Report shows 67 cases of excessive force by Border Patrol

The 21-page internal report said some Border Patrol agents may fire at rock throwers and vehicles because they are frustrated. The report was made public Friday along with revised guidelines on use of lethal force.

The US Border Patrol's parent agency on Friday released a critical report that it commissioned amid complaints that agents used excessive force, a step that the new commissioner said was part of a commitment to transparency.

The Police Executive Research Forum found some agents are suspected of intentionally placing themselves in the escape route of assailants in fleeing vehicles before firing guns, creating justification to use deadly force. It said some shootings of rock throwers were questionable, especially when the attackers were hurling projectiles from across the border in Mexico. The 21-page report, which does not address specific cases, said some agents may fire at rock throwers and vehicles because they are frustrated.

The report was released with revised guidelines on use of force that prohibits agents from firing at moving vehicles or rock throwers unless there is "imminent danger of serious physical injury or death" to them or someone else. The new guidelines say agents should avoid standing in front of vehicles and that they may be able to shield themselves from rock throwers by seeking cover or distance.

The Customs and Border Protection agency had kept the report under wraps since it was completed in February 2013, resisting calls from members of Congress and immigration activists. R. Gil Kerlikowske was noncommittal at his confirmation hearing in January but said Friday that he prevailed in an internal debate about whether the report should be made public.

"We had a difference of opinion, and I won," Kerlikowske said at a news conference in Washington.

The agency had refused to make the report public even after the Los Angeles Times reported on its contents in February. The American Civil Liberties Union's San Diego affiliate sued in federal court last week to try to force the agency to turn it over.

Immigration activists, who urged Kerlikowske to release the report when they met with him Tuesday in San Francisco, claimed victory. Christian Ramirez, director of the Southern Border Communities Coalition, called it "a turning point for the strained relations between Customs and Border Protection and civil society."

The Police Executive Research Forum, a nonprofit group that advises law enforcement agencies, said it reviewed 67 case files related to use of deadly force from January 2010 through October 2012.

Customs and Border Protection took "administrative action" against employees in two of those 67 cases, and internal investigations are open on 10, said spokesman Michael Friel. No disciplinary action was taken in the other 55 cases.

The agency imposed disciplinary action against employees for use of force in 14 cases from 2010 to 2013, Friel said. Eight employees were suspended and five were reprimanded.


Associated Press writer Alicia A. Caldwell in Washington contributed to this report.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to