Eyewitness Affidavit Says He Was Helping, Not Attacking—New Challenge to Official Story in Alex Pretti’s Death
“I Saw Them Tackle Him… He Was Helping Her”: Shocking Court Affidavits Challenge the Official Story in the Death of Alex Pretti
A single sworn statement has the power to alter history—especially when it comes from the person standing at the center of chaos. In Minneapolis, where grief, anger, and unanswered questions have already converged, a woman’s newly filed court affidavit is now threatening to upend the official account of how Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old licensed nurse and U.S. citizen, was killed by federal immigration agents.
Her words are stark. They are precise. And they are now part of the federal court record.
“I saw them tackle him,” she wrote under oath. “He was helping me.”
That statement—supported by additional eyewitness affidavits and video evidence cited by attorneys—directly contradicts the version of events offered by the Department of Homeland Security, which has maintained that Pretti posed a lethal threat during an enforcement operation on January 24, 2026.
What began as a brief official announcement has evolved into one of the most consequential and contested use-of-force cases in recent Minneapolis history.
A Death That Refused to Stay Quiet
From the moment news broke that federal agents had shot and killed a civilian during an immigration operation in south Minneapolis, doubts followed. Early federal statements claimed agents were confronted by a dangerous individual who resisted commands and posed an imminent threat. But cellphone videos, witness interviews, and now sworn affidavits have steadily eroded that narrative.
Pretti was not a fugitive. He was not the subject of the operation. He was, according to multiple witnesses, an observer who stepped forward when others were hurt.
And now, the woman he allegedly tried to help has spoken publicly for the first time—under penalty of perjury.
“I Was on the Ground. He Came Toward Me.”
According to her affidavit, filed as part of a federal civil rights lawsuit, the woman describes being shoved to the ground by agents during a chaotic moment as federal officers moved through the area. She recalls confusion, shouting, and civilians scrambling to understand what was happening.
That is when Alex Pretti entered the scene.
“He came toward me to help,” she wrote. “He wasn’t yelling threats. He wasn’t aggressive. He was trying to get me up.”
She states clearly that she did not see Pretti holding a firearm. Instead, she recalls him holding what appeared to be a phone or camera—consistent with video footage already circulating publicly and referenced by legal teams.
Moments later, she says, agents tackled Pretti, sprayed him, and forced him to the ground.
Then came the shots.
Multiple Witnesses, One Consistent Theme
Her account is not isolated.
Additional affidavits submitted to the court echo the same core claims:
Witnesses say Pretti’s hands were visible
Several state they never saw a gun
Multiple describe him holding a phone or recording device
Others recall him attempting to assist civilians who had falle
One witness stated bluntly:
“I never saw him draw a weapon. He was trying to help people.”
These sworn statements stand in direct tension with the federal position that agents faced an armed and dangerous individual. The contradiction is no longer rhetorical—it is evidentiary.
Video Evidence and the Question of Credibility
Video footage referenced in court filings shows Pretti moving toward agents with an object in his hand that appears consistent with a phone. No clear firearm is visible in the publicly available clips. Attorneys argue that the footage aligns with eyewitness testimony, not the initial federal description.
Legal experts note that in use-of-force cases, consistency matters.
“When you have multiple independent witnesses telling the same story, and video that appears to support them, it raises serious credibility issues,” said one former federal prosecutor not involved in the case.
The federal agencies involved have not released full body-camera footage, citing an ongoing investigation.
That decision is now under mounting pressure.
The Lawsuit and the Push for Independence
Civil rights attorneys representing Pretti’s family and involved witnesses have filed suit in federal court, arguing that the Department of Homeland Security cannot credibly investigate itself in this matter.
They are calling for an independent investigation, separate from DHS and its enforcement arms, citing:
Conflicting official statements
Delayed disclosure of evidence
Eyewitness testimony contradicting federal claims
A federal judge in Minnesota has already ordered the preservation of all evidence related to the shooting, acknowledging the seriousness of the disputes and the public interest involved.
Legal filings argue that the woman’s affidavit is a “material turning point” in understanding what actually occurred.
Federal Claims Under Scrutiny
According to federal officials, agents believed Pretti posed an imminent danger. Some statements suggested he was armed or advancing aggressively.
But critics argue that these claims were issued too quickly—before full evidence review—and may have been shaped to justify the use of lethal force rather than explain it.
Local officials have also expressed concern. Several Minneapolis leaders publicly questioned why the federal narrative was released before a transparent review and why key evidence has not been made public.
The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office has acknowledged reviewing aspects of the case, though jurisdictional limits complicate state-level involvement.
A Pattern, Not an Isolated Incident?
Pretti’s death occurred just weeks after another fatal encounter involving federal agents in the region—the killing of Renée Good—raising alarms among civil liberties groups who argue that aggressive enforcement tactics are increasingly placing civilians at risk.
Activists say the affidavits reinforce a broader concern: that federal operations are escalating without sufficient safeguards, and that official narratives too often minimize civilian harm.
“This isn’t just about one man,” said a Minneapolis organizer. “It’s about whether truth matters when federal power is involved.”
The Human Cost Behind the Headlines
Alex Pretti was a nurse. Friends and family describe him as calm, compassionate, and deeply committed to helping others—traits that now resonate painfully with the woman’s affidavit.
“She described exactly who he was,” said a family friend. “Someone who steps in when someone is hurt.”
Vigils held across Minneapolis have drawn thousands. Photos of Pretti holding medical scrubs and smiling with family have become symbols of a case that refuses to fade.
Why This Testimony Matters
In legal terms, sworn affidavits carry weight. False statements expose the signer to criminal liability. That reality underscores why attorneys say the woman’s decision to come forward is so significant.
She was not a protest organizer. Not a politician. Not a lawyer.
She was a civilian who says she was helped by a man moments before he was killed.
And now her words are part of the permanent record.
Public Trust and the Stakes Ahead
As courts weigh motions and investigators review evidence, the stakes extend far beyond one case. The outcome may shape:
Standards for federal use-of-force investigations
Transparency requirements for DHS operations
Public trust in official narratives during enforcement actions
If the affidavits hold up under scrutiny, they could force revisions to the federal account—or open the door to criminal and civil consequences.
A Story Still Unfolding
No verdict has been reached. No final determination has been made. Federal officials continue to stand by their actions, while legal teams insist the truth is only now emerging.
But one thing is clear: the woman who says Alex Pretti tried to help her has changed the conversation.
Her testimony reframes the final moments of a man once portrayed as a threat—and replaces that image with something far more unsettling: a civilian attempting to help another civilian, caught in a moment that ended in gunfire.
As Minneapolis watches and the nation listens, the question now is not just what happened—but whether the full truth will be allowed to surface.
Because in the end, accountability begins where silence ends.
