An eyewitness who recorded the fatal shooting of 37-year-old ICU nurse Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis has revealed that no federal agency has contacted her as part of the investigation, fueling renewed scrutiny and public debate over how the case is being handled. Stella Carlson, the Minnesota resident whose cellphone footage helped challenge early government accounts of the incident, discussed her experience in an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, saying that despite providing a critical firsthand account, she has not heard from the FBI, Homeland Security, or Border Patrol authorities days after the shooting.

Carlson told Cooper that she has faith in local officials and some representatives working toward justice, but she expressed deep distrust in the federal government’s handling of the case, suggesting that federal authorities may be more interested in “protecting themselves and spinning stories” than pursuing a thorough investigation. She said she has a legal team managing her contact and that, to her knowledge, federal investigators still do not have her name.

The shooting on January 24, 2026, has drawn intense attention and controversy amid conflicting narratives between federal officials and eyewitness accounts. The Department of Homeland Security initially portrayed the incident as involving an individual who posed a threat to agents, but Carlson’s video — one of the clearest publicly available recordings — was widely cited for showing Pretti was unarmed and not acting violently at the time he was shot. Other sworn testimony and bystander footage similarly contradict elements of the official story, prompting legal challenges and widespread criticism.

In the CNN interview, Carlson described how she has not been contacted by federal officials as part of what they described publicly as an “ongoing investigation.” When Cooper asked if she had been contacted by anyone from the federal government — including the FBI — she replied, “No, no, I have not. I do have a legal team now who are fielding much of that, and I am no longer accessible in those ways.” Cooper noted that he had also spoken with her attorney, who confirmed there had been no outreach from any federal agency.

Legal experts say that failure to interview a key eyewitness in a homicide or fatal use-of-force investigation is highly unusual, if not unprecedented. Contacting individuals who were present, especially those who captured footage of the incident, is generally seen as a foundational investigative step. Carlson and her attorney have indicated that the absence of federal contact so far is “extraordinary” and raises questions about the credibility and transparency of the investigation.

Carlson’s remarks have reignited criticism of the federal government’s narrative and response. Minnesota state officials have been far more engaged in gathering testimony and evidence, but Carlson told Cooper she believes federal authorities have sought to limit access to the crime scene and have shown reluctance to fully cooperate with local and independent inquiries. She also said she believes the silence from federal agencies suggests they may be avoiding directly confronting accounts that contradict their messaging.

Observers and civil liberties advocates have weighed in, pointing to the significance of Carlson’s role. She was present when the fatal shots were fired and her footage has been central to public understanding of the incident. In many homicide investigations, such direct witnesses are among the first individuals contacted, yet Carlson says she remains undisturbed by FBI or Department of Homeland Security investigators.

Critics of the federal response have suggested that the lack of outreach undermines public trust and reinforces perceptions that authorities may be more concerned with controlling the narrative than uncovering the full truth. Calls from community leaders, lawmakers, and civil rights groups for transparency and accountability have grown louder as a result. Some local officials have accused federal agencies of obstructing access to evidence, and at least one federal lawsuit alleges federal mishandling of the investigative process.

The absence of direct contact with Carlson, who filmed the shooting itself, amplifies broader controversy over the incident and its aftermath. With multiple eyewitnesses submitting sworn statements that appear to contradict official accounts, the public conversation has expanded beyond questions of what happened that day to concerns about how the investigation is being conducted.

Federal authorities have maintained that investigations are ongoing, but as of this reporting they have not publicly confirmed contact with Carlson or detailed any efforts to incorporate her account into a federal inquiry. The situation raises fundamental questions about investigative protocols, public transparency, and the role of eyewitness testimony in cases involving law enforcement use of deadly force.

Whether her story will ultimately reshape public understanding of that day in Minneapolis remains unresolved, but the growing spotlight on her treatment by federal investigators underscores the high stakes and intense scrutiny surrounding the case.