An article written by Idaho Private Investigator Danny R. Smith regarding various aspects of domestic investigations. Published on Divorcenet.com November 2006.
An article written by Idaho Private Investigator Danny R. Smith with suggestions on selecting the right private investigator for you. Published on Divorcenet.com November 2006.
MEMBER:
National Association of Investigative Specialists
California Homicide Investigators Association
Association of Retired Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriffs
CALI: California Association of Licensed Investigators, Inc.
Cold Case Homicide Investigation:
In every community someone yearns for resolve and closure of society’s most heinous crime—the unlawful killing of a human being. Yet few know why many homicides remain unsolved, or how a private citizen can influence the outcome of an investigation.
The simple and unpleasant reality is that homicide detectives—nationwide—are typically overwhelmed by their caseloads. With no break from a revolving on-call schedule, a steady diet of new cases and several cases preparing for trial at any given time, big city homicide detectives simply cannot dedicate the time necessary to solve every case. The unsolved cases—even recent cases with workable information—begin collecting dust as new cases redirect their time, energy and priorities. As days, weeks and months pass, so do the good intentions of getting back to “that one murder.”
That one murder may be that of your loved one.
Some cases will never be solved regardless of the effort put forth. Drug-related homicides and gang murders are among the more challenging, for various reasons: fearful, unwilling or uncooperative witnesses, diminutive evidence, unsubstantiated motive, anonymous offenders and random victims, to name a few. However, when innocent victims (law-abiding citizens, children, the elderly, etc.) become victims of homicide, a tangible suspect and motive almost always exists. The key to solving these murders is experience coupled with time and tenacity.
According to the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Crime in the United States 2005 report, the national solve rate of murder and non-negligent manslaughter cases of cities exceeding 250,000 in population, was 56.5 percent. These numbers don’t vary much from year to year. It is likely this statistic is elevated by the inclusion of manslaughter cases where oftentimes the offender is known by the victim. It is also fair to say the statistic would be substantially higher if not for drug- and gang-related murders.
The following excerpt is taken from an article titled The Cold Case Concept written by FBI Special Agent Charles L. Regini (posted on the FBI Website):
Only the most experienced, innovative, and persistent investigators should work cold cases because these cases, by their very nature, represent some of the most perplexing and frustrating investigations that detectives face. These are the cases that other extremely competent investigators could not solve.
I would only argue that not all unsolved homicide “could not” be solved by other competent investigators, rather many times those competent investigators had neither the time nor tenacity to solve those cases.
Another unsightly truth is many “Cold Case Squads” or “Unsolved Homicide Teams” are comprised of experienced, veteran homicide detectives who are close to retirement, tired, burned-out, experiencing health problems, or in dire need of regular hours. Special Agent Regini (in his article) speaks to just the opposite, and I applaud the FBI for their efforts to change the make-up of unsolved homicide teams. Yet the truth still widely remains: the “most experienced” homicide detectives are typically burned out.
An additional problem is simple mathematics: every large metropolitan law enforcement agency has a library of thousands of unsolved cases, and the numbers grow each day. Meanwhile, these agencies typically staff one team for unsolved cases, usually comprised of no more than half-a-dozen investigators. Few cases are actually “reinvestigated” without new evidence or persistence from the family members of the decedent.
In order to have a case reopened by an unsolved homicide team, a private citizen should start by contacting the supervisor of the appropriate investigative unit to plea their case. If not satisfied with that supervisor’s response, proceed to the captain or commander of the homicide bureau or detective division. If still unsatisfied, take your case to the office of the sheriff or chief of police of that agency.
A viable alternative is hiring a private investigator experienced in homicide investigation. The investigator will gather all available reports and documentation in order to conduct a thorough review of the existing investigation. At the conclusion of his review, the investigator should have a list of unanswered questions and investigative suggestions for the client. At this point, the client may choose to revisit the responsible agency with a report of the case review to show cause that the case should be reopened, or the client may request the private investigator pursue the case to conclusion. Either way, the unsolved case is off the shelf, so to speak.
A common tactic of homicide detectives is to ask others to review the investigation with a fresh set of eyes. During my tenure as a homicide detective I approached many investigators with problem cases and had many approach me. On one particularly difficult case, I asked a defense attorney whom I trusted to read through my investigation for a completely different view of the evidence; that was quite enlightening. Having a cold case reviewed is a very powerful tool that may rejuvenate a stalled investigation. It also drives home a point that is indisputable: There is no unsolved murder that doesn’t deserve another look.
An article written by Former L.A. Sheriff's Homicide Detective and Idaho Private Investigator Danny R. Smith about "cold case" or "unsolved" homicide investigation, and how you, the private citizen, may influence such an investigation. Published in PI Magazine July/August 2007 issue.
An article written by Private Investigator Danny R. Smith explaining the challenges of surveillance and the need reasons a second investigator is sometimes needed.
An article on various reasons for background investigation, written by Danny R. Smith.
When You Might Need a Private Investigator:
You suspect your spouse of cheating and have considered hiring a private investigator. You want hard evidence, such as photographs, videotape, names and addresses – information to help you with the difficult choices that may lay ahead.
Surveillance is the most basic, fundamental approach to detecting and proving infidelity; however, it is not the only tool in an investigator’s kit. Analyzing cell phone, bank, and credit card records is often very informative.
Other questions to consider: Are there hidden bank accounts or credit cards? Is there a second home or apartment? Is he/she secretly building a nest egg in preparation for divorce? If there is in fact a significant other, is he/she single, married, separated, or divorced? Answers to these questions could alter the course of either reconciliation or divorce.
Subsequent to divorce, private investigators are employed to determine issues such as whether the ex is discreetly cohabitating while the client is paying alimony. The question of whether the children are in the care and custody of the best provider is another consideration. Many parents want background information on an ex’s new boyfriend or girlfriend – an unknown adult to whom the children are now exposed. Documenting the new lifestyle of an ex may also be relevant in custody issues.
Consulting an investigator to discuss these issues and your options is always sound advice. The good news is that many investigators offer a free initial consultation.
Like other professions, there are many tools and tricks of the private investigation trade that are unknown or unavailable to others. It is paramount during this time of emotional distress to focus on the task at hand: obtaining irrefutable evidence so you can make informed decisions about the rest of your life.
Selecting the Right Private Investigator:
You’ve decided to consult with a private investigator, but you’re uncertain how to select the right one – someone you can trust with your valued personal information and hard-earned money, not to mention personal problems. There are several important considerations.
Honesty and integrity are paramount. You will likely provide your investigator with substantial personal information and financial records. You will pay him in advance, or at least provide a healthy retainer, and trust him to complete the assignment to your satisfaction. You will have to trust him when he tells you that a couple of more nights of surveillance are needed, and trust that he is truly working in your best interests and not taking advantage of you. You will trust that he will provide the evidence he claims to have acquired (and you have paid for), and that he will appear in court, willing and able to articulate the facts and findings of his investigation.
So how do you find this person?
My first recommendation is to get a recommendation. Your attorney may have experience with a good investigator, or perhaps a trustworthy friend knows someone who knows someone. Remember to be cautious in your search so that your spouse isn’t tipped off to your efforts. Absent recommendations, you’ll have to take your chances with the Internet or your local phone book.
Then what?
Most states have licensing requirements, which should at least weed out convicted criminals. If you are in one of these states, simply interview a few licensed and insured investigators. Ask what they believe would be the best course of action for your problem, what type of equipment they use, and what you can expect in the way of evidence. Ask about their background and experience. Then follow your instincts and select one who is intelligent, articulate, and interested in helping you with your situation.
What if you live where there are no state licensing requirements?
In Colorado, Idaho, Mississippi, Missouri, South Dakota, and Wyoming, private investigators are not licensed by the state. This means there are no government-verified criminal history checks. There is not a department or entity to gather, process, and record complaints; no standard of training, experience or education; and no requirement for investigators to have at least a basic knowledge of the law. Proceed with caution!
As stated before, interview potential investigators and ask about their background and experience. Find out how they would handle your situation, and follow your instincts and first impressions. Your investigator should be professional, open, and accessible. He is a businessman and should present himself as such.
Select an investigator who has an established business or one with prior (verifiable) law enforcement experience. Not that a young, relatively inexperienced investigator won’t do a good job – he might do an outstanding job! However, you better do your homework in unlicensed states to be certain you don’t compound your problems.
Another decision may be whether to hire a local investigator or a national firm. The national firm will likely subcontract your case to a local investigator, someone you could have hired yourself, usually at a lower rate. The positive aspect of the larger firm is that it should be diligent in screening the local investigator. A national firm will ascertain if the investigator has the proper training, equipment, and experience to handle the task; it will be careful in guarding its reputation. However, this article should assist you in handling the screening yourself.
Finally, discuss your options and goals in detail with the investigator. If you are unable to establish good, open lines of communication at this point, you need to explore other options.
The Challenges of Surveillance:
During my 21-year career with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, I worked many plainclothes, undercover assignments and details wherein surveillance was an essential element of many investigations. We typically used anywhere from six to twelve investigators for mobile or “rolling” surveillance, and at least three for static surveillance. We deployed high-tech tracking devices with the authority of court orders which enabled live monitoring with up to the minute locates. Some cases were paralleled by court-authorized wire taps and coordinated through a central clearinghouse command center. We underwent extensive training in the techniques of mobile and static surveillance, counter-surveillance and undercover officer survival. We utilized decoys in our manner of dress and deployment of vehicles, sometimes posing as construction workers, delivery persons and other professionals.
I say all that to say this: One-person surveillance—something commonly requested/funded in the private industry—is one of the most challenging aspects of private investigation.
The foundation of all surveillance is the “eye.” Someone is detailed to observe a location and record (usually by video) all activity of the subject of the investigation. Generally speaking this is done from a vehicle parked at a distance close enough to obtain video footage and/or photographs, but far enough to avoid detection by the subject. The problem that usually arises is not the subject, but the occupant(s) of the home or business where the investigator has parked. Some will approach and question the investigator, others simply call the cops. Sometimes explaining the lawful and legitimate reason for the investigator’s presence (without revealing who he’s watching) will be effective; other times it bites the investigator as the party then calls every neighbor to report the news. Eventually, the subject of the investigation hears about it.
Some investigators notify the police when they establish their surveillance, and most often that is a good idea. Unfortunately, there are police dispatchers who have provided too much information to the concerned citizen, thereby compromising the surveillance.
Actually following (mobile surveillance) a subject with one vehicle/one investigator is a challenge beyond belief. It's easy to be left behind at a stop light when enough space is provided to protect the integrity of the surveillance. A common tactic is to close distance before each intersection and then back off on the other side. Sometimes this works, other times not. Nothing is more frustrating for an investigator than sitting at a red light while the back of the subject’s vehicle fades into the darkness (or traffic).
Many of these problems can be eliminated if more than one investigator is used. If the investigator on point is not challenged with being prepared to immediately depart when the subject goes mobile, a more obscure point of surveillance can often be established. For instance, one tactic is using a van, trailer or truck with a camper where the “eye” can be concealed inside before arrival. A driver parks and locks the vehicle in plain view of onlookers and is picked up by another investigator or leaves on foot. An “empty” vehicle is less threatening than an occupied vehicle and attracts far less attention. When the subject goes mobile, the “eye” calls it in to awaiting investigators who pick up the action in progress.
Another tactic is to completely abandon the use of a vehicle as the eye. An apartment or motel room with a view of the subject location is very effective. Public areas such as parks or stores tend to attract less attention. I have, on occasion, donned camouflage and concealed myself on a hillside with a terrific view of the subject. These and many other innovative ideas can be used when a second investigator is funded for the surveillance.
In mobile surveillance two or more investigators are able to stay closer to the subject by frequently changing positions, thereby not becoming a constant object in the subject’s mirror. A good investigator knows exactly when a right-hand turn into a parking lot is needed to “cool” the tail. At that time the other investigator, who has either been hanging further back or paralleling on an adjacent street, swings in and picks up the eye. The one who turned right allows a block or two and joins back in with a relaxed position.
With this insight you will better understand why your P.I. may recommend the use of a second investigator. Sometimes it’s your best option and if the budget allows for it, you are likely to experience substantially better results.
When the Cops are Wrong:
It's not uncommon for a cop-turned-private investigator to be asked by his former colleagues, “How do you like working for the enemy?” Or, “I hear you went over to the dark side.” Though some law enforcement officers have an 'us against them' attitude, the truth is we are all part of the legal justice system. Without both sides equally represented, 'justice' would be questionable at best.
I've always contended a good investigator is a fact-finder and it shouldn't matter which side pays his/her salary. The facts of a case should never change or be otherwise altered to fit any agenda. Sometimes facts favor the investigator’s theory; sometimes they don't. True professionals swallow the good with the bad and don't allow themselves to be compromised by passionate viewpoints.
As a homicide detective for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, I was summoned one evening to a gang-related murder in the Vermont District of Los Angeles County, an area plagued by this type of activity. In this case the suspect had been identified by eyewitnesses, arrested by patrol deputies and booked at a nearby substation before we received the call.
I was elated knowing the case would be a 'walk-through', a solved case with very little follow-up investigation required. We would process the crime scene, documenting and collecting evidence, interview witnesses, attempt to obtain a statement from the suspect, and, within 48 hours, present the case to the district attorney.
Our investigation proceeded well until my partner and I met the suspect. The well-mannered, clean-cut athletic specimen before us certainly did not resemble your run-of-the-mill gangster. As it turned out, he played football for a major university. Raised in Compton, California—arguably one of the most dangerous cities in America—this young man had never been arrested and had no record of misconduct. (I couldn't have grown up in Compton without being arrested!) Something, obviously, was terribly amiss.
My partner and I spent the next twenty-some hours proving beyond a reasonable doubt this was a case of mistaken identity. We essentially completed the task of a defense investigator and spared an innocent man a life-altering course he did not deserve to travel. It turned out the witnesses saw the detained man drive past the location as the shooting occurred. His vehicle was unique and made lasting impressions. Not only did we prove this man did not commit the shooting, we determined this was a 'walk-up' shooting and could not have been committed by individuals in a passing vehicle. We later discovered additional witnesses who saw the real suspect run from the scene.
Whose side were we working for, anyway? It didn’t matter. What mattered was a young man’s life was spared from an extraordinary derailment because we were willing to recognize that cops, too, make mistakes.
The purpose of this story is not congratulatory; rather it is to say when I accept private investigator work for defense attorneys, I do so because a good defense is an essential cog in the wheels of justice. I scour police reports, revisit crime scenes, review evidence and assure every stone is turned. Not to embarrass the police or undermine the efforts of the prosecution, rather I do so because there are few tragedies more profound than when an innocent man or woman loses their freedom.
Background Investigations:
Some of the most common requests for background investigations include: pre-employment, child-custody and would-be romances.
Child custody issues often involve the new partner of an ex-husband or wife; the client wants to insure their children will be in a safe, sane and healthy environment when he/she has custody. These requests often involve criminal history checks, sex offender registration checks, and sometimes surveillance.
Would-be romances are more in demand than ever before due to the internet and the increase in cyber-relationships. I just finished a case where a young adult male carried on a relationship with a young “woman” for several years until learning from a third party this “woman” committed suicide. The problem was there never was a young woman on the other end; rather, it was a young adult male impersonating this character. The suicide was an attempt to end the relationship. The truth is one never knows who/what they are dealing with when meeting others through the internet, and they should proceed cautiously.
Pre-employment can cover criminal history, driver’s history, previous employment history, and general character checks. I have not marketed to employers for these types of investigations in the past, but a recent investigation has caused me to consider doing so. I was asked to do a background investigation on a subject after she had embezzled over $100,000.00 from her company. It didn’t take long for me to discover her criminal history in another state where she had committed exactly the same crimes for years. In fact, she had a warrant for her arrest for violating probation, part of a previous sentence related to prior embezzlement charges. This is a case where had the employer requested the background investigation prior to employing this convicted felon, he would have saved a fortune. Not all employers need full criminal background investigations, but in cases like the one described here where the employee will have access to finances, it would be a prudent investment.
Copyright © 2009 www.drsinvestigations.com Boise Idaho Private Investigator
An article written by Danny R. Smith, inspired by the Sue Newby homicide case occurring in Eagle, Idaho.
A top headline news story coming out of Idaho this past week involves the death of Idaho resident Sue Newby. Her husband, Mark Newby committed suicide when the police were closing in on him while investigating the suspicious death. Ada County Sheriff’s deputies had reason to believe the death was not, as reported by Mr. Newby, an accident, in part due to evidence of an affair and a motive of financial gain.
The Idaho Statesman (www.idahostatesman.com) reported:
‘On April 2, Sue Newby told a friend she planned to take a horse ride with her husband and confront him about a suspected affair.
On April 4, she was dead in the bottom of Rocky Canyon north of Eagle.
What happened that day may never be known. Mark D. Newby, 46, killed himself with a gunshot to his head late Wednesday, say Ada County sheriff's deputies who discovered the body when they arrived at his home with a search warrant as they investigated Sue Newby's death.’
Friends and family of Sue were suspicious of the death from the onset, as were several horse enthusiasts who said the details of the “accident” didn’t make sense. They rightfully encouraged law enforcement to dig deeply into this case, and to the credit of the investigators, they did. They quickly developed sufficient probable cause to obtain a search warrant for Newby’s residence.
The point of my writing though is not to dwell on the circumstances which led to Sue Newby’s tragic death, but to offer some occasionally overlooked advice for women in potentially vulnerable situations.
In this case Sue Newby told friends she planned to confront her husband about a suspected affair while the two of them were horseback riding in a remote area; this was not a good idea. She should have confronted him at home or in a public place with just enough privacy for a conversation, not an otherwise unattended act of violence or murder.
In my 21 years with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, I had the misfortune to see worse-case endings similar to this in many cases. The common denominator was often that the victim placed herself in a vulnerable situation. Linda Sobek was a model who was murdered in 1995 by photographer Charles Rathbun at a remote photo shoot. Rathbun had attempted to rape Sobek before murdering her and reporting her death as an accident. This is one of the more notorious cases of which I am reminded, but there are many others that come to mind. And although these two cases are markedly different, there remains a common denominator of vulnerability.
What should be known to all women, young ladies and even boys is that predators come in all sizes, shapes, social-economical and ethnic classes; they represent all professions (yes, even law enforcement), religious sectors (remember the Catholic priest scandals?) and recreational groups (scouting groups, team sports, etc.). Their prey most often have the common denominator of vulnerability in a variety of ways too many and complex to discuss in this article. The real point is this: Since predators fit so neatly into society before and often after striking out at their prey, it is imperative that we do not allow ourselves or our loved ones to become prey.
The following are a few suggestions in protecting ones self:
If your daughter or girlfriend (or you) is planning to meet someone with whom she has established an internet relationship, a very common occurrence these days, encourage (actually, insist!) her to meet him in a safe and neutral environment. (I say neutral because it is equally important she not reveal her residence to someone she knows nothing about.) Have an exit strategy in the event things do not go as planned, and always tell someone trustworthy where you plan to be and when you expect to be finished.
If your son, daughter, friend or sibling is involved in sports or other recreational activities, don’t assume the “adult” in the situation is trustworthy. Never allow him or her to be alone with the “coach” and remember there is safety in numbers.
If you or your best friend are having trouble in a current relationship and plan to break it off or confront the significant other, do so in the manner previously described for meeting someone for the first time. Also, as in that case, have a simple yet effective exit strategy and be prepared to implement it at the first sign of trouble.
Finally, seriously consider having background checks of strangers you are considering dating or allowing access to your children or loved ones. Remember, these are very different times than generations past when everyone in a community knew everyone else, and seldom did their social circles extend beyond that community. Technology has shrunk our world, and for all of its good, there are plenty of underlying evils.
PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR BOISE IDAHO
