Rob O'Dell, The Republic | azcentral.com 3:31 p.m. MST July 1, 2016

U.S. Customs and Border Protection released decisions in the first four use-of-force cases examined by a new review board formed to look into agent shootings and force incidents that lead to serious injury or death.

In each of the four cases, the new review board said the agents' use of potentially deadly force was in compliance with CBP's use-of-force policy.

The four decision were posted online late Thursday. None of them were part of the questionable use-of-force killings examined by The Arizona Republic, which found no repercussions against border agents involved in 50 deaths, even in cases were agents shot unarmed teenagers in the back. One agent has since been indicted on federal murder charges and is awaiting trial.

Customs and Border Protection said there are 14 additional cases the new use-of-force review board is looking into. A CBP spokeswoman would not say anything about the other 14 incidents the review board is examining.

In two of the four incidents reviewed, Border Patrol agents fired at individuals throwing rocks at them from a higher elevation. One was in the desert near Nogales on May 5, 2012. The other occurred when a boat in the Rio Grande River got stuck on a sandbar near Escobares, Texas, on Oct. 2, 2014. In both cases, no one was hit by the bullets and the rock throwers scattered. The agents were determined to be in compliance with the CBP's use of force policy.

In the Rio Grande incident, agents used two less-than lethal FN-303 projectile launchers to try and scatter the rock throwers, but the volley of 18 shots didn't stop the rocks. CBP said the launchers became inoperable before the agent fired his weapon.

Another incident occurred in the Pacific Ocean 10 miles west of Solana Beach, Calif., on June 18, 2015, when a Border Patrol officer fired at smugglers in an "panga" boat. The agent first fired two warning shots and then disabling shots towards the boat's engine. The review board said independent of the shots fired, the boat turned sharply and collided with the Border Patrol vessel and capsized. One person drowned in the incident.

The fourth case involved the Border Patrol assisting local police in Edinburg, Texas, confront an individual wanted for murder who was firing at police on July 22, 2014. The Border Patrol and nine other law enforcement officials fired, killing the man. The shooting was considered within policy.

The Arizona Republic filed a Freedom of Information Act request Dec. 1, 2015, asking CBP for names of members of the use of force review board, what incidents the board was considering and information related to the incidents. The Border Patrol has not fulfilled any of that request.

The agency also has declined to say what the board members' qualifications. The Border Patrol would only say the committee is comprised of senior leaders from Customs and Border Protection, the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

According to the CBP, the review board is assigned to review use-of-force incidents resulting in serious physical injury or death, or any incident involving the discharge of a firearm in a non-training setting. The board reviews cases that have completed the investigative process and have been declined for prosecution by either a U.S. Attorney, state or local prosecutor, the agency said.

The board is tasked with considering:

Whether use of force is within policy.
Whether there is possible misconduct associated with the application of force.
Whether lessons can be learned from the incident in terms of techniques, tactics, policy, training, and equipment.
The use-of-force board makes its conclusions to CBP leadership, but CBP Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske makes the call whether the use-of-force was within policy.

In each of the four cases, CBP said the review board made policy and/or operational recommendations based on the incidents.

The use-of-force review board findings are a "potentially positive step," said Mitra Ebadolahi, a border litigation attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego, but CBP should be more transparent about the cases the board reviews

Ebadolahi said the ACLU wasn't even aware of two of the use of force cases -- the incidents in Nogales, Ariz., and Edinburg, Texas, until the findings were released by the review board.

"It's very hard to asses the outcome of these four cases without more information," she said. "It's difficult to know how these cases are prioritized. ... It's important to know what cases are under investigation."

Shawn Moran, vice president of the national Border Patrol union, said he doesn't know who sits on the use-of-force review board or what the criteria they use to make their recommendations. Any policy changes related to working conditions would need to be negotiated with the National Border Patrol Council before they could be implemented, Moran said.

He said the release of the review board findings were a positive step to show critics and the public how agents do their jobs and respond to dangerous incidents.

"I think it's a good thing CBP is providing some measure of transparency," Moran said. "The vast majority are going to be shown that the agent acted appropriately and within policy and according to training."

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/...iews/86578924/