Pretti Shooting my opinion as a member of US Lawfare

[Godboy]

The latest report from the Federal government supports this was an illegal use of deadly force. After He was disarmed there was no imminent threat. 5 seconds after the gun was taken away he was shot by two agents. There were no furtive movements, and he was restrained, violently resisting yes, but unarmed. The agents screwed up.

In context Pretti had a violent encounter a week before breaking his rib, went to the protest/riot with a loaded gun, and was looking to get even. An act of total stupidity. But the use of deadly force was not justified.

DHS report says 2 agents fired weapons in Alex Pretti shooting

DHS report sent to the House Oversight Committee says two federal agents shot Alex Pretti and does not say that Pretti drew his gun.

abcnews.go.com

What if they werent aware that he had been disarmed? The guy that disarmed him did it sneaky as shit, and he didnt proclaim "i have the gun". Pretti gets shot like 1 second after the gun is removed. There is NO WAY that they all saw the gun get removed.

 

[WorldWatcher]

When a perp reaches in their pocket after being disarmed, law enforcement doesn’t have the luxury to wait and see if it’s a gun.

Except that Pretti never reached into a pocket.

None of the videos show this action. There is one frame in the Pink Lady video where his right arm is obscured by his body (from the video frame of reference). But in one frame its visible, the next is obscured in the video, and the next frame it is visibile again. Time elapse a fraction of a second. This in context while he is on the ground/knees being manhandled by multiple DHS agents.

Now during the entire context of the event, from the very beginning Pretti is holding his cell phone in his right hand. Duing the frames in question he is still holding his cell phone, his body obscures his arm, and when the arm a fraction of a second later is visible again it is STILL holding the cell phone.

You cannot "reach into pocket" holding a 6x3 cell phone, grap a pistol, while still holding the cell phone grab the pistol and then hold the pistol in a manner suitable for shooting. You would have to drop the cell phone, which Pretti never did.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

What if they werent aware that he had been disarmed? The guy that disarmed him did it sneaky as shit, and he didnt proclaim "i have the gun". Pretti gets shot like 1 second after the gun is removed. There is NO WAY that they all saw the gun get removed.

The officer with the red arrow showing line of sight is also the officer that fired the first shot. The blue arrow is the officer that removed the pistol form Pretti's rear belt.

The officer that shot Pretti watched the other officer remove the gun, after the gun was removed, he then shot Pretti.

WW
.
.
.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Obviously you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

You brought up the legal definition. I just showed it to you.

What Pretti did was not assault by the legal definition.



“Shove” lol.

It was assault again from your provided definition:

"Assault is generally defined as an intentional act that puts another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact. No physical injury is required, but the actor must have intended to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the victim and the victim must have thereby been put in immediate apprehension of such a contact."

From the first push back off the streets and bumping chests with the officer, then coming back into the street and placing himself in a defensive blocking position, to then actually fighting with them while armed with a hidden gun.

Is all offensive contact WITH a reasonable apprehension of imminent harm.

 

[OODA_Loop]

The officer with the red arrow showing line of sight is also the officer that fired the first shot. The blue arrow is the officer that removed the pistol form Pretti's rear belt.

The officer that shot Pretti watched the other officer remove the gun, after the gun was removed, he then shot Pretti.

WW
.
.
.

View attachment 1212417

You don't know what anyone saw in the 1-2 seconds after the gun was discovered in a full on scrum and the shots fired.

 

[Hafar1014]

What if they werent aware that he had been disarmed? The guy that disarmed him did it sneaky as shit, and he didnt proclaim "i have the gun". Pretti gets shot like 1 second after the gun is removed. There is NO WAY that they all saw the gun get removed.

He didnt have a gun in his hand and was face down blinded by pepper spray and in no way was an imminent threat. Your what if is a poor excise. It was 5 seconds and the gun was in plain sight in the agents hand

 

[WorldWatcher]

You don't know what anyone saw in the 1-2 seconds after the gun was discovered in a full on scrum and the shots fired.

Actually we do.

I mean it's not like we don't have video showing what happened.

Like the screen shot showing the officer that first shot Pretti watching the other officer remove the firearm from Pretti's rear holster/belt.

WW

 

[Hafar1014]

By the federal govt? C'mon man? Is this the same federal govt who won't let local authorities investigate the matter? That federal govt?

The report supports wrongful use of deadly force by ICE maybe you should read it before you make a dumb comment

 

[OODA_Loop]

Actually we do.

I mean it's not like we don't have video showing what happened.

Like the screen shot showing the officer that first shot Pretti watching the other officer remove the firearm from Pretti's rear holster/belt.

WW

Actually you don't. You think you do from the safety of your easy chair and a screenshot.

It was highly dynamic, adrenaline charged event and lasted about a second.

 

[Godboy]

The officer with the red arrow showing line of sight is also the officer that fired the first shot. The blue arrow is the officer that removed the pistol form Pretti's rear belt.

The officer that shot Pretti watched the other officer remove the gun, after the gun was removed, he then shot Pretti.

WW
.
.
.

View attachment 1212417

Youre trying to tell me that picture is proof that they saw him get disarmed? I cant see ANYONES eyes, let alone where they were focused, and neither can you.

Get this weak bullshit out of my face.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Actually you don't. You think you do from the safety of your easy chair and a screenshot.

It was highly dynamic, adrenaline charged event and lasted about a second.

That does not change the actions that occurred. It does go to context in examining the decisions made.

But it does NOT change the facts. Like people claiming that "well the officer didn't see the gun removed by the other officer", we that is false because the officer that first shot Pretti WATCHED it being removed.

Or claims that Pretti "reached into his pocket", the videos also show that is false because at no time do any videos show Pretti reaching (a) for his firearm, OR (b) into a pocket. During the time in question his left hand was always visible in front of him. His right hand, throughout the entire event was holding his cell phone.

WW

 

[Hafar1014]

Youre trying to tell me that picture is proof that they saw him get disarmed? I cant see ANYONES eyes, let alone where they were focused, and neither can you.

Get this weak bullshit out of my face.

Best analysis of the video opposes use of deadly force by ICE

 

[Correll]

You cant possibly know "he was looking to get even". You cant read minds and you cant ask a dead man. You are just assigning evil intentions to a dead man to soften the blow of the killing, to make it seem like it was saving some future issue. Justice doesnt work like that. You dont get to make up his motivations.

There is also no video evidence of the encounter from a week earlier that you allude to. Whether it happened or not cannot be trusted from the same people telling us he was intending to do massive damage and assassinating ICE agents. We saw that wasnt true. They cant be trusted. We need to see with our own eyes.

I will give you credit for posting an actual thread instead of just trolling though. Nice growth.

Said the leftard who can see racist intent in the messages he reads in his bowl of alphabits.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Youre trying to tell me that picture is proof that they saw him get disarmed? I cant see ANYONES eyes, let alone where they were focused, and neither can you.

Get this weak bullshit out of my face.

Better yet put it in front of a jury.

Prosecutor: "Officer Red, did you see the gun being removed from Pretti's rear holster?"

Officer Red: "Ah, no."

Prosecutor: "Please show peoles exibit 43 at time 9:46."

Prosecutor: "Officer Red, is that you watching the gun be removed?"

Officer Red: "Yes. But, but, just because I watched it being removed doesn't mean I saw it being removed".

At that point loud laughter is heard from the jury box.

WW

 

[OODA_Loop]

That does not change the actions that occurred. It does go to context in examining the decisions made.

But it does NOT change the facts. Like people claiming that "well the officer didn't see the gun removed by the other officer", we that is false because the officer that first shot Pretti WATCHED it being removed.

WW

You don't know what the officer saw in that 1 second therefore you can not state with certainty what someone saw and decided in the instant.

 

[citygator]

Said the leftard who can see racist intent in the messages he reads in his bowl of alphabits.

I don't eat alpha-bits.

 

[Correll]

I don't eat alpha-bits.

Wish I could believe you. But lefties always lie.

 

[rightwinger]

Yup. Just because they gave up one doesn't mean they don't have another.

He could have 20 guns but if his hands are empty you don’t shoot

 

[westwall]

He could have 20 guns but if his hands are empty you don’t shoot

Except he was fighting them. All bets are off then.

 

[citygator]

Wish I could believe you. But lefties always lie.

Discontinued in 2021 apparently.