Alex Pretti Was More Than Just an Observer

After publishing a reaction piece to the Alex Pretti confrontation, I promised readers that I’d review the case once we had as much info as seems likely to appear. So here goes.

What I Got Wrong

My greatest error was my since-debunked conviction that Pretti’s concealed-carry handgun, a Sig Sauer, accidentally discharged, and that it was only after this occurred that the officers began shooting Pretti. The official statement from DHS and, over at The Dispatch, Kevin Williamson’s analysis of the Sig Sauer — which has a reputation, unearned in KDW’s reckoning, for accidental discharge — are sufficiently convincing on the matter: the officer behind Pretti and then one of his colleagues on Pretti’s flank were the only two to discharge firearms (Glocks 19 and 47) in the confrontation.

Does this change anything?

Yes, the lack of an initiating shot raises the bar the officers must clear for why they decided to fire on Pretti. While Pretti’s sidearm was with an officer at the time it was once thought to have fired, it would nonetheless spook officers on the scene who may not have been aware that their colleague had the pistol they knew Pretti to be carrying. But further information about Pretti that became known to the public later suggests that he was more than just an observer caught up in a singular federal policing operation.

What We Know Now

Alex Pretti had earlier been spoiling for a fight with ICE and its law enforcement peers, as video of a confrontation on January 13 indicates:

Video from another angle, catty corner to the one in the most widely publicized video, shows Pretti running up to officers and shouting at them.

After some generic curses, Pretti is heard screaming, “F***ing assault me, motherf***er.” He then spits at an officer who chooses to turn away from him, and finally, he kicks out the tail light of an agency Ford Expedition. While the rest of his actions are varying degrees of ill-advised — especially since, as we can see in the closer video, he has his concealed-carry weapon in his waistband — the destruction of federal property is an absolute no-no.

Charlie Cooke notes in his analysis of the exchange that “under 18 U.S.C. § 1361, that’s a misdemeanor if the damage is under $1,000, and a felony if the damage exceeds $1,000. Under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), it is a felony if the perpetrator was armed at the time — which Pretti appeared to be.” Double trouble.

But let’s leave aside the gun in Pretti’s waistband for a moment; with that roundhouse kick to the hindquarters of the agents’ vehicle, he’d already be in real danger of committing a felony. Taking a look at the styling of the vehicle, we can be relatively confident that Pretti shattered a tail lamp assembly for a 2018–21 Ford Expedition Max Special Service Vehicle. That assembly has an MSRP of $445.85, and this is before labor is factored in ($150/hr plus tax). It is unlikely that just replacing the assembly, as well as verifying the integrity of the dangling wiring harness, could be done for less than $1,000. Factor in paint correction, fastener repair/replacement, and body work, and that quote could be a few thousand very quickly.

So why not arrest Pretti on the spot? After all, the agents spilled from the vehicle and roughed him up before getting back into it and driving off. First, the agents were not there to pick up screaming agitators. The agents’ target was their priority; we can safely assume that they deemed fussing about a tail light and arresting Pretti, when the agents had been denied the support of local police and their holding facilities, more work than it was worth. But the officers who tackled Pretti surely clocked his CCW and most likely notified others about him.

Conclusion
Alex Pretti would almost certainly be alive today if he had been arrested for his assault on a federal vehicle. Minnesota leaders failed to provide to federal immigration officers the men and means necessary to contain the threat from civilians while those officers enforced the immigration laws they were assigned to prosecute. Pretti was imprudent in repeatedly harassing officers while carrying — even if it was technically legal — and he was undoubtedly in error when spitting on officers and damaging their tools of enforcement.

Whether the officers who shot and killed Pretti — Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and Customs and Border Patrol officer Raymundo Gutierrez — were criminally in error to take Pretti’s threat seriously enough to shoot him will be up to others. But Pretti and his local and state leaders made all the wrong choices up until that moment. The immigration enforcement officers had a tough job made tougher by those who, in their arrogance, thought themselves scions of virtue rather than impediments to justice.