From 2014: "US Border Agents Intentionally Stepped in Front of Moving Vehicles to Justify Shooting at Them" [View all]

[Emrys]

An internal review of the US Border Patrol raises serious questions about the agency’s use-of-force policy.

The Los Angeles Times obtained an internal review of US Border Patrol’s use-of-force policies, which US Customs and Border Protection has refused to release publicly (members of Congress have seen a summary). While the Times did not offer the report in full, the paper did publish previously unseen snippets that portray a law enforcement agency operating under loose use-of-force standards and little accountability.

The review was completed in February 2013 by the Police Executive Research Forum, a nonprofit that develops best practices for law enforcement use-of-force policies. It examined sixty-seven use-of-force incidents by federal border agents near the US-Mexico border that resulted in nineteen deaths.

Here are some key findings of the review, revealed by the Times Thursday:

* Border Patrol agents have intentionally and unnecessarily stepped in front of moving cars to justify using deadly force against vehicle occupants.

* Agents have shot in frustration across the US-Mexico border at rock throwers when simply moving away was an option.

* Border Patrol demonstrates a “lack of diligence” in investigating incidents in which US agents fire their weapons.

* It’s questionable whether Border Patrol “consistently and thoroughly reviews” incidents in which agents use deadly force.

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/us-border-agents-intentionally-stepped-front-moving-vehicles-justify-shooting-them/

Let's see that again:



The report goes on to expand on why agents shooting into a moving vehicle was judged to be extremely unwise and likely highly counterproductive and dangerous, as was their attempting to stand in front of a moving vehicle.

At the time, Border Patrol rejected these recommendations.

Since people seem keen to entertain "new angles" on the recent murder propagated by the administration, I offer this as an old one.

Long service is often seen as something to be lauded. Ross's was certainly presented that way by Noem and others.

If that term of service overlapped with a period when Border Patrol had been formally criticized for the sort of culture described in this article, then perhaps it isn't necessarily such a positive in the old résumé.