Austin police completely stop use of beanbag rounds after using munitions on 15-year-old girl

Thousands of protesters march from Huston-Tillotson University to the Capitol in June 2020. In social justice protest that summer, several participants received serious injuries from beanbag rounds.
Ricardo Brazziell/American-Statesman

Austin American-Statesman
Tony Plohetski, Austin American-Statesman
August 7, 2023

Austin police leaders have ordered officers to stop using “less lethal shotguns” three years after the weapons wounded Black Lives Matter protesters and amid new concerns by prosecutors about how they used the munitions on a 15-year-old unarmed girl suspected of no crime. 

Assistant Police Chief Robin Henderson, chief of staff for Chief Joe Chacon, said in a Friday memo to the department that the directive was the result of recent conversations with the Travis County district attorney’s office about the weapons’ “pattern of use and legal implications, including the potential for future prosecutions therefrom,” she wrote. “Effective immediately, all sworn personnel will cease the use of less lethal shotguns.”

“This cessation may be temporary as APD and the (District Attorney’s office) complete their dialogue,” the memo added.

Police have previously said that they would not use the weapons, which often fire beanbag rounds as a means for crowd control — but have continued using them in other instances — after the social justice protests in 2020 in which several participants received serious injuries, resulting in 19 indictments against officers. All but one of those cases are pending.

Additionally, the city has paid $18.9 million in settlements to 15 people injured during the protests.

Police have said that they were thrown into an unprecedented situation in which thousands of protesters overtook Austin streets and Interstate 35 and that the munitions did not function properly.

The latest police directive followed a July 28 memo, obtained by the American-Statesman, from District Attorney José Garza to Chacon in which Garza highlighted the case involving the 15-year-old girl, which prosecutors did not present to a grand jury but believe could have resulted in charges of assault, official oppression or deadly conduct against the officers.

In that June 2021 instance, police were serving an arrest warrant related to a shooting 10 days earlier. 

According to a lawsuit filed in January 2022, police were seeking to find the girl’s older brother, who was a suspect in the shooting. 

The Statesman reported that Shivon Beltran, the mother, was the first to exit the home when officers arrived, followed by her son, who was taken into custody without incident.

Officers then instructed the girl to exit. She walked backward as instructed and turned around so she would not fall. The girl was then shot on her left thigh and fell injured to the ground, according to the lawsuit.

"Rather than help her as she lay wounded, upon information and belief, the shooter and other APD officers yelled at her to crawl back to them," the lawsuit stated.

Police then handcuffed her, the suit said. 

Austin police cleared the officers of any wrongdoing in the case.

Henderson wrote in the department email that police want an opportunity to give prosecutors more information on the basis of the department’s training and policies concerning the munitions. 

Before Friday’s order, Austin police were allowed to use the munitions if a person was engaging in “riotous” behavior such as throwing rocks, bottles and other objects at officers or buildings, potentially putting police at risk; if a person was armed and the munitions might cause the person to drop a weapon; if the person had made a credible threat about hurting themselves or others; or if a person was refusing to obey orders and there was a belief that he or she had already committed a violent crime. Officers were required to give a warning before firing the weapon.

In his letter, Garza said that prosecutors, using their discretion, chose not to take the case to a grand jury and to instead engage in a conversation with the department and city about a “concerning pattern” in the use of the munitions. 

He said he believes a grand jury could have “reasonably concluded” that officers might have shot the youth because she was slow to put down her cellphone and “not because they were justified to do so under the law.”

Garza also wrote that he did not present the case because it did not result in serious injury or death — generally the standard in his office for carrying a case forward.

“It is the expectation of the (district attorney’s office) that the city will use this incident as an opportunity to examine and address its training and policies governing the use of shotguns with modified munitions,” he wrote.

Jeff Edwards, who represents the 15-year-old girl, said: "While I would have preferred the police department would have changed its practices as result of hurting so many innocent people, rather than the fear of future prosecutions, the decision by the department will protect the community from this obviously dangerous and too often misused weapon."