On Q Professional Investigations

When teams of agents are deployed on assignments, from a corporate event to a personal VIP assignment for a foreign dignitary, the most important question to ask is: Does the experience of the agent match the assignment?

The vetting process for each assignment begins with the goals of the project, and understanding a client’s security expectations. On the day the assignment begins, when the agents show up, that level of expertise should also shine through via the agents’ presentation — good grooming and a neat and clean uniform go a long way toward instilling immediate confidence.

Security Stereotypes

In the restaurant industry, a sloppy, dirty look is unacceptable. Patrons would assume that the meal would have the same level of care put into it. You wouldn’t eat there.

The same is true of a security company that doesn’t take pride in the look of the agents; the attention to detail could be reflective of the protection services being provided.

The stereotype of an out-of-shape man sitting in a room watching a monitor while half-sleeping or fully asleep has changed. With shrinking police department budgets and greater security presence needed (because corporations are being targeted and extremists are carrying out attacks on civilians), the need for in-person professional security personnel is very real.

A Growth Industry

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the security-guard industry is expected to grow 12 percent annually through 2022. Part of this growth can be attributed to the need for a manned presence when a security situation arises in a retail setting. It takes an in-person agent to provide property patrols and manage access control systems for buildings and facilities.

These are important jobs that keep the public safer. And, as we’ve seen in recent news, soft targets (such as movie theaters and malls) need an expert security guard on the premises, not a surveillance camera or a minimum-wage employee snoozing at a bank of TV screens.

The security guard field relies heavily on training and experience in personal protection. Security guards are required to interact with people, handle crowds, assess situations and react quickly. Their demeanor and personality are important, as they need to handle a range of situations with control and good judgment.

Conveying Control

A clean-cut appearance and fit physique plays well in visual professionalism but also conveys control over the situation. A crisp uniform and strong physical appearance says, “here’s a person to depend on and look to, should a situation arise.” In an emergency, there’s great comfort in a good presentation, backed by experience, when all details from the ground up are covered.

Furthermore, security guard services have changed; guards today need to be well versed in law enforcement procedures, military maneuverers, marshal arts training, and should ideally possess bilingual skills.

Hiring Strategically

A professional team of security guards should go through a meticulous hiring process that includes background checks and even (depending on the range of assignments) testing applicants’ physical and mental stamina. There could come a time when an assignment may not end for days. In such a case, is this person up to the task, physically and mentally?

Agents must have the ability to use their endurance and survival skills training. They may need to stand guard over a facility during and after a hurricane, for instance. They should be able think on their feet and help others who may not be part of the assignment but are in need of assistance — especially important when on duty after a disaster.

Not all assignments are cut-and-dried within a limited time frame. Sometimes, guard services are called upon when law enforcement is busy handling an emergency. A guard service could — in situations of public unrest after a natural disaster such as a tornado, earthquake, or hurricane, for example — need to remain in place for days, weeks, or months. In New York City during Occupy Wall Street, guard services for corporations were needed around the clock for months to escort employees in and out of the area.

Representing the Brand (and Other Practicalities)

A professional team of security guards can also burnish a security company’s brand. Clients will associate the company’s appearance with professionalism and the ability to handle themselves in any situation.

When purchasing uniforms, keep in mind seasonal concerns and the environment in which the clothing will be worn. Stretch material allows for greater freedom of movement, and a mixture of athletic or performance materials will add comfort.

When it comes to professionalism, relying solely on a clean uniform is a mistake. The look is only the beginning.
Security guards stand for long periods, so footwear is extremely important to reduce fatigue and injury. Placement of logo and size are important and serve as a means of advertising and guard recognition — make sure it is large enough to see.

However, when it comes to professionalism, relying solely on a clean uniform is a mistake. The look is only the beginning. Security is an evolving process — crime and security risks change constantly. This requires that field agents and guards be tested, challenged, and analyzed periodically, to probe for gaps in security and readiness.

Summary

The growth outlook for security professionals is positive, as guards are needed to operate the latest technology that can be used to complement the protection services being offered. In-person guard services are part of the security team and interact with IT professionals in many industries.

View Source

The Psychology of Lies: Behavioral Science Perspectives on Conducting Successful Interviews

There are plenty of myths about the “science” of lie detection.

Despite what popular books on nonverbal behavior may say, there’s no scientific evidence that crossed arms or legs indicate a non-receptive person, or that deceivers touch their noses, evert their eyes, or cover their mouths.

Unfortunately, deception detection isn’t so simple, say behavioral scientists who actually study communication and deceit using scientific methods. Spotting a lie, it seems, is an inexact science.

So how can investigators improve their chances of discovering deceit during investigative interviews? To tackle this topic and overcome popular misconceptions, I asked three leading research psychologists who specialize in the study of deception to share their insights on how to catch a liar.

The Experts:

David Matsumoto, San Francisco State University
Aldert Vrij, University of Portsmouth (UK)
Caroline Keating, Colgate University

Deception detection researcher Paul Ekman established that basic emotions are universal, as are their expressions.

Why Humans Are Good Deceivers and Lousy Detectors

According to Caroline Keating, we’re better liars than we are lie detectors. This point is echoed in various academic studies, which suggest that most people are no better than 50/50 at detecting deception by observing verbal and nonverbal cues.

Research conducted by Paul Ekman and Maureen O’Sullivan, published in Psychological Science in 1991, suggests that even professionals involved in fighting crime (such as law-enforcement and judges) veer only a little better than chance at detecting deception.

According to David Matsumoto, later research by Ekman and O’Sullivan demonstrated that law enforcement personnel were able to tell when people were lying about whether they committed crimes, but not about their opinions on various topics. Of the law enforcement professionals tested by Ekman and O’Sullivan, the Secret Service were the most able at detecting deceit, averaging a 65% success rate.

The bottom line is that even if law enforcement as a whole is better at detecting deception than the general public, that isn’t a particularly impressive statistic.

Most people are no better than 50/50 at detecting deception by observing verbal and nonverbal cues.
But there’s hope yet for lie detection science.

Matsumoto points out a problem with academic research on the topic: Many experiments are based on low-stakes lies. In the real world, lies that concern investigators or potential employers are usually high stakes—in other words, liars in the interrogation room have a lot more to lose than study participants.

How to be a Good Liar

Naturally, some people are bad liars; but professional investigators are concerned with the gifted ones. It stands to reason that to be a good lie spotter, the investigator needs to know what makes a good liar.

Sometimes the investigator may need to be good a liar himself in order to go undercover or pretext.

According to Keating, good liars are ultimately good actors. Her advice on how to lie convincingly is to “rehearse” in order to reduce anxiety; she also suggests creating plausible responses by interweaving deception with truth. Good lying, like good acting, is an art that requires a plausible story, well-practiced.

There are, however, pathological types that make natural liars: psychopaths and pathological liars such as those suffering from Münchausen syndrome. Pathological liars may tell lies with ease, but they are usually unmasked over time by inconsistencies, which earn them stigmatized reputations.

Psychopaths, on the other hand, are natural chameleons that mimic the behavior expected of them but have little or no emotional attachment.

The latter condition is thought to result from structural differences in the frontal lobe and amygdala—areas of the brain that are responsible for regulating emotion. In essence, psychopaths have little fear or anxiety but are natural actors. Keating notes that their “lack of stress” enables them as deceivers.

Good lying, like good acting, is an art that requires a plausible story, well-practiced.

Like the psychopath that simulates love for another when it serves him, good liars uses a measure of control over emotional appearances to overcome discovery, says Keating. The possibility that a liar will be unmasked naturally creates the desire to avoid the issue, but a savvy liar can take the offensive.

For instance, he may mimic anger or hurt in response to an accusation that’s true. The seeming natural response would be anxiety or embarrassment, but a good liar can turn the tables, emotionally speaking.

A final quality of good liars, according to Keating, is self-deception. She cites the story of Colonel Oliver North, who tried to hide evidence of U.S. arms sales to Iran and illegal funding of the Contras. North knew he was breaking the law, but he was acting on behalf of senior government officials—on some level, he believed he was doing the right thing.

Lying to himself, according to Keating, may have enabled him to lie about his actions more convincingly.

Self-deception reduces anxiety by justifying the lie. Presumably the Russian SVR agent presenting as an American businessman, the Al Qaeda operative engaged in terrorism, and the investigator pretexting during a fraud investigation are all enabled by a belief of inherent righteousness.
Caroline Keating suggests that anxiety lies at the root of high-stakes lies—if unmasked, the deceiver faces stiff consequences. But the researcher’s dilemma is that high-stakes lies—and the anxiety associated with them—are hard to ethically replicate in the laboratory.

There is, therefore, hope that in real-world scenarios, fear may betray the deceiver’s self-control more inexorably than it does in the dispassionate environment of the behavioral-science lab.

Catching Liars Through Cognitive Taxation

Aldert Vrij suggests we throw out all notions of specific nonverbal cues and rather look for narrative inconsistencies when mining for lies. To that end, he provides several guidelines based on a synthesis of psychological and social science research. Most notably, Vrij supports the proposition of “imposing cognitive load.”

The idea here is that lying requires extra psychological effort at creating a plausible story, whereas the truth doesn’t, because the teller is simply recalling, not inventing. According to Vrij, an interviewer can exploit this fact through several strategies (as summarized below):

1. Ask for details.

The more details the interviewee provides, the more chance of inconsistency. This fact alone may cause the guilty interviewee to be reluctant about answering questions or to give short or vague responses. If the interviewee is reluctant or vague in responding to a question, the interviewer should pursue the subject further.

Vrij suggests borrowing from the techniques of “cognitive interviewing”—developed to enhance eyewitness’ memories—because they are useful in encouraging the subject to report details. Such techniques include asking the subject to describe his story with richness and imagery and to reassure him that no detail is without significance or is too trivial.

While inconsistency, vagueness and hesitancy can be signs of deception, details provide the practicality of more information that can be cross-referenced and validated.

2. Encourage the subject to describe events in reverse order.

Because a lie is a fabrication, it may be more challenging for the liar to describe events in reverse order, because such act creates extra “cognitive load.” Vrij cites research in which subjects watched videos in which they had to distinguish a liar from a non-liar.

Subjects detected the liar 42% of the time when the lies where sequential but 60% of the time when the liar had to describe what happened in reverse order.

3. Ask unexpected questions.

Just as Caroline Keating suggests that the would-be-liar rehearse responses to possible tough questions, Vrij suggests asking “unexpected questions” as a counter-measure. To be successful, the interviewer must be able to develop relevant questions that the interviewee doesn’t anticipate.

Vrij cites experiments that show that liars produce fewer details when responding to unanticipated questions than truth-tellers.

4. Conduct an information-seeking interview rather than a confrontational interview.

Vrij is critical of the popular Reid method of interviewing, which progresses from interview to accusation. (Some researchers have asserted that success-rate claims in texts on the topic are unverifiable and un-replicable.) Basically, the Reid method presumes guilt and incrementally increases pressure on the subject to make a confession.

In contrast, Vrij promotes the information-seeking interview, in which the interviewer aims to build rapport and plays a sympathetic role in order to coax out facts. Vrij cites a recent meta-analysis of several field studies (as well as laboratory studies), which found that information-seeking approaches yield more information and cues to deceit than confrontational approaches.

Evidently, information-seeking interviewing is a war-proven approach: Ali Soufan, A CIA interrogator, describes using information-seeking interviews with good success on Al-Qaeda suspects in developing intelligence in his book, The Black Banners.

5. Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE)

Vrij advocates an approach developed by Maria Hartwig in her doctoral dissertation, which studied the presentation of evidence in interrogations. Hartwig’s research showed that the non-accusatorial interview— asking open-ended questions and presenting evidence late in the interview—revealed more inconsistencies and contradictions than if the evidence were introduced early.

Furthermore, when interrogation trainees formulated indirect questions specific to the evidence without revealing their own knowledge of the evidence, their ability to detect deception significantly increased. (Such questions are also introduced at a late stage in the interview.)

A later study on SUE showed that trainees utilizing the SUE method produced 85% accuracy vs. 56% over a control group of interrogators not trained in SUE in determining the veracity of statements made by interviewees.

Catching Liars Through Emotional Leakage

Paul Ekman is widely credited with establishing that basic emotions are universal, as are their expressions.

Some anthropologists (such as Margaret Mead) theorized that facial expressions and emotional expressions were learned behaviors with culturally relevant meanings. Ekman’s research took him to Papua New Guinea, where he discovered an isolated primitive tribe whose members were able to accurately describe the meaning of facial expressions from pictures of Westerners.

Ekman is best known for his work on micro expressions—facial expressions that last a faction of a second and are believed to be involuntary. The proposition that these fleeting expressions reveal the true emotion of the subject led Ekman to suggest the ability to posit micro-expressions as a means of truth detection.

Ekman and his colleagues David Matsumoto and Mark Frank then developed a micro expressions training tool called METT—utilized by the TSA and other federal agencies—which has been further expanded independently by both Ekman and Matsumoto.

Matsumoto has been at the forefront of academic scholarship on nonverbal behavior and cross-cultural psychology. He heads a company called Humintell that provides seminars and training material on recognizing and interpreting micro-expressions.

When I asked what actions investigators can take to improve their sensitivity to deception, Matsumoto said this:

“Get trained on the VALIDATED indicators of veracity and deception, both verbal and nonverbal.”

“Learn to strategize their interviewing techniques to maximize the potential for them to receive CLEAR verbal and nonverbal signals to interpret.”

Caroline Keating concedes that micro-expressions betray a person’s true feelings, but she adds this caveat: “You almost need a video camera running in slow motion to see them,” (although Matsumoto counters that a person can be trained to see them in real time). Keating recommends scanning for anxiety and attempts at self-control when looking for deception but also recognizes that individuals have different baseline behaviors and different levels of response.

For instance, one person may be naturally anxious in most situations, while another may become anxious when asked questions that he believes may falsely incriminate him. There are also liars who show little anxiety because they are well rehearsed in their deceit, are self-deceived, or suffer pathological conditions.

The bottom line: a guilty person facing the possibility of unmasking should be anxious, but so, too, could an innocent person fearing for his freedom…and there are exceptions to every rule. To deal with variations in behavior between people, Keating suggests the importance of interpreting behavior by gauging the individual’s “baseline” behavior.

Parting Wisdom

Popular science is not the same as real science, nor is real science on complex human behavior fully resolved. Unfortunately, popular beliefs on nonverbal behavior and lie detection have managed to leak into texts on police interviewing and interrogations.

Nonetheless, behavioral science is making headway, and savvy investigators should pay attention. Ultimately, an interview with a suspect relies on psychological strategizing that aims to unmask the truth.

Deceit betrays itself by behavioral and narrative inconsistencies. Looking for incongruences in a subject’s story and behavior is common sense, but investigators can improve their chances of discovering lies by aligning their strategies with advances from the behavioral sciences. Watching for involuntary micro-expressions and the theory of cognitive load are two such advances that can aid an investigator’s tactics and observations.

There are many variables in human behavior. The investigator must consider all possibilities when interpreting the significance of a statement, pause, contradiction, gesture or hesitation. The goal shouldn’t be to become a psychological X-ray machine, because that’s currently impossible.

Instead, the investigator should aim to acquire verifiable intelligence, and/or, if the intelligence merits it, a true confession. The tips offered in this article provide the investigator with insights from world-class researchers in the field on how to achieve those goals.

View Source

You’ve seen all of the signs, and now you’re looking for confirmation. When you’ve reached this point, to obtain the peace of mind you require you’re left with the decision as to whether you’ll engage the use of a professional service or alternatively invest in some modern day technology. To help you in your decision process, we’ve outlined the most common resources available to you – and the legalities you will face should you choose it.

Private Investigators:

“Honeytrap” investigators: For those who have been cheated on before or have concerns their partner may stray, they may turn to the services of these types of investigators. Better known as a ‘honeytrap’, these types of investigators will start a conversation with your partner in a social setting (either in person or online) with the intention of seeing how far they can take it (ie exchanging of phone numbers, request for intimacy etc) . A full report is then provided to you, sometimes with the inclusion of footage/recordings.

Legality: Although LEGAL, most investigators frown upon this type of entrapment situation. As the ‘honeytrap’ investigator used for these are based on your partners “ideal” (ie looks, interests, clothing sense), the argument is this type of scenario is creating a fantasy situation which may never actually occur in reality and does not actually prove whether your partner is currently being unfaithful.

Surveillance Investigators: The tried and true method of catching a cheating spouse out. If you’re looking for peace of mind as to what your spouse is doing during those ‘unexplained’ hours away from you, or alternatively what they are ‘really’ getting up to when they say they are going out with their friends – conducting surveillance remains the number 1 option for piece of mind. Using a licensed private investigator removes the emotion out of watching your partner and reviewing the investigators footage of your partners night out allows you to see exactly the type of interactions and body language your partner is displaying towards other individuals.

Legality: Surveillance undertaken by licensed, professional private investigators is LEGAL. Through training and experience surveillance investigators know the law (ie your States relevant surveillance and devices Act) and produce their findings by way of a detailed report and footage which are both admissible in Court. If you engage an unlicensed investigator or take matters into your own hands you could very well run the risk of being caught out, or having footage presented to you which has been obtained both unethically and in breach of State laws.

Online Investigators: Do you truly know your partner if you have no idea what they are doing online? Where once being secretive with your mobile phone was an immediate cause for concern of cheating, in this day age it is all about your online activity. As more and more people learn how to log on and interact with other people online, so does the old lingering thoughts of “I wonder what my high school sweetheart is doing these days?”, or “I wonder if I Google my secret desires what will come up / who will share my thoughts?”. Engaging an online investigator can uncover significant behaviours that are otherwise suppressed by your spouse in their everyday life and may just teach you something new about who your partner really is.

Legality: Online investigations conducted by licensed private investigators are LEGAL. Using the skills, experience and resources these types of investigators are able to provide a detailed report on their findings based on information which has been legally obtained. Don’t be fooled by databases online which offer similar type of services for a fraction of the cost – like most things these days, you certainly get what you pay for.

Modern Technology:

Forensic Recovery: Does your partner never leave their phone out of their sight? Do they delete text messages as soon they receive them? Is their call history always blank? Certainly one of the biggest red flags for suspicious spouses is the sudden change in their partners phone habits. With the introduction of a wide range of mobile forensic software those deleted messages may still be able to be recovered. Certainly the hardest part of using this technology is getting access to the phone itself – particularly when they don’t leave the phone out of their sight!

Legality: Lets be clear on this – if you don’t have the permission of your spouse to undertake this, then it is ILLEGAL. Even if you do have permission from your spouse there is certainly no guarantee of recovering everything off the phone leaving you with the same unanswered questions and wondering why you didn’t leave it to the professionals in the first place.

Spyware: With applications such as Stealthgenie and Spectorsoft on the market, once downloaded on a phone or computer, every single keystroke, website, text message and phone call are recorded and sent to your own inbox for your viewing pleasure. Originally created with the intention of tracking your child’s or an employees online activity, suspicious spouses everywhere have seen the benefit of utilising these to discreetly check on their partners activity without their knowledge.

Legality: ILLEGAL. Even if you own the computer/phone your spouse may be using – it’s safe to say if you’re using spyware for confirming infidelity then you will not have the permission of your spouse to record their activity.

GPS applications: With GPS technology becoming smaller and more affordable this has resulted in many suspicious spouses utilising this type of equipment to confirm their partners movements. Certainly with the invention of smart phones having built in GPS systems, iphone applications such as “Findmyphone” have spouses desperate for the truth ‘accidentally’ leaving their phone in their partners’ cars in the hopes of tracking where they go.

Legality: While tracking an individual without their knowledge (or a Court Order!) is ILLEGAL, most individuals who have tried the cheaper applications will tell you the GPS location is typically unreliable and you may end up breaking up your relationship based on incorrect information. Furthermore these pieces of equipment may tell you where your spouse my be but they certainly won’t identify who they are there with, and more importantly what they are doing. Only a surveillance investigator can obtain this information for you. **Editors note: Please check the laws of your State as the legalities of GPS tracking may differ in your location.

Hidden cameras: Once reserved for the likes of James Bond, these days a quick search online for ‘purchase hidden camera’ returns over 26,600,000 results! The fast pace of technology has allowed video and recording devices to become smaller, more affordable and the quality even better. With battery life lasting even longer, these days you can hide a hidden camera in almost anything – clocks, watches, pens, power plugs, teddy bears, smoke detectors – the list is endless! For those who are concerned about who may be visiting their spouse when you’re not home, this type of equipment has allowed many to become their own DIY spy.

Legality: ILLEGAL (in the majority of circumstances) for this type of use. For example, it is illegal in most states to record an individual without their express consent and it goes without saying that everyone should expect a reasonable sense of privacy particular in rooms such as the bedroom. Setting up hidden cameras / recording devices at your partners house will most likely end up in you seeing the footage played back via a Courtroom setting.

View Source

Ever needed to snap a picture in a quiet building without anyone noticing? Or maybe you need to document misbehavior without getting caught? Taking snapshots on the sly isn’t easy, but a few tricks can help you capture a moment without another soul noticing.

A true spy’s main goal with snapping photos is to document a situation without ever being noticed. For the average person, this comes in handy in all sorts of circumstances, including visits to the museum, snapping photos of a chalkboard in class, concerts, the guy in the robot costume on the train, or even just when you want to capture a true “in the moment” photo and not a staged shot. With that in mind, here are a few things we can learn from how spies take pictures.

Silence Your Shutter Sounds and Disable Flash

First things first. If you want to start taking pictures on the sly, you need to disable any sounds and flash your camera might make. For smartphones, this is usually done by flipping the volume mute button, and disabling the flash in the camera app itself.

For other cameras, you’ll need to dig into your settings menu to disable the shutter sound effect and the automatic flash. If you can’t find that menu, you might try snagging your camera’s manual from Manuals Online so you can find and disable the settings.

The goal here is simple: don’t draw attention to the fact you’re taking a picture. Keep it silent and don’t let the flash go off under any circumstance.

Hide Your Camera Inside Something Else

As any good purveyor of spy movies knows, hiding a camera inside of something else is a classic trick. You can stick a camera in a bow tie, contact lenses, and of course, watches. The point is, if nobody knows you even have a camera, they won’t think you’re taking pictures.

Throughout history, cameras have been stuck inside all sorts of things, from pockets, to books, and even hidden behind newspapers. Here are a few ideas to make your own:

USB Powered Spy Shirt: Instructables user Tetranitrate shows off how to use a laptop, laptop bag, and a USB camera to convert your button-up shirt into the perfect spy camera. The whole system threads through the shirt itself, and then attaches to the computer inside the bag. It’s bulky, but it’s cheap and easy to do.

Spy Glasses: Google’s Project Glass are still a little ways off for public consumption, but if you want to build your own it’s possible. In fact, Instructables user Kipkay’s build mounts a cheap camera right into any pair of sunglasses so you can record everything that happens everywhere you go.

Hide a camera in a book: The hidden camera in a book is an old trick, but this particular build takes it a step further—it’s an iPad hidden in a book with a small slot for the camera. It’s a little ridiculous, but considering you can always play it off as a “funky case” if you’re caught, it might come in handy.

On the flipside, if you’re worried about something spying on you in your house, all you need to find a pinhole camera is a flashlight. Theoretically, you can stuff a camera in any everyday object and call it a day, so use your imagination.

Conceal the Fact You’re Taking Pictures on Your Smartphone

Of course, most people use their smartphones for pictures the majority of the time, and thankfully, it’s pretty easy to disguise what you’re doing on a phone.

First and foremost, when you’re snapping hidden photos with your camera, make sure you’re holding it like you’re using it to do anything but take a picture. Position the camera like you’re texting, playing a game, or whatever else might natural in the situation you’re in. Personally, I prefer the texting position, even though it’s often difficult to get a good shot.

Second, if you want to conceal what you’re doing from anyone behind you, it’s important to hide your screen. On a jailbroken iPhone this is easy with SlyCam since it allows you to take pictures from the Notification Center without anyone behind you seeing the camera screen.

For non-jailbroken iPhone users, we like Real Spy Camera. Not only does the app icon call the app “Easy Calc,” you can also shoot video, and use either your front facing or rear facing camera. However, the best feature is the fact you can set up a fake background as well, which means you can actually make your screen look like you’re text messaging.

On Android, we like Mobile Hidden Camera. Its app icon is a notebook, so nobody will suspect a thing, but it’s also filled with features like video recording, burst-mode, customizable screens, and the incredibly handy feature to block incoming notifications so you don’t accidently draw attention to yourself. Photo by Cory Doctorow.

Know Your Rights of When You Can Pictures and Use This Information Wisely

Public photography is tricky business, and it’s good to know your rights. You can’t just walk around taking pictures of everything under the sun—people do have a right to privacy in some circumstances. So, learn up on the rules before you go snapping photos on the sly.

And this should go without saying, but be responsible. Unless you’re documenting an important event, don’t snap pictures of people who have a reasonable right to privacy, don’t be the obnoxious person at the museum snapping pictures of everything, and respect any safety rules you might come across.

View Source

The prospect of sinking $200,000 into law school and changing your mind about being a lawyer might be terrifying.

But you can still use your degree.

Law graduates go on to plenty of lucrative and interesting non-lawyer jobs.

Some of these positions—like Congress—might be a longshot, but you’ll be surprised at what you can do with your law degree.

Read More

When HR or supervisors investigate claims of employee misconduct or harassment, it’s common for them to ask employees to “keep this information confidential.”

But an important ruling from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) says that such a blanket confidentiality rule barring workers from discussing ongoing investigations could violate federal labor law. The NLRB says such confidentiality requests can’t be made unless “legitimate and substantial justification exists” for the ban.

The case: The HR director for Banner Heath Systems typically asks workers involved in in-house investigations to not talk about the investigation with co-workers. She made that request of James, who was interviewed as part of an insubordination charge.

James filed a charge with the NLRB, saying this policy was an unfair labor practice that violates Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act. Section 7 gives employees—in both union and nonunion shops—the right to discuss the terms and conditions of their employment with other employees.

The NLRB sided with James, saying that for a company to justify such a confidentiality request, it must show the existence of a substantial business justification.

How to respond? Avoid blanket requests for employees to keep investigations confidential. And don’t discipline employees for failing to maintain confidentiality.

The Fisher & Phillips law firm says a better approaching woudl be “to limit such requests to situations where there is a legitimate and demonstrable safety concern, a concern about witness tampering, or a risk of lost evidence. Even in such instances, the request should ideally be limited to time (i.e. the duration of the investigation) and scope (i.e. during work time and on company property).”

Read More

Rules to implement legislation mandating that canine handlers be licensed by the State have taken effect. The Department of Financial and Professional Regulation began accepting applications from qualified canine handlers today.

To qualify for a canine handler authorization card or canine trainer authorization card, an applicant must be at least 18 years old, posses a valid private detective license, private security contractor license or a permanent employee registration card (PERC) and work for a licensed private detective agency or private security contractor agency.

The Department has also begun the approval process for all canine handler training courses and canine instructor training courses training and instruction programs. Once a program has been authorized by the State, graduates of those programs will be able to apply for a handler authorization card.

The new regulations and applications are posted on the Department’s website at www.idfpr.com. Questions regarding licensing of canine handlers may be directed to the Division’s Technical Assistance Unit at 217-782-8556 in the Springfield office.

Read more

TV and movie portrayals of real professions tend to be less than realistic, and the job of private investigator is no exception. But just because you won’t solve every case between 9 and 10 p.m. on Tuesdays doesn’t mean that becoming a private investigator isn’t for you.

What does it take to be a successful private investigator?

“You need to be intelligent, inquisitive and methodical,” says Dr. David Woods, a professor of criminal justice at South University’s Austin campus. Woods, who holds a doctorate in criminal justice and has worked as a police officer and a private investigator, also cites having an open mind, being proficient with technology and learning about people.

A good knowledge of the law is another necessity. Private investigators are regular citizens who must follow the law, but because of their profession they are held to a higher standard of legal knowledge than the public.

Most states require P.I.s to obtain a license, but the requirements vary widely based on where you live. Depending on the jurisdiction, even those with a law enforcement or military background may have to prove they have the necessary knowledge and skills.

Fulfilling the requirements may involve education, training courses, an apprenticeship or all three. In some situations, the education and training requirements can be met with a bachelor’s degree, such as the Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice offered at several of South University’s campuses.

The work of a private investigator is not for everyone, but it can be an exciting way to earn a living for the right person. Like most careers, it has its plusses and minuses.

Working independently, as most P.I.s do, can mean a constant search for new clients. Other drawbacks include a lack of regular hours, dangerous situations and – much more often than danger – long periods of inactivity during surveillance work.

But Woods says that the fictional portrayals of private investigators are not completely untrue. The main resemblance to TV, he says, lies in the freedom and adventure of the job.

“It can take you anywhere, anytime,” he says. As for the disguises and subterfuge so often a part of TV shows, he says they may or may not be part of an investigation.

“A disguise is often part of surveillance work. But posing as someone you’re not is much rarer – maybe 10 percent of the job,” he says. “A good private investigator is never seen or heard until the investigation is complete.”

Other than the freedom it affords – which many may say is the best part – being a P.I. provides the ability to promote fairness and justice.

Because they see such a large number of cases, law enforcement agencies must limit the resources they can expend on each one. A private investigator, on the other hand, has the ability to focus his or her resources on one client at a time, which can yield better results.

“Many times, you are able to assist people who may have no other recourse available to them,” says Woods. “You can do something important and help someone out.”

Read more

As a parade of slovenly dressed 20-somethings passed through the entrance of a downtown Manhattan apartment building on a weekday afternoon, these seemingly savvy New Yorkers did not seem to notice they were the subjects of a photo shoot.

That is because this shoot was covertly orchestrated by their landlord, who had hired a private investigator to root out illegal tenants.

Masked by lunchtime crowds and afternoon rain, the private eye, Joseph Mullen, who has run a sleuthing firm for more than 40 years, parked his car in front of the building, flipped through papers showing that several residents of the seven-story building were “dead or living somewhere else,” and waited.

Shane Williams, a vice president of the firm, J.T. Mullen Inc., slouched strategically in his seat and photographed people as they entered and left. The affable pair looked like observers at an antifashion show as food deliverymen paraded through, an older portly renter stepped out to buy cheese biscuits and renters dressed in gym clothing shuffled outside to smoke.

“We don’t know half the people who live in this building,” Mr. Mullen said. He released a gravelly chuckle, rustled through papers and glanced through the tinted window. “The landlords say, ‘I got to get these illegal tenants out and make some money.’ ”

In a high-rent borough like Manhattan with plenty of rent-regulated apartments ripe for exploitation, real estate investigation has long been a big business. Private detectives say it has picked up in the past year as some New Yorkers have tried to find extra money by moving out of their apartments and subletting to other renters for more than they are paying, which is not allowed.

And, of course, there are landlords pressed for cash, trying to root out people who are using rent-controlled or rent-stabilized apartments illegally. This would allow the landlords to find new tenants and raise the rent by 20 percent or more under state housing law. During the speculation boom of the last decade, some large landlords were accused of using private investigators to harass legal tenants out of their apartments in order to raise rents to cover large mortgages and increase their profits.

Landlords who root out illegal sublets and absentee renters — a rent-regulated tenant must occupy the unit for at least 183 days a year — crow about how profitable these investigations can be.

Craig Charie, a lawyer and landlord who has hired private investigators for such cases since 1994, described a tenant at one Chelsea building who held onto her $433-a-month apartment while living primarily in New Jersey. An investigator tracked her commuting patterns, and Mr. Charie kicked her out, combined the apartment with another to make a duplex and raised the rent.

“It’s exceptionally useful,” Mr. Charie said. “We pieced together a lifestyle and recaptured the unit.”

As Mr. Mullen and Mr. Williams watched for residents and rain pattered on the car, they explained how these real estate cases, which make up a small fraction of their business, reach them. New Yorkers settle into rent-regulated apartments in their 20s. But as their incomes and families grow and they move out, they try to hold onto these apartments by renting them out to family and friends. When landlords bought buildings in recent years, often the only information they were given about their tenants was scribbled on rumpled papers and included names of residents who had not lived there in 30 years. Mr. Williams estimates that landlords do not know 20 percent of their tenants.

That is when they hire Mr. Mullen’s firm. He investigated a Baxter Street building where all of the residents had the same Social Security number. Mr. Williams chimed in about a building where the illegal tenant listed his apartment under the name O. B. Juan KNobi.

They allowed this reporter on a recent stakeout on the condition that the address not be published, because it was still under surveillance. They were hired to investigate 10 of the 25 apartments in the building; they usually earn $300 to $500 per apartment, or more if it involves extensive research. The most widely available public records may not always help. They said some tenants who lived elsewhere most of the year would vote in the city (itself a crime) to leave a paper trail or would receive their mail at their rent-controlled apartment and bribe the superintendent to forward it once a week.

This building had several advantages for the two men, including proximity to good coffeehouses, to keep them alert, and a superintendent who puts out the trash early enough to give them time to dig for Consolidated Edison or phone bills or other clues to who actually lives in an apartment. E-ZPass records and auto insurance bills are also useful. At some buildings, the superintendent can be talked into wedging a match into a locked apartment door to see how many days or weeks it takes to fall out.

When a smoker emerged from the building, they cheered; smokers linger and make it easy to photograph. Eventually, they will give all their photos to the landlord, who can show them to the superintendent to identify who is living where and whether a 25-year-old is living alone in a 95-year-old’s apartment.

If so, the eviction process can begin. It’s a messy business that has left Mr. Mullen with little envy for his clients.

“I wouldn’t want to be a landlord,” he said.

Read more

Charles W. Huffman, 45, of Salisbury, is being held on $100,000 bond after allegedly attempting to run an insurance investigator off the road by ramming him from behind.

A deputy from the Wicomico County Sheriff’s office charged Huffman with first-degree assault, second-degree assault and reckless endangerment after Huffman allegedly realized the private investigator from an insurance company was conducting surveillance, according to police documents.

Huffman then allegedly began chasing the investigator and reportedly rammed him 20 times. The incident allegedly began on Johnson Road before continuing onto Wango, Wastegate and Mt. Hermon Roads.

The deputy reportedly saw damage on the investigator’s vehicle consistent with his story. Police charged Huffman once they found him.

Read more