Podcast Summary: Legal AF by MeidasTouch

Episode: Trump Caught in the Act by Judge After Destroying Evidence in Pretti Murder
Date: February 6, 2026
Hosts: Michael Popok, Ben Meiselas

Episode Overview

This episode dives into a significant federal court ruling regarding the investigation into the shooting of Alex Pretti, focusing on evidence destruction and accountability. Michael Popok leads a detailed breakdown of Judge Tostrid's order, the implications for future civil suits, and the cascading legal failures of the federal agencies involved. The hosts analyze the larger issues of spoliation (intentional or negligent destruction of evidence), chain of custody breaches, and federal-state legal conflicts, all against the backdrop of political and judicial accountability.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Judge Tostrid’s Ruling: Implications of Destroyed Evidence

• Judge's Finding: The Trump-appointed federal judge, Judge Tostrid (Minnesota), concluded it is "highly likely" critical evidence from the Alex Pretti crime scene was destroyed and likely unrecoverable.
• Impact: While he declined to continue an injunction preventing further destruction, he explicitly invited Pretti's estate to leverage this spoliation of evidence in civil litigation against the federal government.
• Host Insight:
  • “He’s inviting effectively and knows there’s going to be an excessive force lawsuit brought by Preddy’s estate for what happened to him.” ([05:30] Michael Popok)

2. Breakdown of Crime Scene Handling and Evidence Loss

• Access Denied: The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) was denied access to the crime scene, evidence, agents, and witnesses immediately after the shooting.
• Lost Gun: Despite multiple affidavits from federal agencies (Homeland Security, Border Patrol, FBI), the location and handling of Pretti’s alleged firearm remain unknown.
• Host Frustration:
  • “For the life of me I sorted them all out. I laid them all next to each other. I don’t know where the gun is. From Mr. Preddy and the judge doesn't either.” ([06:40] Michael Popok)

3. Legal Consequences: Spoliation and Future Civil Action

• Civil Litigation: The judge explicitly notes that the loss of evidence—especially the gun—could severely undermine the government’s defense in the anticipated civil rights/excessive-force lawsuit.
• Spoliation Doctrine: Destroyed or mishandled evidence could lead to automatic findings of liability against the government (i.e., default judgments), shifting focus solely to damages.
• Judge’s Warning:
  • “Non preservation or spoliation would pose significant, perhaps dispositive consequences.” ([04:45] Michael Popok quoting order)

4. Concerns with Federal Processes and Transparency

• Chain of Custody Lapses: The judge points to failures by the federal agencies in properly securing and tracking evidence, most notably the disputed firearm.
• Superintendent’s Declaration: Superintendent Evans of the BCA asserts the gun was not preserved according to standard law enforcement procedures and raises alarm about other evidence.
• Federal Agents’ Silence: None of the federal affidavits could address the ongoing preservation status of the firearm, suggesting procedural failures.
• Host Reflection:
  • “From defendant silence, the judge says I infer they failed to safeguard the firearm in compliance with normal law enforcement processes.” ([08:00] Michael Popok)

5. Unanswered Questions and Continuing Investigations

• Agents' Firearms & Identities: Uncertainty remains over the Border Patrol agents’ weapons—whether one or multiple agents fired, and what guns were used in the shooting.
• Transparency Issues: The government has not released even the names of the agents involved, further fueling legal and public accountability debates.
• Host’s Summary:
  • “Was it one gun firing 10 bullets from an extended magazine? Or was it two weapons? Or was it more? We don’t know. We don’t even know the names of these people at this late date.” ([09:10] Michael Popok)

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On Legal Strategy and Forthcoming Lawsuits:
  • “He’s (the judge) more interested in the invitation on the lawsuit about the fact the judge has declared that there was defoliation, there was destruction of the crime scene and we don’t know where the gun is.” ([08:32] Michael Popok)
• On the Tone of Judicial Critique:
  • “If they do so at their own risk... the judge concluding that the gun was not properly handled.” ([08:20] Michael Popok)
• On Civil Justice Prospects:
  • “There’s also justice to be had on the civil side and for damages. Never bringing Alex Pretty or Renee Good back for that matter. But justice nonetheless.” ([05:47] Michael Popok)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 02:12: Introduction to Judge Tostrid’s order and the destroyed evidence
• 03:20: Minnesota BCA’s blocked efforts to access crime scene evidence
• 04:45: Explanation of the legal significance of spoliation
• 06:40: Focus on confusion and mishandling of Pretti’s alleged gun
• 07:40: Judge and Superintendent Evans’ assessments of federal failures
• 08:32: Host summarizes the civil implications, lawsuits, and missing evidence
• 09:10: Questions regarding agents’ weapons, identities, and further investigation

Closing Comments & Calls to Action

• Michael Popok urges listeners to stay engaged and follow ongoing coverage on Legal AF and Midas Touch.
• Ben Meiselas briefly promotes co-host Popok's new firm, focusing on civil rights and injury law ([10:20]).

Summary Tone and Language

The episode is factual, hard-hitting, and laced with legal insight, frustration at federal opacity, and a sense of urgency about civil justice and systemic reform.

Useful for new listeners:
This episode provides a clear narrative on the legal crisis stemming from the Alex Pretti shooting investigation, the systemic mishandling by federal agencies, spoliation doctrine, and the judicial response—crucial for anyone tracking law, politics, and civil rights intersections.