Fact Finding Investigations - Prepare
One of the most important and core tasks of investigators – from law enforcement to private, in civil and criminal litigation – is the witness interview. Witnesses can be victims or accusers, clients or defendants, those present at an event, and those not present who have information (hearsay). Generally, there are two sides to each witness – their own, and another’s; and the truth is the area between – which can lean more towards one person or another. It is the investigator’s duty – and skill – to assess the witness and fully inform their client (attorney, prosecutor, etc.) of the witness provided details. It is further important to empirically compare and contrast all details reported by witnesses, and also to other independent facts. Together these begin to tell the story, and determine the credibility of persons involved – including other investigators.

As noted in each of our books, the interview process is part of the fact gathering process – it is preceded by fact gathering, includes fact gathering, and is followed by more fact gathering. In Dean’s book, ‘Practical Methods for Legal Investigations: Concepts and Protocols in Civil and Criminal Cases’ – (www.PracticalMethodsForLegalInvestigations.com) the process of legal investigation, including each interview, is Prepare, Inquire, Analyze, Document, and Report.

The first step, in the full investigation and in each component and task – each witness, scene, event and empirically. Acquiring information, facts and evidence is a step-by-step building process, and we begin with the Prepare step.

As the old story goes, in the example of circumstantial evidence, is waking up to snowfall and seeing rabbit tracks in the snow. The conclusion seems obvious, it snowed overnight and a rabbit crossed in the snow. Both are reasonable conclusions of circumstantial evidence. It can be assured it snowed overnight, as there is no other explanation for snow on the ground in the morning. However, can it be concluded a rabbit crossed in snow – is there another explanation? Had you seen the rabbit cross in the snow, it would be conclusive. The same can be said for a physical altercation.

Two persons are on a public roadway, one is ahead on a motorcycle and another is passing in a vehicle. In changing lanes, returning to the ‘slow’ lane, the vehicle cuts off the motorcycle – as later reported by the motorcycle driver. The vehicle driver reported he did not. There are no other reported witnesses. In the course of the investigation, you obtain an independent statement from the vehicle driver’s insurance – who there is now a claim against (‘adverse driver’), which has been denied. The statement includes the vehicle driver reporting there were three additional persons, on motorcycles, who stopped and he was threatened – and left the scene of the accident out of fear for his life.

Law enforcement received a report from the motorcycle driver, and did contact the vehicle driver from a license plate reported. The motorcycle driver stated he was alone and did not threaten the vehicle driver. Law enforcement, several days after the event and having no other information, writes a citation to the vehicle driver for careless driving, but not for leaving the scene – the motorcycle driver is not cited. Your client is the attorney for the claimant, the motorcycle driver, and your task is to determine the facts which establish liability. Your task is NOT to only establish liability against the vehicle driver.

To ‘Prepare’ for your interview of the vehicle driver, you first obtain the Traffic Accident Report and statements, and also both the 911 calls and the dispatch log (i.e. Computer Aided Dispatch – CAD; or Calls For Service, etc.). From these you learn the following:
- The dispatch log shows the vehicle driver was the first caller from the scene.
- There were two other identified callers, also from the scene and the log includes information from each they witnessed an vehicle driving erratically in traffic and cut off a motorcycle. Neither stopped.
- The 911 call from the vehicle driver includes their statements of driving on the road, being surrounded by 3 or 4 loud motorcycles, and then being able to pass them. After he did, they sped up and surrounded him again, slowed down, and forced him to stop. After that, they were trying to open his car door and he was able to drive off, pulling into a gas station to call 911.
- The 911 call from the first witness states they saw a vehicle, described and matching the vehicle driver’s, pass them and then a car in front of them, and then a motorcycle. It looked like the vehicle pulled over fast because of another vehicle coming at them, cutting off the motorcycle.
- The 911 call from the second witness states they were behind a motorcycle, when a vehicle – which they could not describe, other than dark, passed them and the motorcycle, then cut off the motorcycle as another car passed from the opposite direction.
- There was no 911 call from the motorcycle driver.

Briefly, back to the 911 call of the vehicle driver and an important fact intentionally left out of the above information. During the 911 call, you hear the vehicle driver’s voice in a panic and you also hear loud banging and a male yelling he is going to pull him out of the car and beat him to death.

Also, back to the dispatch report and another piece of information – many now include GPS coordinates of the cell phone tower transmitting the call. Using any popular mapping software, you find the vehicle driver’s call came from closer to the reported scene of the traffic event, and not a gas station several miles away.
From your pre-interview preparation, you have learned the following:
- There were at least two unreported witnesses as 911 callers;
- Both reported the vehicle driver as driving in an unsafe manner;
- One reported seeing the vehicle driver cut off the motorcycle;
- Both reported seeing only one motorcycle;
- Neither reported seeing the vehicle or motorcycle stop;
- The first 911 call GPS, from the vehicle driver, was at a point several miles from where he reported calling from; and
- The first 911 call included background of a single person outside the vehicle making threats to the vehicle driver.

In many similar cases, there are now dashcams and personal cameras available at popular electronics stores. These are available to everyone, and can be mounted on bicycles, motorcycles, helmets, vehicles, etc. Cell phones are also used for photographs and videos. It is important to determine if any of these devices were used by any reporting persons, witnesses and law enforcement.

As investigators, our purpose is to find and report information, facts and evidence to our client. As legal investigators, this is to our attorney-client; as law enforcement this is to the prosecutor; and as insurance adjusters this is to the insurance company. Knowing we are investigating after-the-fact, it is important to keep in mind others also investigating may not have had all the information at the time of their investigation, and who they represent – insured, accuser, defendant, etc. – may have a cognitive bias, and perhaps only information supporting their claim is reported. Remember, our task is NOT to only establish liability against the opposing party.

Establishing a fact pattern is important to assuring your client is fully informed and can make appropriate decisions and legal strategy in the best interests of their client. This may include dropping any claims or charges, amending any claims or charges, or accepting a settlement or plea offer. The time to learn of what should have been investigated is NOT during any hearing, proceeding or trial – it is before.

Every investigation has its limitations – from time to resources to funding. The process of investigation, and the depth as well as direction, are dictated by these factors, as well as the directions of the client. As a legal investigator, we are tasked with finding all information, facts and evidence to present to our client, for them to make a full and informed decision in the best interests and protection of the rights of their client.

Autopsy Options in Civil and Criminal Litigation
 
We are often contacted for advice on having an autopsy performed, finding a forensic pathologist, or having our agency and/or forensic pathologist conduct a review of records, reports and photographs in a criminal or civil case for pre- and active litigation. Many find it interesting the options available to them – or not available. The first question to ask is – is the body available for autopsy; and the second is – was an autopsy performed? The only thing that prevents an autopsy is cremation. An autopsy can be performed on an embalmed body, including exhumed weeks to years - even decades - later.  Embalming does present issues; however, these are addressed by the forensic pathologist.
 
What are the available options for an autopsy? First, autopsy is from the Greek, ‘autopsia’ – “to see with one’s own eyes”. We recommend having a board certified forensic pathologist conduct any autopsy in potential litigation. Other specialties involve the hospital and medical setting – which involves clinical and anatomical pathology. A forensic pathologist, often cross trained and certified in both clinical and anatomical pathology, has the added education and training in areas of injury and injury causation to determine the cause and manner of death; such as our consulting forensic pathologist. In addition, we recommend a member of the National Association of Medical Examiners (www.theNAME.org). Areas of additional medical education and specialized training for the forensic pathologist includes toxicology, firearms and ballistics, blood analysis, and trace evidence, including DNA, collection.
 
The forensic autopsy includes a review of the medical history, crime scene evidence, evidence of injury or disease, and medical and trace evidence. A forensic pathologist is available to all parties – prosecution, plaintiff, and defense. In addition, a forensic pathologist is available for clinical consultation – examination of living persons – very important and valuable to surviving victims of serious bodily injury. The primary distinction between a fatal and non-fatal event can be fractions of an inch. We treat all SBI cases the same as death cases. Finally, we also recommend an expert medicolegal death investigator be present to document any autopsy requested.
 
An autopsy, to see with our own eyes, is available in the following manners:
- Private autopsy – if an autopsy has not been completed or the case is not in the jurisdiction of the medical examiner / coroner;
- Second full autopsy – if an autopsy, forensic or medical only, has been completed and an independent full forensic autopsy is needed. This includes exhumations;
- Forensic Pathology Review – if an autopsy has been completed, however, the body is not available for a second autopsy (cremated, not exhumed, logistically not available); and
- Forensic Body Documentation – whether previously autopsied or not, and the body is available, the body can be documented by photographs, video, diagramming, and any additional evidence collection.
 
There exists standards and protocols for when to conduct forensic autopsies, the process of both the forensic autopsy and the death investigation, as well as accepted usual practices for each. As part of our consultation in death cases, we review the processes of the official investigation.
 
Private Autopsy
If an autopsy has not been completed or the case is not in the jurisdiction of the medical examiner / coroner, the next-of-kin can request a private autopsy. As most deaths are not subject to autopsy, the family may have questions to be answered by autopsy. It is recommended that any unexpected death be autopsied; however, from budgets to forensic pathologist availability, most are not. As an example, we often see fatal motor vehicle collisions or law enforcement determined suicides not autopsied, as it is believed the cause and manner of death are known by investigation. We have written extensively on the errors of these ways.
 
A private autopsy is authorized and paid for by the next-of-kin, and conducted by an independent forensic pathologist. Consulting with a forensic pathologist in advance will assist in determining if a forensic autopsy is possible and potentially informative, or if another available option is better.
 
The private autopsy is conducted in the same manner as the medical examiner / coroner authorized autopsy. This includes gross external examination, and internal examination of the body, toxicology, and microscopic tissue examinations. The forensic pathologist will also request the decedent’s medical history, and circumstances of their death. We also recommend an expert medicolegal death investigator assist with the autopsy and investigative processes, much as a medical examiner / coroner system has available.
 
Second Full Autopsy
If an autopsy has been completed or the case is not in the jurisdiction of the medical examiner / coroner or private autopsy – and may include exhumation, the next-of-kin can request a private autopsy. A second autopsy is most common when there is a claim or dispute in the findings of the original autopsy. In media, we see this in potentially high-profile cases – such as law enforcement involved deaths. We may also see these where it is believe the first autopsy missed something, or did not conduct a specific test or examination, or where new evidence has been found and a second autopsy is necessary.
 
A second autopsy is also conducted as a Private Autopsy (above) and is also limited to the body being available, which would include embalmed and exhumed bodies. Being embalmed presents some issues, but does not hinder a second autopsy or findings. As with the original autopsy, the forensic pathologist will also request the decedent’s medical history, and circumstances of their death. In addition, they will dissect their own tissue for microscopic examination, and specimens for toxicology; they will also likely re-examine and test specimens from the original autopsy in microscopy and toxicology. In addition, we also recommend an expert medicolegal death investigator assist with the autopsy and investigative processes.
 
Forensic Pathology Review
If an autopsy has been completed, however, the body is not available for a second autopsy (cremated, not exhumed, logistically not available, or a forensic pathologist is unavailable) or there was no autopsy, there are alternatives, the first of which is an independent review by a forensic pathologist. This review would include the original autopsy report, toxicology results, medical history and circumstances of death as known at the time of the original autopsy.
 
Based on the findings of the review, or in consideration of the circumstances in litigation, the forensic pathologist may recommend also doing an independent examination of any retained specimens for microscopy and toxicology. This review, and additional independent examination, are as close to a second autopsy as can be done, without having the body to examine. Of course, any autopsy without a body is subject to the limitations of not being able to examine first-hand, as well as retain their own specimens. We also recommend an expert medicolegal death investigator assist with the review of the official investigative records, reports, and photographs with the forensic pathologist.
 
Forensic Body Documentation
As with the Forensic Pathology Review (above), the body can be documented by photographs, video, diagramming, and any additional evidence collection. A forensic pathologist may provide this service, or it is most often provided by an expert medicolegal death investigator. Due to the nature of the evidence, documentation, examination, and potential testimony, we recommend this be done with expert experience considered. There are specific steps and protocols to follow, as well as potential evidence to look for in the examination and documentation.
 
What Steps to Follow
Each of these available options – from autopsy to review – can be conducted at a morgue or funeral home setting, dependent on what is logistically available.  To further the findings of an unexpected death involved in litigation, time is of the essence and immediate action must be taken, to include:
- Obtain notarized consent from the next-of-kin or court order;
- Provide an immediate letter of preservation, or court order, to the medical examiner / coroner’s office and/or funeral home or other custodian of the body;
- Provide an immediate letter of preservation, or court order, to the medical examiner / coroner’s office, funeral home, hospital or other custodian of the tissue (histology) and toxicology specimens; and
- Make immediate arrangements with a board certified forensic pathologist and/or expert medicolegal death investigator.
 
Our goal is to provide you with the utmost in privacy, confidentiality and our professional attention to your legal investigation and expert consultation needs.​ ​You can learn about us at www.DeathCaseReview.com/Attorneys.html for details, CVs, and information packets.
 
​If we can be of assistance in any death or personal injury consultation or investigation, please contact our office at your convenience and visit www.DeathCaseReview.com/sample-cases.html for cases we have worked.  We welcome your inquiries and the opportunity to assist you.
​​​
A synopsis of our expert consultations is best described as: ​​
​​"Expert [Forensic / Medicolegal / Death] Investigator to review the records, reports, photographs and evidentiary documentation in order to provide a non-medical forensic expert opinion, within the scope of their education, training and experience, as to the totality of the circumstances of the fatal and non-fatal event and the competence of the official investigation, with respect to death investigation protocol and standards."
 
In addition, we have an affiliated consulting Forensic Pathologist and a Forensic Toxicologist available for additional, and medical specific, expert consultations – including all protocols and options presented here.
 
We invite you to contact us at your convenience for the opportunity, and to introduce you to the Associates in Forensic Investigations experience.

-----
Dean A. Beers, CLI, CCDI, CFI-FTER and Karen S. Beers, BSW, CCDI, CFI-FTER
Colorado Licensed Private Investigators (PI2.050 and PI2.019)
Cheyenne WY Licensed Private Investigators & Security (31146)
Board Certified Legal Investigator / Expert Consultant
Board Certified Criminal Defense Investigators
Board Certified Forensic Interviewer-Forensic Testimonial Evidence Recovery
Certified in Medicolegal Death Investigations / former Deputy Coroners

Associates in Forensic Investigations, LLC
A Rocky Mountain West Agency
Expert Consultants and Legal Investigators
Personal Injury, Negligence & Death in Civil, Criminal and Probate Litigation

www.DeathCaseReview.com ~ beersda@DeathCaseReview.com
CO - (970) 480-7793 Office / TXT and (970) 480-7794 Fax
WY - (307) 222-0136 Office / TXT and (307) 222-0138 Fax
'Quaero Indicium' - To Find The Evidence

I am humbled and honored to be chosen as the next Executive Director (ED) for the National Council of Investigation and Security Services (NCISS) organization.
 
Carol Ward has been the Executive Director for many, many years and it will be quite difficult to follow in her foot-steps.  Carol has been a fixture and an exemplary representative in her dedication to NCISS.
Carol is retiring and will be set free from the books to enjoy her life as she so deserves.
 
I want to thank Carol for her confidence and consideration in recommending me to fill the position as ED to NCISS.  I promise to do my best not to disappoint.
 
I also thank my husband, Dean Beers, for standing by my decision to pursue the ED position and always being there no matter what, even if sometimes he just stands there shaking his head at some of my antics.
 
I thank the special selection committee that was put to task in choosing an Executive Director as well as the Board who gave the thumbs up for me to have the opportunity to take the position.  I appreciate that all of you have given me the chance to assist NCISS in continuing the mission of this important association.  We will continue to advocate for all professional investigators and security officers and agencies.  Our main goal is to keep us all in business and we will continue keeping up with and being informed of any legislative actions that could impact our professions. 
 
Last, however, certainly not least, I want to thank all NCISS members.  Without all of you and your support, NCISS would not be able to continue on with our mission.  Like Carol, I am very approachable, and I invite you all to contact me with ideas and concerns to keep NCISS alive and well and working for our professions.
 
Remember: “You cannot speak up for yourself when you are six feet under, so do it while you still have a voice.”
by Karen Beers 

To all my colleagues and Many Friends,
 
As I start this new chapter in my life, the one thing I will miss, is the daily communication with so many of you.  Please know, retiring from NCISS was not an easy decision.  Knowing Karen Beers the way I do, I feel I have left you in very capable hands.  This makes it so much easier for me to step aside.  I don’t plan on being a stranger. Don’t be surprised if I show up at Hit the Hill next Spring. 
 
I am so very proud to have been a part of such a great association. I’m thankful to have been given the opportunity to work with so many professionals that have dedicated so much of their personal time and funds to make NCISS the very best national association for investigators and security professionals.
 
I sincerely appreciate NCISS’s support during my long tenure and will always consider myself a part of the NCISS family.  I wish all of my colleagues the very best, and am certain that the association will continue to grow and be successful. 
If I started listing all those that have helped me through this journey, it would take up the whole page.  So I will just say “Thank You” to all of you.  Please join me in welcoming Karen to her new position as Executive Director of NCISS.  You are lucky to have her.

In mid-June I announced to the NCISS membership the resignation of long-time NCISS Executive Director Carol Ward.  Carol has been steadfast in her long-time dedication to the Council, and deserves to finally enjoy a rich retirement.  Carol’s last day was July 31st. We are saddened that Carol is moving on, but excited about what the future holds for NCISS.
 
I appointed a Special Committee, Chaired by 1st VP Andrea Orozco, with Past Presidents Maria Landry, Ed McClain and James Huckabee - tasked with the duty of reviewing, interviewing and making a selection and recommendation for the position of Executive Director. The Special Committee completed its due diligence process, looking at resumes and conducting interviews to make its recommendation to the Board.
 
The Special Committee evaluated the candidates thoroughly; and based on experience and other factors Karen Beers was determined to the best choice to be appointed your new NCISS Executive Director. This was ratified by a vote of the Board and Karen’s position is effective 08/01/2018. Carol will help make the transition as smooth and transparent as possible for members. You will see announcements of new contact information, and updated to the NCISS website.
 
On behalf of NCISS members and Board, I want to thank Carol for her many years of excellent service!

Garbage In is Garbage Out
 
Just this week Dean was communicating with an old friend, Kelly Riddle, TCI (Kelmar Global – www.kelmarglobal.com in San Antonio TX) about database resources professional investigators use. At one time, it was not unusual for law enforcement to come to us for help with our resources – now they have some of the same access. This stared as a comment Kelly made to the Texas Association of Licensed Investigators listserv about what the best database is – a very common question, without one answer (even the providers will tell you). Kelly gave one of the best answers I’ve seen – based on his 29 years’ experience. In short, all information comes from the same sources – it is how it is searched (user) and returned (provider) that makes the difference. Because each case may have different inputs, and each provider has different data aggregating, algorithms, and reporting – the results may differ between providers. Within the providers, using the same input with different permissible purposes under the FCRA and GLBA, may produce different results. Sometimes inputting more information is better, sometimes less. There is an art to understanding all the nuances.
 
In our 30th year, our agency started with providing general individual locates, backgrounds and assets & liabilities records checks and investigations (there is a difference). While communicating with Kelly, he mentioned, “My first book “Private Investigating Made Easy” showed people how to do background searches before there was an internet…. good old gumshoe stuff!” How true! Dean’s first book, “Professional Investigations: Individual Locates, Backgrounds and Assets & Liabilities” (www.ProfessionalLocateInvestigations.com) offers the same history and necessity of this ‘gumshoe’ experience. This book was based on Dean’s first conference seminar, which became “Skip Trace Seminar on CD”. Early on, probably a decade before the book, Dean learned about these mysterious databases and asked a colleague. Needing to keep a secret, Dean was told, “I just entered the Social Security Number and had a new address.” – but he would not share the source. Being an investigator – without Google – Dean learned about sources and began to learn about them. He learned, Garbage In is Garbage Out.
 
Every professional investigator should know how data flows in and out with both public records and data providers. There is no magic wand, there are many mistakes, and all information must be verified before reporting. We often receive assignments from clients and colleagues requesting we conduct one of our general investigations. From time to time we are brought in after other attempts have been made and are unsuccessful.
 
Any record that is kept or provided is only as good as the chain of events involved.  Remember: Garbage In Is Garbage Out.
 
GIGO still remains an easy way for absconders to manipulate their credit report - not as easy now as it was. All they have to do is apply for credit with a different address (now they check ID - but many clerks do not look or will overlook if you tell them you just moved). This becomes a red herring. It is also important to know how to sort the information and rule out when someone uses certain search criteria to pull credit header data (PIs, collectors, etc.).
 
This unintentional manipulation used to happen more (algorithms with data companies screen this out better) and is when you use an old address to pull up current information. The address you used gets put at the top as being current - making the actual current address move down.
 
Everything is a record and creates the paper trail, or map, lending to the information about the subject.  How that record is maintained, stored and possibly disseminated, varies and influences the accuracy of the information.  Any record that is kept or provided is only as good as the chain of events involved.  At the beginning is the person that provides the information.  If the applicant lies or fails to provide accurate information, then the information subsequently received is consequentially inaccurate.  Persons are known to have fibbed just a little on a credit or job application. 
 
The next link is the person recording the information.  Any typos, misprints or other related mistakes also affect the record.  These mistakes are often seen on personal credit histories, even civil and criminal histories – ‘official’ records.  Following this would be the method of updating and record storage.  All records are only as accurate as the frequency of updates.  Some records are never updated.  Finally, what about the provider of the information?  Is the provider primary (the original record holder), secondary (bought the information from a primary record holder) or is the provider even more removed from the original record holder, such as an information provider (Consumer Reporting Agency)?  Did they have accurate retrieval information and were they knowledgeable in how to obtain and verify the information?
 
Anybody can find information and present it, but is it reliable?  Any error in this chain of record keeping will impact the ability to search the records, as well as the accuracy of the record and ultimately the investigation and findings.  After the information is received, it is usually a simple and inexpensive task to verify any relevant information through a primary source or provider of primary source information.
 
Although suitable for searching and conducting only records checks, database and online records are not detailed or suitable as the end-result for a comprehensive background investigation.  This is only summary information and detailed information is necessary.  There is no harm, and actually a great benefit to summary records, but always proceed to detailed records if available.  Current information will usually lead to finding historical information. 
 
All individual investigations require the verification of the accuracy of the information provided and developed through our Investigative Protocol – Prepare (gather the preliminary known subject data), Inquire (conduct the background investigation), Analyze (review the known and obtained subject information and records), Document (ensure all official documents are obtained) and Report (compile the investigative report and supporting documentation).  If at any stage of the Investigative Protocol there is any question, doubt, or concern – start over and do so before submitting any report that may contain factual or procedural errors or is otherwise incomplete.
 
No single record or repository, or single method of searching, should be relied upon.
 
This manner of investigation is not limited to general investigations. It is also important to Criminal Defense Investigations, as taught by another friend and colleague of nearly three decades – Brandon Perron, CCDI, CFI-FTER (Criminal Defense Investigation Training Council – www.DefenseInvestigator.com in Stuart FL). Stay tuned next month, as this topic is continued into defense investigations.
 
* Dean started our agency in October 1987, and Karen joined part-time in 1996 and full-time in 2012. Dean expresses his thanks and to personal and professional friends, Kelly Riddle and Brandon Perron. They first ‘met’ as original and close-knit contributing writers to the original PI Magazine, and continued as contributors with each new publish, multiple books and articles, training seminars and speaking engagements.

One of the most fundamental skills, and staple offering, of Professional Investigators is the Due Diligence Investigation. These types of investigations range from personal to business clients - and personal to business subjects. Not including business due diligence - such as IPO or merger projects - most investigators find themselves learning and being able to specialize in Individual Locates, Backgrounds, Assets & Liabilities, and Heirs for Civil, Criminal and Probate litigation. Like most of our colleagues, it is also how we started. These types of investigations not only cover the basic skills and resources, but are also a necessity in almost every type of investigation conducted. They are also specialties in themselves, and share common practices, resources and methodologies. Learn the basics of one - and you will know the basics for another.

A good start is our book at www.ProfessionalLocateInvestigations.com - it is designed for the novice, rookie, and veteran investigator. We also highly recommend checking the offerings of other experts in these fields.

Some have seen the proliferation of online resources, open to the public, as a threat to these services. Having been in the profession for 30 years - we have seen this 'threat' and have met it head-on. Most often what is available to the public is unreliable and unverified. Services aggregate various public records and make them available by name - no other means to search or verify is available. These are not threats to us or our profession. In fact, they are beneficial. Our clients need accurate, verified and sourced information. There are no secrets from our clients - we may be testifying, or at least providing affidavits, as to our findings. We must also follow state and federal laws and regulations. This makes our profession and services even more valuable and necessary than before. No matter the availability of public information available, the core value is our ability to find information, private resources for information, and our ability to cross reference and verify information. No public online resource does so - and, in fact, their disclaimer all but assures you the information is likely inaccurate for any number of reasons.

Here is an example, from this month. A private client contacted us for two tasks, and one being multiple background checks of persons involved in an official death investigation. They had first paid $30 for each subject for an online records check - and all had felonies; we recommended they retain a local investigator to conduct the verifiable backgrounds. in a follow-up to a consultation, we learned they had retained a local private investigator and received a 'certified' background report, which they were told could be used in any court as evidence of character. After explaining how the admission of evidence, which a report is, works - the use of a 'certified' report and their context also caught our attention. The history of the case included some public officials and elected positions. The private investigator, not known to us, provided a report that stated an elected county magistrate had been dead for five years prior to signing a search warrant in the death we were examining. While on the phone with our client, we conducted a quick Google search of the name. Within five minutes we learned the client had been provided inaccurate information on her 'certified' report. It would have been embarrassing to bring to any attorney for litigation, or a court. The name, fairly uncommon, was the same as a person deceased as reported; however, it was not the magistrate - and never was a magistrate. The magistrate was alive, and was still presiding. This made all of the other subjects' background investigations questionable. We suggested the client contact the private investigator with the information we quickly learned. This was an egregious and serious error and should not have happened with a simple verification process.

Also this month, we were contacted by a political candidate to do opposition research. The candidate had also obtain a $30 online background check and learned the opponent had a historical bankruptcy in the state he had resided, until moving and running for office. The position involved fiduciary duties worth hundreds of millions in public funds. Of course, this would be concerning. After conducting our own, we did find a bankruptcy; however, it was not the subject. In fact, we found no negative information of the subject.

Individual Locates
Every case involving litigation, or potential litigation - from domestic relations to criminal defense and civil torts - has witnesses, parties and others that need to be located and found. Probate cases for heirs is simply determining who needs found, then finding them - except, most often even a basic name is unknown. Adoption cases, although similar to all of these, does take on a different scope due to the nature and secrecy of adoption, and confidentiality of records - and having less to work with than heir and probate cases. The scope of adoption cases are changing with social media, society, and laws. Those cases with witnesses are most often some of the easiest, as the subject is not actively looking to hide, and often does not realize they may be important to your case. Defendants, particularly in collection cases, and sometimes in adverse litigation, can be the most challenging in litigation cases.

Two unique areas of individual locates are adoption and heirs. Both generally start with knowing only the client - a decedent / estate, and the adopted person. Both of these require working backwards from known information in order to develop the subject's history, and then finding connecting information for relatives. As previously noted, these are hindered by resources and privacy protections. These also tend to use much more public records than the data resources available to professional investigators. Each of these are important to verify. In adoptions, finding and contacting the wrong person will happen; however, providing that information to the client unverified can result in serious issues. Similarly, in reporting unverified persons as relatives and heirs, without verification, will have serious issues - as there is a decedent's estate involved.

Individual Backgrounds
The need and purpose of a background check (records only) or investigation (records, and often interviews and more in-depth) has grown with various needs from litigation requirements to online dating. Sure, there is information and records available to the public; however, it is our expertise to find and verify information using reliable resources available to professional investigators that makes our services important and valuable to the client.

Conducting a background check and/or investigation is essentially the same as an individual locate investigation. The resources and skillsets are the same, and the goal of learning verified information about the subject is the same. There may be consent involved or required, and additional details will be known about the subject.

Assets & Liabilities
This is essentially the financial background of an individual, and will involve mostly public records. This is important, as private resources are not considered primary source and, in many cases, cannot be used. Private resources are excellent aggregators of information used to develop a subject's basic profile and then researching the appropriate resources to develop a financial picture of the subject. Often a client will ask for 'Assets' - as only assets can be attached to collect debt, seek a civil judgment, etc. However, knowing the subject's liabilities is as important - liabilities may be asset collateral not subject to being attached for a judgment, or in domestic relations both the assets and liabilities are to be reported by both parties - the unscrupulous tend to forget to include assets and only reveal liabilities.

There are many limitations to this scope of investigation, due to various privacy laws and regulations. As long as the investigator stays with known and primary sources, and verifies the information obtained, there should be no issues.

Key Commonalities
First, we need to define the distinction of a public vs. private record. A public record is maintained by a public agency - it does not imply it is publicly available. A private record are those aggregated from multiple resources and made available through a private data provider - it does not imply only private investigators have access. Public records (or contents) may be available, in some form, through private data providers. Federal and state laws and regulations provide for the legal means to collect, distribute, access and disseminate these records. Professional investigators will use a variety and combination of these resources to conduct and complete the assignment.

Each of these types of investigations is essentially taking the basic personal identifiers and developing a comprehensive and verified dossier of the subject. For each of these investigations, you will need to have - or develop - the following:

• Full Name (Given, Middle, and Surname), any suffixes (Jr., Sr., etc.);
• Date of Birth;
• Social Security Number; and
• Address History.

If you do not have this information, or have trouble developing any, use the best you have - middle initials, nicknames, age, last known address, etc. This information is used to develop new information, and also verify information given, obtained, and ultimately reported.

Laws and Regulations
Please be familiar with the applicable state and federal laws, and respective regulations in conducting your investigations. Of importance is different purposes of investigations have permissible and denied purposes, as well as reporting. An employment background may require releases from and notices to the subject, and may have limitations on what can be accessed, as well as reported - and may have time limitations for reporting. Just because the investigator sees the information does not mean it can be reported. What can be accessed for a pre-employment purpose is not the same as what may be for a person checking out a potential online profile for dating.

Most important, be certain of your client and their purpose. Even if the client is a close personal friend or relative, treat their case the same as you would a cold call for the same type of investigation. One ploy often used by persons with restraining orders is to have a background check done for someone they met online. First, they may not reveal their own real identity - that is your first verification: identity and a minimum of checking their history of negative concerns. Then, your duty to report does not include - and should not include - any personal identifiers or sensitive information. In fact, you may be specifically restricted from providing such information by the data provider and/or applicable laws and regulations. Internally, we do not take any cases that do not have an attorney of record - we suggest the same. However, if you opt to provide these services to the public - it is important to not release any sensitive information not already provided to you. This would include the 'confirm or deny' ploy - in which a nefarious client gives you a subject's address they dug up and asks you do a background. What they are actually seeking is for you to verify the address they provide you.

What do you do if you come across a situation in which a prospective client has contacted you, and you determine the subject may be endangered? This will depend on several factors - from if you were retained and confidentiality, to the nature of the concerns. Have an agency policy - and stipulations in your retainer agreement - for all circumstances.

The National Council of Investigations & Security Services, our professions national legislative advocate, adopted the following resolution, which should be guidance for all:
NCISS’ POSITION ON HANDLING LOCATE REQUESTS (09/12/2008)"A member shall, prior to providing a person any personally identifying or location information of an individual, conduct appropriate due diligence to ensure that the person has a legitimate business or legal interest in obtaining that information. When such due diligence is not possible or appropriate, or if the person appears to not have a legal or business interest, the person shall be informed that their contact information will be provided to the subject they are seeking and the personal identifying information of the subject they are seeking will only be provided to the person if that party consents."

Trust But Verify
This applies to potential clients, as noted above; however, here we are specifically addressing the information you receive and report. Of course we would like to trust our resources, especially those public records that are primary sources. However, mistakes are made from a person filling out a form, to the person entering the data, and finally the person extracting the data. Garbage in is garbage out.

Assuming those mistakes are not found or are resolved, of important next is verifying the information received as being complete, accurate, and applicable specifically to the subject. If there is something which cannot be verified, and is to be reported - be sure to note this in your final report. As noted in the examples introduced, and countless others we have all experienced, mistakes happen - but not verifying the information before reporting is not a mistake - it is a potential egregious liability. A person could be not hired, fired, denied housing, or other circumstances based on your report. Your report may be required by law and/or regulation to cite and include the source - and, many types of background investigations that may result in negative action, cannot use private data resources (and the Terms of Service may specifically prohibit their use).

Skill Building and Expertise
One of the earliest skills, and first areas of expertise, Dean self-taught and acquired were these areas. Together we have presented seminars, distance learning, articles and a book on this subject matter. This is a changing and growing area of expertise and each professional investigator must continually learn and adapt to better serve their clients.

Not only are these basic skills and services for every investigator, they are also a constant for the client. It is important to thoroughly research and familiarize yourself with the techniques, resources, and limitations to these investigations - and continually. A good start is our book at www.ProfessionalLocateInvestigations.com - it is designed for the novice, rookie, and veteran investigator. We also highly recommend checking the offerings of other experts in these fields.

The NCISS 2018 Annual Meeting and Hit the Hill event was held in Washington DC from March 19th to March 21st.

Monday was the Board meeting, following by the Annual Meeting and elections.

Tuesday was the Hit the Hill with each member visiting the offices of their Senators and Representatives. Also on Tuesday was the special luncheon and presentation of the "Duffy Award" inside the US Capitol building, and an afternoon reception, also in the US Capitol building.

Wednesday brought some unexpected challenges. Inclement weather overnight resulted in cancelled and changed flights, and having to adapt the schedule for our members. The new Board meeting was held, followed by the presentation of the Vinson Award and the Wunder Award, swearing in of Officers and Directors, followed by special speakers - Terry Kilburn for Tracers Information Specialists, and Cynthia Hetherington for The Hetherington Group. Tim Dimoff, for SACS Consulting and Investigative Services, was scheduled to speak and instead yielded his time so Cynthia could give her full presentation (one consequence of the weather and schedule change). Tim has agreed to come back next year.

Here are some photos and videos of this years events - NCISS_2018_HTH_Photo_Album

NCISS 2018 Annual Meeting - Elections

At the Annual Meeting, held March 19th, NCISS held its Annual Meeting and Hit the Hill event in Washington DC. As part of the Annual Meeting, elections were held and awards presented.
 
Officers (serving one-year terms):

• President - Brad Duffy
• 1st VP - Andrea Orozco
  
• 2nd VP - Chris Reynolds
• 3rd VP - Wes Bearden
• Treasurer - Candace Ivey
• Secretary - Mark Gillespie
• Board Chairman - Terry Myer

 
Regional and At Large Directors (serving alternating two-year terms)
Mark Gillespie (Region 4 – AL-AR-MO-LA-MS-NM-OK-TN-TX)
Michael Julian (Region 6 – AK-CA-HI-ID-MT-OR-NV-WA)
Tim Gilbert (appointed to Region 1 – IL-IN-MI-KY-OH-PA-WV)
At Large Directors – Dean Gluth and Tawni Tyndall

NCISS 2018 Awards (www.NCISS.org/awards)

John J. Duffy Memorial Achievement Award (www.NCISS.org/john-j--duffy-memorial-achievment-award)
This year, the committee of the "Duffy" past recipients selected two persons - U.S. Capitol Police Special Agents Crystal Griner and David Bailey. for their acts in stopping a shooter and saving the life of Rep. Scalise and others at the softball practice on June 14, 2017 in nearby Alexandria VA.
 
This award was presented during the Hit the Hill luncheon, in the US Capitol Building. Giving the keynote address was Rep. David Young (IA) and presenting the award was House Majority Whip, Rep. Steve Scalise (IA).


Presentation of the John J. Duffy Memorial Achievement Award
Special Agents Crystal Griner and David Bailey
United States Capitol Police
March 20, 2018 – United States Capitol, Senate Visitors Center
https://youtu.be/6bgxzKqoTqg

Wayne J. Wunder Memorial Award - Andrea Orozco (www.NCISS.org/wayne-j--wunder-memorial-award)
The award recognizes exceptional contributions to NCISS by members who characteristically are not in the forefront in terms of recognition. This year the committee of the “Wunder” past recipients selected 2nd Vice President, Andrea Orozco. Her steadfast leadership and accomplishments on behalf of the Council and the profession epitomize what the Wunder family originally had in mind for recipients of the Award.
 
Here are some comments from NCISS leaders who have worked with Her: “When she says she will get it done – it gets done.” “She goes outside the box for solutions – and this is reflected in her tenure as a Board member.” “She is always thinking of others first.”“She quietly goes about her work and never cares about taking credit.” and “The Council owes her a lot over the past several years and she will play an integral part in securing its future.”
 
Presentation of Wayne J. Wunder Memorial Award by past recipients Brad Duffy and Michael Duffy:
https://youtu.be/P7whQoGSDyo

Vinson Award - Brandy Lord (www.NCISS.org/vinson-award-for-outstanding-service)
The award is presented annually since 2012 to an elected Director, Committee Chair, or other member in recognition of outstanding leadership, dedication, and service to the National Council of Investigation and Security Services. Selected by the Executive Committee, this year’s award was presented to At Large Director, Brandy Lord.
 
Brandy is alternatively described as “dynamic” and a “powerhouse.”  An unabashed NCISS supporter who knows the importance of the Council’s existence and lets other professionals know every chance she gets.  She is a respected President of her state association in Indiana and a recruiter extraordinaire for the Council.
 
Presentation of Vinson Award to Brandy Lord by the first and most recent recipients, Dean Beers and Terry Myer:
https://youtu.be/ujQo3HMUObI

NCISS is now on social media!

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/NCISS.Association (please note the period between NCISS and Association)
Twitter – https://twitter.com/nciss_assoc @nciss_assoc (please note the underscore between NCISS and Association)
YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3lsMjDxG-rGTU3enyVfgcg

Our agency is often turned to for experts in other forensic fields. Going into 2018, we have been working diligently to bring our clients and colleagues the best in their fields. We have known each expert personally and professionally extensively. This is not an exclusive list - or one of exclusion - they are our recommendations for those we take pleasure in having working relationships.

​To find our recommended and Affiliated Forensic Experts - please visit our updated Affiliated Experts page at www.DeathCaseReview.com/affiliated-experts.html for details.

​The area of forensics for investigations has many specialties - the first thought of areas are those driven by media and events. At the time of the popular "CSI" television series, it was criminal, scene and evidence forensics. In the current time of popular electronics it is cellular and computer - digital - forensics. We are now seeing a specialized field of debugging forensics - Technical Surveillance Countermeasures (TSCM). We are proud to know some of the best. In addition, many think of forensics as strictly science; however, that is incorrect. Forensics is an area of expertise and evidence specific to our judicial system - as noted by Criminal Defense Investigation Training Council (CDITC), "...the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation..." and at our agency we like to say that forensics represents "Facts or Reasonable Evidence Necessitating Systematic Investigative and Critical Solutions" as it applies to legal investigations.

​The following specialties are being added to our Affiliated Experts page - at www.deathcasereview.com/affiliated-experts.html:

• Forensic Pathology
  
• ​Forensic Toxicology
• Forensic Nursing
• ​Forensic Photography
  
• ​Digital Forensics - Cell Phones
• Digital Forensics - Computers
• ​Digital Forensics - GPS / Vehicles
• ​Forensic Technical Surveillance Countermeasures

​
​We are pleased to extend our relationships with each of these colleagues, bringing better opportunities in evidence collection to our civil and criminal litigation attorney clients.

If you have any questions or need a direct referral to one of our Affiliated Experts, please contact our agency:< Contact Page >
Office (970) 480-7793 ~ Fax (970) 480-7794
Email us - associates@DeathCaseReview.com