before fire. This is a preliminary agency account, not a final independent finding. ABC’s January 27 reporting on the notification.
The agency distinction matters. Border Patrol and the other identified firing role sit within Customs and Border Protection. ICE is another component of the Department of Homeland Security. Calling every federal immigration officer an ICE agent blurs the chain that investigators need to establish. Name the institution, identify the act and follow the responsibility.
Officials should correct claims the evidence does not support. The family should not have to spend its grief fighting an accusation of murderous intent that the public recordings do not establish. There is a grotesque imbalance when the state can accuse instantly while the dead man’s parents must wait months for answers.
A gun is evidence. It is not a death sentence.
Alex’s possession of a firearm must be examined honestly. It cannot be treated as a substitute for examining the use of force. What threat existed, what had changed after the removal, what could each officer perceive, and what justified each shot? Those are questions about the actual encounter, not a referendum on whether a viewer approves of Alex’s politics.
In Barnes v. Felix, decided May 15, 2025, the Supreme Court rejected a rule limiting excessive-force review to the instant of perceived threat. The Fourth Amendment inquiry considers the relevant circumstances, including events leading to the shooting, from the perspective of a reasonable officer at the scene. The decision did not resolve every question about officer-created danger, and it did not decide Alex’s case. It explains why investigators cannot discard the preceding sequence. The Court’s opinion, pages 1 and 4–9.
Federal criminal civil-rights prosecution also requires proof of willfulness, not merely a tragic result or poor judgment. DOJ’s own explanation of 18 U.S.C. § 242 identifies the protected right, action under color of law and the required intent. State-law offenses and civil remedies involve their own elements and procedures. The duty is to investigate the evidence fully and prosecute the crimes it establishes. DOJ’s explanation of law-enforcement misconduct prosecutions.
Due process is not a favor reserved for an officer. A truthful investigation protects the public, the victim’s family and the integrity of any prosecution. Accountability that can prove its case is stronger than a slogan that cannot survive examination.
The evidence became a second fight
On February 16, Minnesota’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension said the FBI had told it on February 13 that it would not provide the evidence it had collected in Alex’s killing. That was not the end of the chronology: on July 13, the county attorney announced that state investigators had received previously withheld evidence and described two-way sharing. A truthful account must include that progress. BCA’s February statement; Hennepin County’s July statement.
The October sworn record describes cooperation stopping again. BCA Superintendent Drew Evans said in his October 13 declaration that the Pretti evidence still missing included officers’ firearms, the gun removed from Alex, officers’ phones, projectiles and cartridge casings, and a recording of one shooting officer’s statement. This is a plaintiff official’s sworn inventory, not evidence independently inspected by DaddyBruce95 or a final court finding. Evans declaration, especially paragraph 42.
County Attorney Mary Moriarty’s declaration describes a June 26 cooperation agreement, subsequent deliveries, an indefinite pause communicated in September and a refusal to allow even in-office viewing of unshared video. She explains that her July statement reflected the promised cooperation; later review identified omissions and additional material. Those details matter more than an argument over whether officials once used an optimistic sentence at a news conference. Moriarty declaration, paragraphs 27–39.
DOJ’s October 20 brief argues that Minnesota’s requests did not satisfy the applicable disclosure procedures and that further sharing was discretionary and not subject to the review the state seeks. Minnesota’s October 27 reply disputes that reading, argues its investigations qualify and says requiring prosecution before access to potentially decisive evidence reverses the investigative sequence. These are opposing legal arguments. They are not a judgment resolving the dispute. Federal reply and opposition; Minnesota’s reply.
Our position is direct: preserve the complete record and provide lawful access for independent investigation. If an item is withheld, identify the legal basis and explain the restriction through the appropriate process. Federal custody must not become a wall that the state can see but cannot examine. The government’s control of the file gives it a duty of care, not ownership of the truth.
Keep the court record and the charging status straight
The emergency evidence-preservation order entered January 24 was dissolved on February 2. Judge Eric Tostrud found the record insufficient to establish likely future destruction warranting the requested injunction, while addressing collection concerns and criticizing speculative early political characterizations. That decision did not rule the shooting lawful, acquit anyone, or order the full file shared. Preservation duties did not disappear when the temporary order ended. February 2 opinion, No. 26-cv-628, Document 24.
The separate evidence-access lawsuit filed in March remained ongoing in the accessible November 11 docket. It displayed the October briefs without a merits resolution. FOX 9’s November 8 reporting said the Good and Pretti death investigations had produced no charges. This review located no later public charging announcement. An unresolved investigation is neither a criminal conviction nor an exoneration. Evidence-access case docket and documents; FOX 9’s November 8 report, syndicated by AOL.
His family deserves meaningful answers
At their October 27 news conference, Michael and Susan Pretti described months without substantive answers and asked federal authorities to cooperate with the state investigation. DOJ defended its timing and said meaningful family communications generally occur at later procedural stages. The existence of an investigation is real. So is the family’s demand that it produce something more meaningful than indefinite reassurance. MPR’s firsthand press-conference report and DOJ response.
CNN obtained a July letter in which the family’s attorney alleged violations of the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act. Its report describes a July 13 meeting with the U.S. attorney but no substantive updates afterward. This is a disputed rights claim, not a court ruling established here; the statute does not automatically give a family the entire investigative file. Respectful communication, lawful process and the family’s dignity remain concrete obligations to examine. CNN’s reporting, syndicated by ABC7; 18 U.S.C. § 3771.
In an earlier ABC interview, Michael Pretti said of his son: “He wanted people to be treated fairly.” The family’s released statement asked: “Please get the truth out about our son. He was a good man.” Those are their words. The response should be sustained attention, accurate records and an investigation capable of reaching the people responsible. ABC’s August 25 family interview; Michael and Susan Pretti’s released statement.
What justice must require
The complete record preserved. Keep original video, audio, communications, firearms, ammunition evidence, medical records and investigative material secure, with an accountable chain of custody.
Independent access through lawful procedures. Resolve the outstanding evidence dispute. Explain restrictions specifically; protect witnesses and sensitive material while enabling competent investigators to do their work.
Responsibility for every relevant decision. Examine the takedown, disarming, warnings, each use of force, supervision, medical response and subsequent official accounts. Prosecute crimes the admissible evidence proves, through a fair process.
A family treated with dignity. Provide a responsible liaison and meaningful, lawful status information. Return property no longer needed. Explain the charging decision when the investigation permits.
Correction of unsupported official accusations. Identify what was known when claims were made, correct the public record and examine any deliberate falsehood or obstruction on its evidence.
Protection that continues after the headline. Publish justified findings and implement effective oversight, training and policy changes. Prevent the next family from inheriting the same closed door.
Ask elected representatives for written answers about independent investigation, records access and oversight. Request a named responsible official, a timetable and a follow-up. Use Take Action to find your representatives. Keep the demand peaceful and persistent. The point is enforceable accountability and people protected.
Carry the care forward
For people with firsthand evidence, use Hennepin County’s current official TAP instructions. The old Good/Pretti upload portal was closed; the county’s Transparency and Accountability Project provides its current route for potentially unlawful federal-agent conduct. Preserve original recordings and context, follow the agency’s instructions and protect private information. DaddyBruce95 is not the prosecutor’s evidence repository.
The University of Minnesota School of Nursing established the Alex Pretti Nursing Scholarship with his family’s consent. Its October 19 update describes an endowed fund for prelicensure nursing students with financial need, with preference for veterans’ care. This supports future nurses through the university. Read the university’s explanation and, if you choose, visit the official scholarship fund. Remembrance can help someone carry the work forward while the demand for accountability continues.
Faith cannot bless impunity
For DaddyBruce95, faith means care made useful: the wounded person helped, the frightened person protected, the powerful person required to answer. That is this platform’s moral reflection, not a claim about Alex’s private religious beliefs. God’s name does not turn state violence righteous, and a uniform does not place a human decision beyond scrutiny.
Alex’s colleagues describe a man who practiced care when other people were vulnerable. Honor that with more than admiration. Be dependable. Protect a neighbor. Refuse the easy cruelty of treating a stranger as disposable. There is no courage in a powerful institution asking a grieving family to become comfortable with silence.
Alex Pretti deserves justice. Honor his life. Preserve and release the evidence through lawful channels. Follow the decisions, prosecute the crimes the record establishes, and make the responsible institutions answer. The government does not get the final word simply because it is holding the file.
Sources, review scope and corrections
The links beside each claim lead to the reading record: original video analyses, firsthand interviews, university accounts, official statements, sworn declarations, legal briefs and court decisions. Video sequence findings are attributed to the organizations that performed those analyses. This review did not independently authenticate the full footage, inspect firearms or ballistics, obtain the complete body-camera record, conduct fresh interviews or request comment. The preliminary congressional notification was reviewed through the reporting that obtained it. Court filings state the parties’ positions unless a ruling is expressly identified.
Charging and docket status are dated above. Source access included institutional document hosts and original-report syndication where publisher access was restricted. No claim is made to know sealed proceedings. Symbolic cover artwork is original DaddyBruce95 design, not documentary evidence. For a specific factual correction, send the statement and a supporting source through Standards & corrections. Please protect witnesses’ and family members’ private information.