Still, the footage provides the public with a significant new look at what happened immediately before the shooting.
Garces Perez’s attorney, Kate Lincoln-Goldfinch, previously offered a dramatically different description of the encounter. She said her client was working as a DoorDash driver when officers in an unmarked vehicle allegedly attempted to force his car from the roadway.
According to Lincoln-Goldfinch, the officers pursued Garces Perez, sideswiped his vehicle, shot him in the back of the neck and then pulled him from the car.
The newly surfaced surveillance footage raises questions about at least part of that narrative.
Rather than showing federal vehicles quietly following the vehicle without identifying themselves, the surveillance recording appears to show the pursuing vehicles operating with emergency lights and sirens.
The footage also does not visibly show the federal vehicles striking Garces Perez’s car. That does not establish that no collision occurred, however, because the available surveillance angle only captures part of the pursuit.
Another piece of video evidence has also complicated the description of what happened after Garces Perez was wounded.
Body-camera footage released by the Austin Police Department shows local officers responding to the scene and assisting Garces Perez out of his vehicle. The footage does not appear to show Austin police dragging him from the car, as his attorney previously alleged.
That distinction is significant because investigators are still attempting to reconstruct the sequence of events from multiple recordings and eyewitness accounts.
At the same time, the newly released footage does not answer the central question surrounding the case: why the federal officer fired his weapon.
The ICE officer involved reportedly was not wearing a body camera, meaning there is no officer-worn recording capturing the shooting itself. CBS News reported that sources familiar with the investigation said the officer did not have a body camera at the time.
That leaves investigators with surveillance recordings, police body-camera footage and witness accounts as they work to establish exactly what happened.
The immigration status of Garces Perez is also disputed by the parties involved.
DHS has said Garces Perez was unlawfully present in the United States and was subject to a final removal order. His legal team has disputed aspects of the government’s account and has been fighting to prevent his deportation. CBS reported that his attorney said he had previously possessed a work permit and was seeking asylum, while DHS said the permit expired in 2025.
A federal judge has temporarily blocked immigration authorities from removing Garces Perez from the country ahead of a scheduled hearing, according to reporting from the Austin Chronicle.
Meanwhile, concerns about his medical treatment have become another major point of contention.
Lincoln-Goldfinch said her client was being held in an ICE detention facility’s infirmary with the bullet still lodged in his body.
“Our immediate demands are clear: restore Wilber’s communication privileges and take him back to the hospital,” Lincoln-Goldfinch wrote in a Facebook statement.
“He needs access to appropriate medical care,” she added.
Garces Perez was initially taken to a hospital after the shooting before being transferred into federal custody. His attorney has continued to raise concerns about his condition and treatment while detained.
Democratic Rep. Greg Casar of Texas also visited Garces Perez at the South Texas ICE Processing Center in Pearsall and sharply criticized the federal government’s handling of the case.
“ICE has been trying to blame all of this on him without releasing any of the video footage, any of the evidence,” Casar said in a video posted after the visit.
Other Democratic lawmakers and immigration advocates have likewise condemned the shooting and renewed criticism of ICE’s enforcement operations.
But the release of the surveillance footage introduces another important piece of evidence into an investigation that remains far from settled.
The video does not prove exactly why the officer fired, and it does not establish every detail of the encounter. What it does show is that federal vehicles were pursuing Garces Perez with flashing lights and sirens shortly before the shooting — a detail that conflicts with portions of the account initially provided by his legal team.
As federal and local investigators continue examining the incident, additional evidence could determine which competing accounts are supported by the full record.
For now, the newly released footage has made one thing clear: there is considerably more to the Austin confrontation than could be seen in the first videos released after the shooting.
