A preliminary review by U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s internal watchdog office found that Alex Pretti was shot by two federal officers after resisting arrest, but did not indicate that he brandished a weapon during the encounter, according to an email sent to Congress and reviewed by The New York Times.
The review makes no mention of the Department of Homeland Security’s earlier claims that Mr. Pretti, a U.S. citizen, “wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.” Shortly after the shooting, Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, claimed that Mr. Pretti was “brandishing” a gun.
Officials had provided no evidence to back up the claim, which was contradicted by witness videos.
The initial review by C.B.P., which deployed more than 1,000 officers and agents to support the enforcement operation in Minnesota, represents the first official written assessment of Saturday’s shooting since administration officials rushed to blame Mr. Pretti.
A D.H.S. spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
The review was done by C.B.P.’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which normally conducts internal misconduct investigations following shootings, and was distributed to members of Congress on Tuesday, as required by law. It presents a detailed timeline of the events based on body camera footage and agency documentation.
At approximately 9 a.m. on Saturday, a federal officer was confronted by two female civilians blowing whistles, according to the review. Although the officer ordered them to move out of the road, they did not move.
The officer then “pushed them both away” and one of the women ran to Mr. Pretti, the review said. After the officer attempted to move them out of the road and they did not move, the officer deployed pepper spray at them, according to the review.
Mr. Pretti then resisted attempts by C.B.P. officers to take him into custody, prompting a struggle, the review said. Multiple times during the struggle, a Border Patrol agent yelled, “He’s got a gun!”
About five seconds later, a Border Patrol agent fired his Glock 19, and a C.B.P. officer also fired his Glock 47 at Mr. Pretti, according to the review.
The government review said that after the shooting, a Border Patrol agent “advised he had possession of Pretti’s firearm” and “subsequently cleared and secured Pretti’s firearm in his vehicle.”
At approximately 9:02 a.m., C.B.P. personnel cut Mr. Pretti’s clothing and provided medical aid to him by placing chest seals on his wounds, according to the review. About three minutes later, local emergency medical services arrived at the scene.
Mr. Pretti was placed in an ambulance and transported to Hennepin County Medical Center before medical personnel pronounced him dead at approximately 9:32 a.m., the review said.
On Tuesday, President Trump faulted Mr. Pretti, who had a firearms permit, for bringing a gun to protest the enforcement operation. It is legal to openly carry a weapon in Minnesota. Still, Mr. Trump promised a “very honorable and honest investigation” into his killing.
C.B.P.’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which produced the initial report, has a large investigative program to look into officer-involved shootings and other potential officer misconduct. Basic incident reports like the one distributed on Tuesday are required to be released within 72 hours of an officer shooting. But those are often followed by investigations from internal staff, often alongside F.B.I. officials conducting a review to see if criminal charges are warranted.
The review says instead that Homeland Security Investigations, an arm of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is investigating the incident while OPR is reviewing those findings. The decision to have HSI take the lead has provoked some consternation from former O.P.R. leaders.
In a statement on LinkedIn posted Tuesday morning, Daniel Altman and Matthew Klein, two former officials at the watchdog office who recently left, called on the administration to allow O.P.R. to do an internal review and the F.B.I. to conduct a criminal investigation into whether the officers violated civil rights laws.
They said HSI “does not have the mandate or expertise to conduct civil-rights use-of-force investigations.”
Mr. Altman and Mr. Klein were also critical of the initial rush to judgment by administration officials and called for more transparency.
“Public confidence has already been damaged,” they wrote. “Transparency — through disciplined, sequenced release of investigative findings — allows the public to judge the results for themselves.”
Michael Gold contributed reporting.
Madeleine Ngo covers immigration and economic policy for The Times.
The post Initial D.H.S. Review Does Not Say Pretti Brandished Gun, Departing From Noem’s Claim appeared first on New York Times.
