Witness video contradicts federal agent’s account of fatal Minneapolis nurse shooting

MINNEAPOLIS — A federal agent shot and killed a 37-year-old nurse on Jan. 24, sparking a dispute between authorities and witnesses over whether the man was armed at the time of the encounter.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released an image of a handgun they claim belonged to the victim, Alex Pretti. While social media reports alleged the image was a stock photo, the fact-checking website Snopes found no evidence the photo existed prior to the shooting.

However, Snopes could not definitively verify the DHS claim because the agency did not provide the original photo's metadata.

DHS officials stated that Pretti approached agents with a firearm and "resisted fiercely." The agency maintained that the agent opened fire because they "feared for their life."

A witness video of the incident appears to contradict the official account, showing Pretti holding a cell phone rather than a gun.

Pretti’s family confirmed that he was a legal gun owner but said they do not know if he was carrying a weapon when the shooting occurred.

The recent shooting in Minneapolis is more than an isolated use of force; it is a quintessential case study in the eroding public trust facing U.S. law enforcement. At the heart of the crisis is a widening credibility gap between the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) official narrative and conflicting eyewitness accounts.

DHS’s rapid dissemination of a firearm photo on X appears to have been a strategic public relations move aimed at narrative control. However, the tactic has proved counterproductive, inadvertently fueling conspiracy theories. By withholding raw, high-resolution evidence from independent fact-checkers, the agency has deepened skepticism surrounding its version of events, regardless of the underlying facts. This lack of transparency significantly undermines the department's institutional standing.

The backdrop of Minneapolis—the epicenter of the global protest movement following the death of George Floyd—makes the public uniquely sensitive to police conduct. The agency’s reliance on the legal boilerplate "feared for their lives," a justification mirrored in another recent fatal shooting in the city, renders the official explanation formulaic rather than persuasive. This pattern suggests that the friction is not merely the result of an individual officer's actions, but rather a systemic failure in how federal agencies navigate accountability in a hyper-polarized environment.

The incident has sparked widespread concern across many communities, including our own, regarding law enforcement accountability and the potential for fatal misunderstandings. For the many Vietnamese-Americans who exercise their right to legal gun ownership for self-defense—a topic of increasing importance within our community—the death of a lawful gun owner under such controversial circumstances is particularly alarming.