Monday, February 21, 2011

Gathering Intelligence: The Systematic Gang Member Interview

Very interesting article by Andrew Eways, Maryland State Police from corrections.com.

Since law enforcement agencies and correctional facilities first dedicated officers to gang-related duties, these personnel have sought out and interviewed gang members whenever the opportunity arose. Gang members have been interviewed during traffic stops, during field contacts, during criminal investigations, during intake and booking at city and county detention facilities, and in state prisons. The list goes on…

Due in large part to a lack of fundamental training, however, many officers are not making their gang member contacts as productive as they could be. For law enforcement purposes, most gang member interviews fall into one of three major categories; field interviews, custodial or intake interviews, and debriefings; each with its own rules and special considerations.

Field Interviews:

A properly documented field interview (FI) is a valuable investigative tool. It is also probably the most important initial step in developing accurate information about gangs. Contrary to popular belief, almost all useable police intelligence on gangs, gang members and their criminal activities is generated through contacts made by patrol and uniformed personnel. These officers interact with gang members during traffic stops, calls for service or simple consensual contacts. Although depending on the nature of the field contact a subject may have the right to refuse to be photographed, officers should not be afraid to ask for consent to take pictures of the gang member, tattoos or clothing. Proper documentation of field interviews, coupled with the photographs and other evidence the officers gather, may assist in solving more serious crimes.

While conducting field interviews with gang members, officers must also be aware of their surroundings and conscious of officer safety. Field interviews will most often take place in open, public areas frequented by other gang members. Be aware that gang members may be hesitant to talk or may cry harassment in the hopes of inciting others around them. This is also where an officer’s inter-personal skills and tact will come into play. If an officer identifies a potential informant or cooperator during a field contact, they should keep the field interview brief and make arrangements for a follow-up interview with the subject in a more secure location out of sight of others.

Custodial and Intake Interviews:

Unlike field interviews, custodial and intake interviews are usually conducted in a safe and controlled environment. In these instances, officers are speaking with subjects who have been arrested and are at a police station, booking facility or detention facility. The custodial and intake interviews are a chance for the officer to obtain specific information about gangs, gang members and their criminal activities while the interviewees are at a disadvantage.

In the experience of many gang officers, the most opportune time to conduct custodial and intake interviews is during the booking process at a police station or during the intake process at a detention facility. In these instances, the gang member is likely to be at an emotional low point and more likely to answer questions about their gang and criminal activities. Further, many gang members who have just been arrested will be cooperative out of fear or in hopes of lessening or avoiding prosecution for the charges they face. The stress of being arrested or the immediate desire to cooperate with law enforcement and garner favor often does not last more than a few hours, so gang officers should take full advantage of this situation and, whether day or night, make arrangements to conduct custodial and intake interviews as soon as gang members are identified. It is also important to remember, however, that some gang members may appear cooperative and forthcoming in an effort to manipulate officers into unwittingly revealing sensitive information to them. Officers must be aware of this and always maintain control of the interview.

Unlike field interviews, the subject of a custodial or intake interview does not necessarily have any right to refuse to have their face, profile, tattoos and distinguishing features photographed. It is important that these pictures be taken during the course of regular booking or intake process. If a gang member has already been processed and housed, however, removing them from their cell and photographing their tattoos and marks may require the officer to obtain a warrant or court order.

Debriefings:

A debriefing is a full and detailed interview with a cooperative subject, who has generally agreed to answer all questions that are asked. Unlike the majority of field interviews and custodial or intake interviews, a debriefing is usually scheduled in advance. This allows the interviewer time to outline questions and topics they wish to cover in advance. Officers who conduct debriefings should take full advantage of the cooperation they are receiving and, in addition to ongoing criminal activities, ask about the signs, written and verbal codes or other intelligence specific to the cooperators gang that can be useful to law enforcement.

The debriefing will almost always take place in a safe, controlled environment and, because it is scheduled in advance, there will rarely be time constraints to worry about. Remember, just because a subject is cooperative at the time of the interview, it doesn’t mean they will remain cooperative and forthcoming after the first debriefing. Therefore, it is very important for the interviewer to take their time and cover everything they want to know. If possible, debriefings should be recorded. If not, then the debriefing officer or another officer should take detailed notes so as to be able to pass along all pertinent information gleaned from the interview to officers, units, divisions or departments that can make use of it.

Conducting Productive Gang Member Interviews:

To be affective and productive, officers should not only be familiar with the three major types of gang member interviews, but they must also follow a few basic, common-sense rules that apply to any interview. Whether you are conducting a field interview, a custodial or intake interview, or a full gang member debriefing, you should ask open ended questions and let the subject speak without interruption.

The skill that most often separates the good interviewers from the bad is the ability to be quiet, take time to pause, and let them speak because, as human nature dictates, if you allow someone to speak long enough they will say something they shouldn’t. This basic principle was demonstrated when California Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger told the public that “I think that gay marriage is something that should only be between a man and a woman.”, when former Washington D.C. Mayor Marion Barry downplayed the crime problem by telling the press “Apart from all the killings, Washington D.C. is one of the safest places in the country.”, and never more clearly and comically than when singer Mariah Carey addressed world hunger with “I’d love to be skinny like that, but not with all those flies and death and stuff.” Remember, as long as you are being paid to be at work, the person you are interviewing is never really wasting your time. Time is on your side!

Other basic rules for conducting productive gang member interviews, just like other criminal interviews, are; (1) regardless of your personal feelings, be respectful and express an interest in what the subject has to say, (2) do not prompt or coach the subject to answer your questions. If they don’t know the answer to your question move on to the next one, and (3) don’t try to impress the subject with your knowledge of gangs. Remember, an interview is not about you – it’s about them. And as a final consideration that only a few short years ago I would never have believed I needed to address, do not show gang members and interview subjects police training material or other sensitive information. Just as much as we want their knowledge, the gang members and criminals want ours. Many would like to see how much we know (or don’t know), how accurate our information is, and what they need to change to continue operating their criminal organizations. There is no legitimate need to ever show a gang member material you have received from law enforcement training.

Future Implications, Officer and Public Safety Issues:

Once you have finished your interview, make sure that you document it properly according to your department’s policy. If there is no policy in place, transcribe your interviews into narrative form and keep an organized filing system so that you can retrieve them if needed. And, above all, make sure to pass on the information you learn to other departments, divisions or officers who will benefit from the knowledge. The goal of gang member interviews is to develop knowledge that will assist all law enforcement and correctional personnel in their duties. The results of your interviews could help to solve serious crimes and prevent other officers and civilians from being hurt. Documenting this information may not help you today, but it could help you or your brother or sister officer later. If you feel the need to horde information and keep it secret from other officers, as some gang officers unfortunately do, you may be allowing criminals to avoid future prosecution and you may be causing danger to other officers.

A systematic gang member interview process will allow correctional officers, detectives, patrol officers, school resource officers and any other law enforcement personnel to develop useable intelligence on gangs, gang members and their criminal activities. If properly documented and shared with other officers in a timely manner, these interviews will keep law enforcement and correctional officers on a more level playing field with the gang members who would like nothing more than to do us harm. It will keep you safer and make the communities and facilities we work in better places.

Read more...

Friday, February 18, 2011

Broadcast Television Tools to Help Intelligence Analysts Wade Through Data

The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency is preparing to deploy a suite of tools that will help war commanders sift through live and recorded video quickly to pinpoint key clips and highlight information with the ease of sports broadcasters. The system is part of a broader agency effort to establish an intelligence network that will allow analysts in operations centers and troops on the battlefield to find pertinent archival video and associated information no matter who collected the data or where it might be stored.

“The comparison we like to make is to ESPN, or CNN, or MSNBC,” said Charlie Morrison, director of business development at Lockheed Martin Information Systems and Global Solutions. The company is the prime contractor for the system. Former intelligence officers say the video analysis tool would be a drastic improvement over the current process, which is an antiquated “hunt-and-correlate” method that takes too long and often leaves analysts drowning in data.

The Defense Department flies hundreds of sensors over war zones to collect surveillance video. NGA, which has responsibility for archiving the imagery coming off Air Force Predators and other aircraft, wants to improve how it provides that data to ground troops. Intelligence analysts characterize their daily task of wading through hours of footage as searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack. It can take up to a week to find a specific event embedded in 20 million minutes of video. Once that data is located, they encounter additional hurdles to send it forward to troops on the ground.

The suite of commercial-based analysis tools, part of the NGA’s National System for Geospatial-Intelligence Video Services, will compress the time it takes to go through the process, officials said. “What this will do is take the video that you have and make it more accessible, more discoverable and more useable,” said Joseph A. Smith, a retired military intelligence officer who is now the technical executive for the sensor assimilation division in NGA’s acquisition directorate.

This could have applications for law enforcement as well as the military so will be well worth keeping an eye on. Sifting though hours of footage on riots, industrial burglaries and other video surveillance situations is a time-consuming and exacting task which could use some technological assistance.

Read more...

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Using the “So What?” factor in analysis

This is a great article by Libby Stengel from the GroupIntel site...

I was working as an intelligence analyst for a fusion center early in my intelligence career. During my daily reading I came across a piece of information that not only had a reliable source with great access, but also seemed to provide key intelligence information. I quickly grabbed the report and rushed to my supervisor to show him my great find. He stared at me and said, “So what?”

The supervisor understood that the information was important but he didn’t know what to do with the raw information. As that newly minted intelligence analyst I quickly learned to take every piece of information or intelligence provided and figure out why it was important. A director or even a section lead at an analysis center does not have the intimate knowledge or time that an analyst would have to devote to understanding a specific situation. I learned that Raw, unanalyzed information is noise that clouds decisions. Carefully analyzed information can be a decision making tool.

Analysts must:

  • Connect the dots. Where does this information fit with the existing understanding of the topic? Is it a new threat stream, trend or person? How does it affect the mission and goals of my agency?
  • Explain - Why should I care about this information? What makes you believe that this information is important? Is it time sensitive? Does it complete the puzzle on a threat or person you had been following? Is it completely different than what you had seen previously? Will this change my agency’s view on a topic or person?
  • Summarize thoughts into succinct and convincing statements. Provide not only a summation of the information, but also your educated opinion on the situation. What will happen if we do nothing? What will happen if we do something? Worst case and best case scenarios? When encountering several information or intelligence items that you want to combine into a threat assessment, intelligence report or “product,” it is important to analyze each part separately.
Then, look at the information as a whole. When formatting a report, there are three tips that always help:
  • Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF). This is a one-to-two line summary of what I am going to tell you with my educated opinion included in it.
  • Text of Information or Intelligence. If a piece of intelligence is highly relevant, provide the entire, original text for those who will have time to read it . In some instances, including a map is helpful for readers.
  • So What? Using the previously listed three musts, tell the reader why they should care about this new or different information.
The truth is that analysts are the people who make intelligence actionable. Remember, you have far more knowledge about the subject than anyone reading it. Be the expert and share your insight! Doing the interpretation and the concise reporting is a foundation for success, so that the most insightful decisions can be made.

Read more...

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

A Change in Terrorist Threat Levels

Every now and then something amusing can be said about our sorry state of affairs and a close colleague sent this to me, and I thought it should be 'out there' in print. It is priceless!

THE ENGLISH are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist threats and have therefore raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out.

TERRORISTS have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada.

THE SCOTS have raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's get the Bastards." They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.

THE FRENCH government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.

ITALY has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."

THE GERMANS have increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbor" and "Lose."

BELGIANS, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels .

THE SPANISH are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

AUSTRALIA, meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries" to "She'll be right, Mate!" Two more escalation levels remain: "Crikey! I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!" and "The barbie is canceled." So far no situation has ever warranted use of the final escalation level.

John Cleese - British writer, actor and tall person

Read more...

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Australian terrorist threat to airports

A group of Australians who are believed to be at terrorist training camps in Yemen pose a threat to airport security, a security expert has warned. 22 Australians have gone missing in Yemen and are believed to be at al-Qaeda training camps. Heading up the al-Qaeda regime in Yemen is an American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki who the ABC reported has been dubbed the Osama bin Laden of the internet. Al-Awlaki has been allegedly involved in a number of terrorist attacks and in his internet sermons - delivered in perfect English - he preaches contempt for non-believers.

The 22 Australians are believed to be receiving training at these camps where their value is their Australian passports and the access they can gain with them. "The authorities know who these people are," Homeland Security Asia Pacific director Roger Hennings told AAP. "The government of Australia is aware of the identity of 22 Australians who went missing about four months ago, in other words they just got to Yemen and disappeared," he said. "This constitutes a national security risk because all of these people left through Australian airports and when they return they will return through Australian airports."

Mr Hennings said these Australians were believed to be in al-Qaeda training camps in Yemen and there was nothing to stop them communicating with sympathisers in Australia. According to Mr Hennings, 66 Australian citizens and residents have already been trained by al-Qaeda or in Pakistan by other terrorist organisations.Major airports are areas of mass gathering which Mr Hennings says are critical to the security of the country. Yet the majority of people working in airports don't understand how security threat levels work and Mr Hennings says there is a daily threat level to Australia's airports.

Read more...

Saturday, February 5, 2011

Obama Said to Fault Spy Agencies’ Mideast Forecasting

President Obama has criticized American spy agencies over their performance in predicting and analyzing the spreading unrest in the Middle East, according to current and former American officials. The president was specifically critical of intelligence agencies for misjudging how quickly the unrest in Tunisia would lead to the downfall of the country’s authoritarian government, the officials said. The officials offered few details about the president’s concerns, but said that Mr. Obama had not ordered any major changes inside the intelligence community, which has a budget of more than $80 billion a year. On Friday, a White House spokesman said spy agencies had given Mr. Obama “relevant, timely and accurate analysis” throughout the crisis in the Middle East.

But questions about the recent performance of spy agencies expose a tension that has played out since the C.I.A.’s founding in 1947: how to balance the task of analyzing events overseas to warn officials in Washington about looming crises with the mission of carrying out covert operations around the globe. Some officials have focused their criticism on intelligence assessments last month that concluded, despite demonstrations in Tunisia, that the security forces of President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali would defend his government. Instead, the military and the police did not, and Mr. Ben Ali and his family fled to Saudi Arabia. One American official familiar with classified intelligence assessments defended the spy agencies’ Tunisia analysis. “Everyone recognized the demonstrations in Tunisia as serious,” said the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was discussing classified intelligence reports. “What wasn’t clear even to President Ben Ali was that his security forces would quickly choose not to support him.”

Read more...

Followers

Search This Blog

Who am I?

I am a law enforcement professional with over 35 years experience in both sworn and civilian positions. I have service in 3 different countries in both the northern and southern hemispheres.

My principal areas of expertise are: (1) Intelligence, (2) Training and Development, (3) Knowledge Management, and (4) Administration/Supervision.

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP