Austin police released bodycam video showing officers pulling a wounded Venezuelan illegal immigrant from his car moments after ICE agents shot him during a targeted enforcement stop, an incident now under federal investigation.
Three short clips published Tuesday by the Austin Police Department capture the immediate aftermath of the shooting of 28-year-old Wilber Rafael Garces Perez, who ICE says was the subject of a vehicle stop because he had a final order of removal and was illegally present in the United States. In the footage, officers approach Garces Perez's car, ask him in Spanish whether he has weapons, "¿Tiene armas?", and receive a one-word answer: "No." An officer on scene then notes what he describes as "one gunshot wound so far." Three gunshots are audible on the recordings.
Garces Perez, a Venezuelan national who had been working as a DoorDash delivery driver, was hospitalized after the Sunday shooting and later transferred to an ICE detention facility. ICE said he arrived at the facility hours after his hospital release and slept on a bed, a detail the agency offered in response to early claims about his treatment in custody.
The agency's public statement left little ambiguity about how it views the encounter. ICE described the stop as targeted, not random, and pushed back against suggestions that Garces Perez was an innocent bystander swept up in a dragnet.
Fox News Digital reported that ICE stated plainly:
"This illegal alien was the subject of a targeted vehicle stop."
The agency added that Garces Perez's work permit had expired in 2025 and emphasized that holding a work permit does not confer legal status. ICE also issued a broader warning aimed at local officials it considers obstacles to enforcement:
"Resisting officers and evading arrest is dangerous for our officers, illegal aliens, and the public. We remind the public that resisting officers and evading arrest is a felony and a federal crime. Sanctuary politicians need to stop encouraging this dangerous behavior that puts our officers and the public at risk."
That last line, directed at "sanctuary politicians", points to a recurring friction between federal immigration enforcement and local governments that have adopted policies limiting cooperation with ICE. Austin has been a flashpoint in that debate for years.
Garces Perez's attorney, Kate Lincoln-Goldfinch, offered a sharply different account. She said an unmarked truck chased her client and sideswiped his vehicle before agents shot him. She also claimed Garces Perez received his final order of removal only because a hearing notice was mailed to a previous address, even though, she said, he had updated his address with the court.
If Lincoln-Goldfinch's account of the address mix-up is accurate, it raises a procedural question: whether Garces Perez had meaningful notice of the hearing that produced his removal order. ICE has not publicly addressed that specific claim. The agency has also neither confirmed nor denied the sideswipe allegation.
In an account relayed through his attorney, Garces Perez told the Washington Examiner that he was "not doing well" and had "not received the medical attention that I require." He is being held at the South Texas ICE Processing Center in Pearsall, roughly 130 miles southwest of Austin.
The incident is not the first time ICE enforcement actions have ended in gunfire in recent months. A Colombian national died after allegedly using a vehicle as a weapon against ICE agents in Maine, and other confrontations have drawn scrutiny from both sides of the political aisle.
Medical details that emerged after the initial reports paint a grim picture of Garces Perez's condition. Breitbart reported that the bullet fractured his clavicle and remains lodged dangerously close to his spinal cord, too risky to remove. Garces Perez himself said through his attorney: "I'm in a lot of pain because the shot fractured my clavicle and at the hospital where they took me they couldn't remove the bullet because it's close to the spinal cord."
Lincoln-Goldfinch was blunt in her assessment of the shooting itself: "There is absolutely zero justification for having shot him." That is the defense attorney's position, not a finding of any investigation. But the claim has gained traction among progressive lawmakers and advocacy groups pressing for answers.
The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI are now jointly investigating the shooting, according to a DHS post on X. The agency stated: "Homeland Security Investigations, with the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is leading the investigation into the officer involved shooting of an illegal alien from Venezuela."
Similar enforcement confrontations have prompted Texas Democrats to demand probes into ICE operations elsewhere in the state, a pattern that has become politically predictable.
The shooting triggered protests in Austin and drew public statements from city leaders. Austin Police Chief Lisa Davis said the city "deserves answers" and pledged transparency. The New York Post reported that Chief Davis told the public: "We're going to get all those questions answered, and we'll be as transparent as we can be."
Austin Mayor Kirk Watson went further, saying he was "very angry" but "not surprised at all," adding: "It's happened in other cities with the nature of ICE and the way ICE is doing its business these days." Watson's framing, treating ICE enforcement itself as the problem rather than the illegal presence that prompted it, reflects a familiar stance among Democratic municipal leaders who view immigration enforcement as inherently heavy-handed.
What Watson did not address is the fact that Garces Perez had a final order of removal. Whatever procedural questions surround how that order was issued, it existed. ICE was not conducting a random sweep. The agency identified a specific individual who, by its account, was illegally present and had exhausted or forfeited his legal options.
Confrontations between ICE and illegal immigrants during enforcement operations have produced fatalities as well. In Maine, a Colombian man was fatally shot by an ICE agent under disputed circumstances, with neighbors and officials clashing over what happened.
The legal battle is moving fast. U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia has ordered Garces Perez to appear in person at a hearing on September 30 in San Antonio, the Associated Press reported. The judge's order was direct: "Petitioner must be present at the hearing." His attorneys are fighting to block his deportation.
Democratic U.S. Rep. Joaquin Castro said he planned to visit Garces Perez to "check on his condition and demand his release." That demand, release, not due process, captures the progressive instinct to treat enforcement itself as the offense, rather than the illegal presence that made enforcement necessary.
Garces Perez was released from the hospital twice with the bullet still in his back before being returned to federal detention. Whether he is receiving adequate medical care in custody is a legitimate question. But it is a separate question from whether ICE had authority to stop him in the first place, and on that point, the agency's position is straightforward: he had a removal order, his work permit had expired, and he was in the country illegally.
The broader pattern of enforcement confrontations turning volatile is worth watching. When illegal immigrants with removal orders resist or flee, the risks escalate for everyone, agents, bystanders, and the individuals themselves. ICE said as much in its statement. Sanctuary city policies that discourage cooperation with federal agents do not eliminate those encounters. They make them less controlled, less predictable, and more dangerous.
Cases like the illegal immigrant charged with murder one day after a California judge granted pretrial release underscore the downstream consequences when the system treats enforcement as optional.
Several key facts remain unknown. Which ICE officers fired, and how many were present? Has ICE confirmed or denied the attorney's claim that agents sideswiped Garces Perez's car? What specific charges, if any, has Garces Perez faced beyond his immigration violations? And did Austin police or any other agency open an independent investigation into the use of force?
Enforcement is messy. Nobody disputes that. But the alternative, letting people with final removal orders drive around indefinitely because arresting them might look bad on camera, is not a policy. It is an abdication.