Did Pretti act lawfully?

[j-mac]

The camera's didn't lie or distort anything. This was recorded from way before the officers came to Pretti's side of the road. He never even got close to them, until they came to him.

And it also shows the officer who shot Pretti, paying very close attention to the officer who took Pretti's gun. Even after the gun was taken.

We wasn't there. But it doesn't change what we saw on video.

So, no investigation. No trial. Just straight to the gallows according to you. GTFOH.

 

[Hafar1014]

Pretti wasn't obstructing anything. The officer approached him. He only raised his hand to block the pepper spray.

That's not obstructing.

He was obstructing that was his entire purpose when he got involved. Thats the only reason he was there. He has history of violence and his ex stated he has anger issues. Still he should only have been arested

 

[j-mac]

Pretti wasn't obstructing anything. The officer approached him. He only raised his hand to block the pepper spray.

That's not obstructing.

Your opinion is irrelevant

 

[j-mac]

He was obstructing that was his entire purpose when he got involved. Thats the only reason he was there. He has history of violence and his ex stated he has anger issues. Still he should only have been arested

Maybe so. But, it’s not up to the mob.

 

[SeaMajor7]

He was obstructing that was his entire purpose when he got involved. Thats the only reason he was there. He has history of violence and his ex stated he has anger issues. Still he should only have been arested

And he was ******* armed ILLEGALLY.
Your insistence that he was shot unlawfully is NONSENSE.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I agree with all that. But the shooting of Good. That was a good shoot. The officer didn't have time to see exactly which direction the wheels were turned or that she was trying to dodge him. Only that the car was moving forward towards him. After she'd been told by another to get out of her vehicle.

Good escalated that one.

But Pretti, 100% that was a bad shoot.

First shot? Sure I can buy that. That shot entered the vehicle low down on the A-Frame right side and was unlikely the fatel shot.

When the officer fired the 2nd and 3rd time the officer was standing BESIDE the vehicle firing through the driver side window putting a bullet in Good head that entered on her left side and exited the right side of the skull.

WW

 

[j-mac]

This thread isn’t about Good…don’t take the bait.

 

[WorldWatcher]

And he was ******* armed ILLEGALLY.
Your insistence that he was shot unlawfully is NONSENSE.

Actually he wasn't.

He had a valid CC license to carry in MN.

Under MN law not having his CC with him is a misdeomenor and it is REQUIRED to be dismissed if the valid license is presented to the court OR to the agency issuing the ticket.

So so long as he was a legal carry, there is no criminal action if he presents his CC at a later time. The misdeomenor charged are required to be dismissed.

WW

Sec. 624.714 MN Statutes

www.revisor.mn.gov

 

[Hafar1014]

Your opinion is irrelevant

No I have training in deadly force law and psychology. What do you have?
Pretti was extremely violent as can be seen in his video a week before he was killed. His ex also stated he has anger problems.
He comes to a protest armed with a gun? Whats his intent? How poor was his judgement. He has it tucked into his pants no holster. He then inserts himself into a confrontation between ice and a woman. Gets OC sprayed and the gun falls out. He is now blind and disarmed. He is restrained by 4 agents and is not an imminent threat. Deadly force is not legal. The agent was wrong to shoot him.
Pretti is a candidate for a Darwin award when poor judgement and stupidity ends your life

 

[mudwhistle]

He unlawfully stole all those bullets with his body.

FAFO is what he did.

He was being a dumbshit and paid the price for it.

 

[mudwhistle]

Absolute fabricated bull shit.

 

[Seymour Flops]

That's why I'm not a lefty.

#1 I support border security when done intelligently and also stepped up enforcement of illegals that crossed the border legally and remained past their alloted time.

#2 I support deportation of those present in the country illgeally in accordance with the law and under rights guarenteed to all persons.

#3 I don't support shooting a woman through the head through the drivers side window of a vehicle or shooting an unarmed man in the back who was on the ground under physical control of 4-5 DHS agents.

WW

Do you support a woman attempting to drive away after being ordered by law enforcement to step out of her vehicle?

Do you support that even if she runs into the officer that ordered her out?

 

[YoursTruly]

He was obstructing that was his entire purpose when he got involved. Thats the only reason he was there. He has history of violence and his ex stated he has anger issues. Still he should only have been arested

Post #151........

When you're on the other side of the road, and officers walk all the way over there to APPROACH YOU, that's not obstructing.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I respect you as a poster, and I will discuss any other topic with you.

But democrats and "not democrats" have made the conscious decision that taking the honest approach to this issue will not work for them, so therefore they will be completely dishonest.

Which is . . . okay. Unlike assaulting and interfering with law enforcement officers, being dishonest on a message board is absolutely protected by the first amendment.

But I do not have to humor people who do that, or say something like, "well for the sake of argument . . . "

Why do you assume that I'm not staying with facts based on publically available videos and therefore I'm being dishonest?

Facts:

• Pretti was videoing the officers from the street and later from the sidewalk on the opposite side of the street,
• At all times up to and including the shooting Pretti was (a) holding his cell phone, and (b) never reached for his holstered weapon,
• The DHS Agents approached Pretti,
• Pretti attempted to assist a woman get up that DHS agents had pushed to the ground,
• For that DHS agents initiate violence against Prett including OC spray multiple times rendering him blind and in great pain from the OC spray in contact with skin, eyes, nose and mouth,
• DHS Agents in a 4-5 agent scrum threw (said kindly "placed") Pretti face down on the ground where Pretti continued to be in great pain,
• A DHS Agent proceed to beat Pretti about the head of his OC Spray can,
• A no time during the scrum did Pretti ever reasch for his firearm in a rear waistband holster,
• A DHS Agent (Gray Coat) noticed the firearm when Pretti's coat road up due to the violence being committed by DHS Agents, that agent removed the firearm and exited the scrum,
• The DHS Agent that fired the first shot watched the Officer in the gray coat remove the firearm from the scrum,
• That DHS Agent then proceed to shoot Pretti in the back (note Pretti is still holding his phone, was unarmed, and face down with his arms in front of him).

I don't talk in "for the sake of argument". The above are facts derivied from pubicallyh availalbe video of the scene.

So some information that is not publically available which I think could exonerate the Officer that intitiated the shooting are:

• Is there a ballistics report showing Pretti's firearm was discharged?
• If so, was there a shell casing recovered (there would have been recovered as part of crime scene procedures)?
• Was the shell casing a forensic match to Pretti's firearm (scratches, pin indentation, same ammo type?
• Did the magazine indicate that a round had been fired (on other words a full spare and a single round missing from the magazine in the firearm).
• Since the video showed that Pretti's gun was pointed down and way while the Officer in gray was moving out of the scrum, was there damage to the roadway from a bullet impact?

OPINION: I think the Officer in grays reaction to the sound of the first shot isn't consistent with Pretti's firearm discharging, but I'm willing to be corrected based on evidence from the scene. Evidence that (A) the DOJ has, and (B) that if exculpatory they would have rushed to put before the public. The fact they have not released it is indicative that it does not support Pretti's firearm discharging making the first shot fired being by a DHS agent into the back of an unarmed man.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Do you support a woman attempting to drive away after being ordered by law enforcement to step out of her vehicle?

No.

Her attempting to leave was not grounds for her life to be ended.

Do you support that even if she runs into the officer that ordered her out?

#1 The officer was in volation of DOJ policy placing himself inm front of the vehicle and secondly in volation of attempting to shoot the vehicle so it would stop (physics doesn't work that way) and he was also in volation of DOJ policy for shooting at a fleeing vehicle.

#2 I've already said that the first shot was justifiable. The 2nd & 3rd shot through the drivers window while standing beside the vehicle shooting someone in the head was not.

WW

 

[ColonelAngus]

Easy, give them all amnesty, DLs, and allow them to vote.

That is the correct answer.

They just will not admit it.

 

[ColonelAngus]

That's why I'm not a lefty.

#1 I support border security when done intelligently and also stepped up enforcement of illegals that crossed the border legally and remained past their alloted time.

#2 I support deportation of those present in the country illgeally in accordance with the law and under rights guarenteed to all persons.

#3 I don't support shooting a woman through the head through the drivers side window of a vehicle or shooting an unarmed man in the back who was on the ground under physical control of 4-5 DHS agents.

WW

We mostly agree. That LE over reacted. My angle is that if she did not intentionally interfere with LE, she would not have been shot. Not that the specific LE who did the shooting should not be investigated and sanctioned.

Plenty of LE kil people. We just had one in Portland.

When that occurs, there should be an investigation and sanctions if the LE officer made poor choices.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Why do you assume that I'm not staying with facts based on publically available videos and therefore I'm being dishonest?

Facts:

• Pretti was videoing the officers from the street and later from the sidewalk on the opposite side of the street,
• At all times up to and including the shooting Pretti was (a) holding his cell phone, and (b) never reached for his holstered weapon,

And right before the scuffle, he got into an ice officer's face.

• The DHS Agents approached Pretti,

No.

Pretti walked five feet to get in an ICE officer's personal space, placing his face inches away from the officer's.

• Pretti attempted to assist a woman get up that DHS agents had pushed to the ground,

No.

When the officer pushed the woman away from himself, Pretti immediately turned to the officer - not to the woman - and approached the officer.

• For that DHS agents initiate violence against Prett including OC spray multiple times rendering him blind and in great pain from the OC spray in contact with skin, eyes, nose and mouth,
• DHS Agents in a 4-5 agent scrum threw (said kindly "placed") Pretti face down on the ground where Pretti continued to be in great pain,
• A DHS Agent proceed to beat Pretti about the head of his OC Spray can,
• A no time during the scrum did Pretti ever reasch for his firearm in a rear waistband holster,
• A DHS Agent (Gray Coat) noticed the firearm when Pretti's coat road up due to the violence being committed by DHS Agents, that agent removed the firearm and exited the scrum,
• The DHS Agent that fired the first shot watched the Officer in the gray coat remove the firearm from the scrum,
• That DHS Agent then proceed to shoot Pretti in the back (note Pretti is still holding his phone, was unarmed, and face down with his arms in front of him).

We can discuss all of that, but not starting off with the false narrative on Innocent Nurse Pretti.

I don't talk in "for the sake of argument". The above are facts derivied from pubicallyh availalbe video of the scene.

The videos are shaky and grainy, but they show Pretti doing what I said he did not what you say he did.

You cannot be making that claim based on what you saw in the video.So you must be making it based on the narrative that the media is putting out.

So some information that is not publically available which I think could exonerate the Officer that intitiated the shooting are:

• Is there a ballistics report showing Pretti's firearm was discharged?
• If so, was there a shell casing recovered (there would have been recovered as part of crime scene procedures)?
• Was the shell casing a forensic match to Pretti's firearm (scratches, pin indentation, same ammo type?
• Did the magazine indicate that a round had been fired (on other words a full spare and a single round missing from the magazine in the firearm).
• Since the video showed that Pretti's gun was pointed down and way while the Officer in gray was moving out of the scrum, was there damage to the roadway from a bullet impact?

OPINION: I think the Officer in grays reaction to the sound of the first shot isn't consistent with Pretti's firearm discharging, but I'm willing to be corrected based on evidence from the scene. Evidence that (A) the DOJ has, and (B) that if exculpatory they would have rushed to put before the public. The fact they have not released it is indicative that it does not support Pretti's firearm discharging making the first shot fired being by a DHS agent into the back of an unarmed man.

WW

I have no reason to believe that the firearm Pretti had on him when he interfered with and assaulted a federal law enforcement officer ever discharged. I i am almost certain that it did not.

Some people that I normally agree with are making that claim. The difference between me and the ICE bashers on here is that somebody claiming something is not enough to convince me, when I can see with my own eyes that their claim is not true.

 

[Seymour Flops]

No.

Her attempting to leave was not grounds for her life to be ended.



#1 The officer was in volation of DOJ policy placing himself inm front of the vehicle and secondly in volation of attempting to shoot the vehicle so it would stop (physics doesn't work that way) and he was also in volation of DOJ policy for shooting at a fleeing vehicle.

#2 I've already said that the first shot was justifiable. The 2nd & 3rd shot through the drivers window while standing beside the vehicle shooting someone in the head was not.

WW

I agree about the subsequent shots.

I doubt seriously that it is DOJ policy to never stand in front of a vehicle.

I am extremely skeptical that ice falls under doj.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

He unlawfully stole all those bullets with his body.

he did nothing unlawful by "stealing" those bullets, as a member of the white privileged class he was entitled to them.