The Fast and Furious Investigation

Let’s start with what we know about the Fast and Furious investigation.  The Alcohol, Tabaco & Firearms Agency (ATF), a law enforcement branch of the federal government, started a ‘gun-running’ operation out of there Phoenix, Arizona office.  Guns were allowed to go across the United States/Mexico border in the hope that they would be able to track them from the US into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels.  There was poor accountability of these weapons and it was a botched operation from the start.  It has been reported that a number of Mexican nationals were killed in Mexico with guns from this operation.  Brian Terry, a US Border Patrol agent, was killed in a fire fight  on US soil on December 10, 2010 in which one of these weapons was found.

 

When a law enforcement officer dies, his department carries on an in-depth investigation into the shooting.  They do this prosecute those involved, to find out went wrong operationally and to find out if anything could have been done differently during the gunfight itself to educate and perhaps save other officers lives in future gunfights.  The heads of departments where officers have lost their lives want to know details of what happened and what went wrong, and they want to know it immediately.  One of the guns tracked by the ATF was  found at the crime scene of Agent Terry’s death.  You would think the head of the US Border Patrol, a federal law enforcement agency, would be screaming for accountability regarding this from the ATF, another federal law enforcement agency that specializes in weapon tracking and violations.  You would also think that major players in federal law enforcement would want to get to the truth of this, and let the chips fall where they may.

 

The Justice department is headed by the Attorney General, the senior law enforcement official in the United States.  That position is currently held by Eric Holder.  The Justice Department initially denied the existence to Congress of the Fast and Furious operation.  Mr. Holder initially stated to Congress in May 2011 that he had only become aware of the operation just a few weeks prior to his testimony.  Note that this is six months after Agent Terry’s death. Six months after that, in November 2011, Holder admitted to Congress that gun walking occurred in Fast and Furious.

 

Let me see if I have this straight.  The senior law enforcement official in the United States, which just happens to have an agent killed on the border in a highly contentious illegal immigrant smuggling area, claims he had just learned of the failed gun walking operation that allowed weapons to go into another sovereign nation on the US border and of which one was found at the crime scene of a federal law enforcement agent, only after about five or six months after the federal agent’s death. He then admits to Congress six months after that testimony that gun walking did occur in Fast and Furious.

 

Am I to belief that the senior law enforcement official in the US, with a large staff of trained lawyers and investigators, would knowingly go before Congress and at best not have his facts right about a federal gun walking operation into another sovereign nation and that was also involved in the death of a federal agent?  Wouldn't you think that with the Mexico/US border being such a sensitive issue, coupled with the death of a federal agent, that Mr. Holder would have used all of his department's resources to get to the bottom of things prior to his testimony?  

 

Here’s another thing.  Are we to believe that a regional field office of a federal law enforcement agency would run an undercover operation allowing guns to go across the border into another sovereign nation, in this case Mexico, without people way, way up in the federal government not knowing about it or signing off on it?

 

Here’s the last thing on this.  When an individual pins on the badge, whether it is a municipal, state or federal law enforcement department, he or she readily knows the risks they take.  They do this with the knowledge that their fellow officers will to come to their aid, no matter how dangerous or mortal the situation.  They also believe that their agency will leave no stone unturned in order to hunt down the killers, thoroughly review the shooting itself and the operation attached to it, and make tactical and operational improvements in order educate and save their fellow officers in future operations.  If killed in the line of duty, they know that their department and employer (city, state or nation) will do everything for their next of kin and family, including giving them all the details of how and why their loved one perished.

 

Mr. and Mrs. Terry, the parents of slain Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, are still waiting for that call.

 

Informants: Working Hard or Hardly Working

When I first started out as a young police detective, I would spend hundreds of hours, often times for naught, trying to solve a heinous or complex crime.  After a while, I discovered that if I spent about fifteen minutes with the right person, in the right place, and maybe throw in a cigarette and a candy bar, I could often crack the case.  In investigating terms, the right person was an informant.  This goes for both police detectives and private investigators.  Often times there is someone out there who has knowledge of the case, but you have to use the right approach and do it in the right location, in order to get the right results. 

Try not to let police movies or TV cloud your vision of how to work an informant.  You don’t approach someone on the street and expect them to talk to you.  By doing this, it also shows your lack of knowledge of the street and you won’t be trusted.  For police detectives, an individual can be interviewed back at the police station or in the lock up. 

I used to scan the daily arrest logs to see if anyone got arrested near one of the crimes I was investigating, or if any of my informants had managed to get themselves locked up.  I’d talk to the detective that was handling the individual’s current arrest to clear it with him, and then I’d go and talk to him.  It’s amazing how many arrestees, knowing that their looking at going back to prison, will talk to you if you have the right approach.  You have to be able to convince them that you will protect them and not reveal their identity.  Start small, and once they give something up that appears to be good, that’s when they get rewarded with the coffee or soda.  The more they give up, and the bigger the case, is when the candy bars and cigarettes come out.  Remember, they get the goodies after they cooperate, not before.

The same holds for private investigators.  You can meet with a possible cooperative informant off-site from his workplace or home.  Whether you’re a cop or a PI, you always pick the time and location.  You want to make sure you’re not being setup.

Different motivations motivate different people to give up information.  It can be fear, revenge, retaliation, power, honesty etc.  You need to find which one is the one that turns your informant.  Find the right one, and your case can be solved.

George Zimmerman - Defendant’s Rights and the Media

On Thursday, June 14, The Daily Breeze (a newspaper here in Southern California) reported that a judge in Orlando, Florida, had ruled that statements made by George Zimmerman to police detectives after he fatally shot Trayvon Martin can be released to the public.  The judge further ruled that the identities of witnesses who had not been identified yet, can stay private.  The article went on to state that both the prosecutors and Zimmerman’s defense attorney had wanted to keep both Zimmerman’s statement and the witnesses identities private.

Additionally, according to the article, the judge said disclosing Zimmerman’s statements to police detectives would not jeopardize his ability to get a fair trial.  Further, the judge ruled that tests given to Zimmerman after the shooting could be released, as well as some crime scene photos and Zimmerman’s recorded telephone calls from jail.

Where do I begin?  The United States Constitution guarantees the accused the right to, among other things, a fair and impartial jury.  This judge’s ruling allows key elements to the case, including Zimmerman’s statement to police, crime scene photographs, and Zimmerman’s recorded telephone calls from jail to be released to the press.  Among other things, this allows the potential jury pool that will sit in judgment of Zimmerman to view  key evidence of the case before it can be argued in court.  Potentially this information can be splashed all over newspapers and be argued by so-called experts on TV talk shows again before a trial even begins.

I note also that the article stated that both the prosecution and the defense attorneys argued against the release of this information.  Ironic that both opposing counsels argued against it but the judge ruled in favor of the news media who wants to have it.  Is it just me that thinks this ruling says that the rights of the news media trumps those of the defendant who is on trial. 

At least the judge ruled against releasing the identities of the witnesses in the case who have not yet been identified.  Can you imagine the circus that would have ensued if he hadn’t?  You would have had news agencies parked out in front of their houses and knocking on their homes or workplaces just to get an exclusive interview.

I am not arguing the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman here.  That should be done in a court of law with all the evidence presented before a jury of his peers.  What I am saying is that this latest ruling by a Circuit Court judge in Florida troubles me greatly in regards to Mr. Zimmerman chances of getting a fair and impartial jury.

THE ETAN PATZ CASE

A 33 year old missing person’s case in New York City is again drawing international headlines. On May 25, 1979, six year old Etan Patz disappeared on his way to school.  His photograph was the first missing child to appear on milk cartons.  Although the case has been widely publicized throughout the years, no arrests were ever made.  Recently, however, news reports have stated that NYPD detectives had interviewed an individual in New Jersey and he had confessed to the crime. These same reports stated that the suspect had discarded the victim’s body in a trash bag in the garbage.

From an investigative stand point, this is an extremely difficult case.  First and foremost, you’re dealing with a criminal case that is 33 years old.  Secondly, the victim’s remains have never been recovered.  Witnesses may be difficult to locate, some of the detectives who worked on the case could be deceased, possible crime scenes may have been renovated or destroyed, case files could be misplaced, evidence could be compromised etc.  The neighborhood where the crime took place could be severely altered after so much time has passed.

If the suspect has supposedly confessed to the detectives, probably the most important part of the interrogation from a prosecutorial standpoint is if the suspect told the detectives things that only the killer would know.  Police detectives will always attempt to hold back from the public important details in a crime for just that reason.  It’s not uncommon to have people confess to notorious crimes.  It’s when you get down to specific issues that are unique to that specific crime is how detectives can weed out the sensation seekers from the real suspect.

The job facing the NYPD detectives will be going back and trying to recreate a crime scene from information obtained from the confession.  They will go over everything the suspect told them to see if they can find any type of physical evidence or eyewitness accounts to match his story.  They will be going over New York City Sanitation records to attempt to find out any information regarding trash pickup on the specific date and location that the suspect provided them.  They’ll attempt to locate the truck driver and any sanitation workers that were on the route on that day.  They’ll even go over city dump records in an attempt to locate the specific location in the dump where that specific truck off loaded its contents.

Attempting to file a criminal case against a defendant without any evidence other than a confession would be difficult at best.  The tragedy begins all over again for the victim’s family, who are again thrust into the limelight because of this horrible crime.

Get out of the office

As a private investigator, do you ever find yourself spending too much time in your office?  It is a necessary evil, what with writing reports, making calls, doing computer searches, sending out invoices, marketing clients etc.  But sometimes I think we can become chained to that office chair.  What’s more, I believe some of an investigator’s most important skills can erode because of it.

Let’s take interviews for example.  One of the most important skills an investigator can possess is that of interviewing.  It’s how we gain critical information which helps us solve cases.  How often have you foregone a personal interview for a phone one?  Oh sure, it’s quick and easy.  But there’s a price to be paid.  It is difficult to develop a rapport with a witness in a phone interview.  Your just a faceless voice on a phone.  How many times have you hung up the phone and realized you didn’t ask an important question or you felt pressed for time.   

In an in-person interview, I’ll spend 10/15 minutes talking to the person about their home, garden, hobby etc. before I get into the interview itself. People love to talk about things that interest them, and they become relaxed with your presence.  You can get a lot more information that way then just going right into questioning them.  You’re also developing and maintaining your people skills.

I think in this technology age we have a tendency to rely too much on the computer.  Don’t get me wrong, computers are great.  They have made our lives and our jobs infinitely easier.  But there is a price to pay, and that is we can become office bound.  If you don’t develop and utilize your people skills, you’ll lose them.

Being out of the office and on the street is like exercise.  You feel better, think clearer, and most important, you can make things happen.  I can’t tell you how many important interviews I got, how many neighbor tips I received, and how many important witnesses I was able to subpoena just because I went out there and did something.

I had a veteran police detective tell me when I first started out as an investigator that you don’t solve cases by sitting in your office waiting for the phone to ring.  You have to go out there and make things happen.  So push yourself away from that desk, turn off your computer, grab that case file and get out there and do something!  You’ll feel better for it and you’ll solve cases.

WHY POLICE OFFICERS SHOULD CARRY A BACKUP GUN

When I became a police officer in 1976, we were issued .38 caliber revolvers.  When I retired from the LAPD in 1998, they were issuing 9 millimeters to all the recruits going through the academy.  There was a big difference between carrying a revolver with six rounds versus an automatic with 15 rounds (One in the chamber and 14 in the magazine). With the .38, we carried 6 round speedy loaders to reload. I see officers today carrying two and sometimes three extra magazines on their gun belt.  Each magazine carries an additional 14 rounds.  That’s a lot rounds that can be generated in a gunfight.

With all this firepower available, why do I think officers should carry a backup gun?  Here’s three scenarios that will explain it.   In scenario one, an officer gets engaged in a gunfight with an armed suspect.  The suspect fires the first round, wounding the officer in his shooting arm and preventing him from drawing his weapon.  He is now basically unarmed, as it would be very difficult if not impossible for him to reach across and draw his weapon with his non-shooting hand.  If he carried a backup gun in the opposite side front pants pocket, however, he can rearm himself and engage the suspect.

Scenario two involves an officer who becomes engaged in a life or death physical altercation with a suspect.  At some point the suspect either grabs or is in the process of wresting the gun from the officer’s grasp. If the officer is carrying a backup, he can arm himself and engage the subject.

My last scenario is a real nightmare.  Somehow the officer gets in a situation where an armed suspect has the drop on him.  He may be able to pretend to give up his service weapon while drawing his backup gun and engaging the suspect.  This is a worst case scenario, but some officers have been put in this situation and survived it.

Something to remember about a backup gun.  It’s supposed to be a hidden.  I knew officers who used to stick it inside their gun belt.  You could see the gun butt sticking out.  That’s definitely not hidden.  You should be able to get to it quickly with your non-shooting hand.  That’s one of the reasons I don’t recommend an ankle holster. You have to reach down to your ankle to draw it.  That costs precious seconds you don’t have.  It inhibits you from running in a foot pursuit, and more importantly, it can easily become loose.

You should be able to get to it quickly with your non-shooting hand.  I recommend putting it in the opposite front pocket from your holster.  It should be small enough to be inconspicuous.  For years I carried a 2 inch barrel, five shot .38 in a leather pocket holster that fit just right in my pants pocket.  I would also have a tailor drop my right front uniform pants pocket (I’m left handed) two inches so the gun butt wouldn’t stick out.

Things can go bad on the streets in a blink of an eye.  In a life or death gunfight or physical altercation, a backup gun may just save your life.

WHEN THE BAD GUY DIDN’T DO IT

During my police career, I put many suspects in prison for crimes they committed.  There were two cases, however, where I proved that the arrestee didn’t do it.  What was even more extraordinary was that both of these arrestees were two of the biggest jerks I ever handled. 

The first case involved the suspect being arrested sitting in a stolen car that had been taken in a residential burglary.  He had a lengthy arrest record and had already done time in prison.  When I interviewed him at the police station, besides being an incessant chatterbox who just wouldn’t shut up, he tried to tell me that a guy had picked him up and had given him the keys to the car.  He had fallen asleep in the car and was subsequently arrested by some uniform officers.  When it came time for his court date, he asked to see me.  In the lock up interview room he told me that the suspect who had given him the car was also in the lockup that day.  He saw him on the transportation bus from the jail to the court lockup and had even gotten his name.  I followed up on it and was able to prove that his story, incredible as it sounded, was true.  I was able to get the charges against him dropped, and filed burglary and auto theft charges against the other individual.  From that day on, every time he saw me either on the street or when he was at the police station, he always made it a point to thank me.

The second case was another residential burglary.  When I interviewed the arrestee at the police station, he was very arrogant and antagonistic.  As memory serves me, he had been identified by a witness and the case seemed very strong against him.  As I got further into the investigation, however, it became apparent that he hadn’t committed the crime.  When I went to court and requested the case against him be dropped, the public defender told me that his client was one of the most obnoxious persons he had ever represented.  That being said, he didn’t do the crime, and he was subsequently released.

Here’s the bottom line: As an investigator, your job is to find the truth.  If someone is charged with a crime, no matter what his background or record is, if he didn’t do it, then he goes free and you continue your search for the guilty party.  That’s what justice is all about.

WHY WOULD YOU DO CRIMINAL DEFENSE?

Although its not the major part of my business, I do occasional criminal defense cases for some top notch, ethical defense attorneys.  As a retired police detective, I’ve been asked numerous times by current and former police officers why I would do any criminal defense work.  When I do get asked that question, I always respond with the fact that in the United States, every defendant is presumed innocent and is entitled to a defense.  I then bring up the fact of the Duke Lacrosse players who were filed on for serious criminal charges by a rogue prosecutor, convicted in the press in a trial by media, then ultimately, completely exonerated.  If not for a spirited defense team, these young men would have been sent to prison for a crime that never happened.

On a personal note, I was the defense investigator in a case in which a police officer was accused of excess force in apprehending a suspect. Criminal charges were filed against him and he was facing prison if convicted.  I was able to find an independent eyewitness whose testimony cleared the officer of any wrong doing, which resulted in a not guilty verdict.

A person’s whole life can change in a blink of an eye.  Sometimes, like in the Duke Lacrosse players case, the judicial system can do terrible things. In police work, officers have to make split second decisions that can go horribly wrong.  When it seems like the weight of the whole criminal justice system is aligned against you, it’s just your attorney and your defense investigator that stands between you and jail.  Pray that you’re never placed in that situation, but if you ever have the nightmarish experience of being arrested and formally charged with a criminal offense, you’ll understand why I do criminal defense work.

UTILIZING FORENSICS

When I first started out working homicide, I was at a crime scene with a forensic team that was assisting us in the crime scene investigation.  One of the items of interest in this case happened to be a box that had fallen from either a table or a shelf to the floor.  I remember that the Forensic team kept running multiple test experiments with the box to see if it fell in the exact place each time.  When I questioned them, they advised me they were testing to see if it always fell in the same place or if it had been moved there by the suspect.

Forensic people look at things from a scientific and analytical viewpoint.  If something happened to a person, item etc., there must be a cause and effect as to how a it happened.  Could a body weighing the same as a suicide victim have hung themselves from a certain height and item (Pole, railing, shower rod etc.) without the item breaking or falling?  Could a spent cartridge at a shooting scene have landed in a certain location?  Could a left handed suspect have stabbed an individual incurring the same wounds as the stabbing victim?  Could a pry tool allegedly used by burglary suspect have made the same indentations as the ones at your crime scene?  Forensic people are always running tests to see if this is the case.

Whether you’re a police detective or a private investigator, the key thing to take away from this is don’t just assume that everything at a crime scene or accident scene is as it should be.  Question things!  If necessary, seek out experts.

DEATH INVESTIGATIONS

One area of investigative work that a private investigator can be utilized in is death investigations.  Often times the family of a decedent has suspicions regarding their loved ones death and question the finding of the police and/or coroner’s office.  After interviewing the client, the private investigator should obtain and review any police reports, autopsy reports and photographs that are available.  A key step in the investigation is an examination of the death scene.  This can sometimes occur days, months or even years after the death.  It is still critically important to view the death location.  Even though some things may have changed at the location, you still need to conduct an on-site examination.  Is what you see at the location consistent with what’s in the reports? Has anything changed?  Is anything wrong?   Is the manner and cause of death listed in the reports consistent to what you see at the scene?  Do the events portrayed in the reports match up with the evidence you see at the scene?  Are there any errors in the report?  Could the decedent have met his demise the way it’s portrayed in the reports?


There is always the possibility that evidence could have been overlooked by the police at the scene, so if you find anything that you think could be of evidentiary value, be sure to photograph it before recovering it.  Take your own photographs, measurements and diagram.  Remember that oftentimes the only police presence at a death not immediately classified as a homicide is usually patrol officers who may not have a lot of experience in death investigations.  Take nothing for granted while you are out there.  If possible, try to conduct your examination of the scene at the same time as the estimated time of death.  Lighting at the scene could play an important part in the investigation and in witnesses’ accounts.


An added benefit to conducting a death scene examination is that it will greatly assist you when you are interviewing family members and potential witnesses.  Be sure to have the diagram and photographs to available to show witnesses.  Try to interview the police officers, paramedics and coroner’s investigator that were at the scene.  They may or may not talk to you, but it’s worth a try.

AN INVESTIGATOR’S MOST IMPORTANT TRAIT

I have been asked many times what did I consider the most important trait an investigator can possess.  After many years in the investigative business, and working with many outstanding police detectives and private investigators, I believe the one trait the best ones all have is persistence.  The best way I can describe it is with the technique of canvassing a neighborhood looking for an eyewitness to an incident.  It is boring, it is time consuming, and you are constantly going from door to door with negative results.  But like I told a client recently, if you find just one eyewitness, you can break your case wide open.  If you knock on 49 doors with negative results, you keep going to the 50^th one and hope to strike pay dirt.  Its going through reams of documents, its spending hours on the phone, it’s pouring through old records and court cases, just looking for that one nugget that will make your case. Its continuing to interrogate a suspect after you haven’t gotten anywhere in 2 hours, and finally asking the right question and getting a confession. Its the plodding, by the numbers, slow and steady investigators that consistently solve cases.

WAS THAT REALLY EDDIE HASKELL?

While I was in the LAPD Police Academy, they would have role playing situations for the recruits where they would have staff personnel acting as suspects in field situations.  On this one day, we were doing vehicle pullovers.  The first recruit officer went through his run and then returned to our group with a quizzical look on his face.  We all asked him how it went.  He said, “You’re not going to believe this, but the driver of the car was Eddie Haskell, the real Eddie Haskell, and he talked and acted just like him.”  Eddie Haskell was the character on the TV show ‘Leave it to Beaver’ when we were kids.  Haskell was the guy who was overly polite to everyone’s parents and was mean and ornery behind their backs.  Everybody of my generation remembered him. 

 We all thought the first guy was hallucinating until it was our turn.  Sure enough, it really was Eddie Haskell.  Well, actually, it was LAPD Officer Ken Osmond, the actor who played the character of Eddie Haskell in the show.  After the show had its full run, he had joined the LAPD.  At the time I was in the academy, he was one of the staff instructors.  He looked exactly as he did when he was on TV.  He later became a motorcycle officer with the department.  Can you imagine getting pulled over by a motor officer and getting a traffic ticket and looking up and seeing it was Eddie Haskell!  I’m sure he had a lot of funny stories as to how people reacted to him when he cited them.

The dangers of police work caught up to Ken Osmond.  He went in foot pursuit of a suspect who shot him three times.  Two shots hit him in the chest, but luckily he was wearing a bullet proof vest.  The third shot ricocheted off of his belt buckle and he survived.  He eventually retired from the job.

DRIVING TIPS FOR VEHICLE SURVELLANCE

Here are some driving tips for the actual vehicle surveillance.  First, always try to do a reconnaissance or at least a Google map check of the location sometime before you do the actual surveillance.  This will help you to know when there are parking restrictions on the street, what the street parking situation looks like, likely avenues of travel, and what the subject’s home or business looks like.  When you park your car and are setup, always be sure to lock your doors and keep your keys in the ignition.  You don’t want to be fumbling around for your keys when your Subject starts to move.  Practice ahead of time on how you’re going to quickly move from the back seat to the driver’s seat.  More than likely as a PI you’ll be working alone, so be sure to stay close enough to the Subject’s vehicle when he first takes off so you won’t lose him.  Once you’re comfortably behind that vehicle, try not to bumper lock him.  Initially on surface streets, you may have to be behind him due to traffic.  That’s all right, because most drivers are unaware their being followed and never check for it.  Once you’re comfortable with the traffic flow and the way the Subject drives, you don’t have to be in the same lane in order to follow him.  Be aware of your surroundings, especially to the lanes on your right and left.  You can move into them so as not to be constantly behind the Subject.  If traveling on service streets, pay attention to the on-coming green lights in case you need to close the gap so as to make the light.  If you’re traveling on a lightly congested road or a major freeway, you can always let a car in between you and the Subject’s vehicle for cover.  If your Subject pulls over and parks, you can always drive past him and park.  Use your side or rear view mirror to view him.  If I’m sitting in the front seat when my Subject pulls away, I always like to duck down until he drives by.

CONDUCTING VEHICLE SURVEILLANCES

Here are some good tips to start you off about vehicle surveillances.  These are good for both private investigators and police detectives.  The first thing to look at is your vehicle.  Try to use one that is a neutral colors or lighter shades of gray or blue.  Stay away from the garish colors like red or orange because they really stick out.   Try not to use a white or black vehicle, because they also stand out.  The next thing to look at is to use a vehicle that blends in to the area.  In cities and suburbs, small SUVs are perfect because so many people drive them.  The next thing to think about is what can people see inside your vehicle when their close up.  Most vehicles come with at least the rear passenger and rear windows tinted.  Here in California you can’t have the front windshield or front driver and passenger windows tinted.  You can still cut down on the lighting by using a good front sunscreen shield.  You can also hang dark clothing on the side window hooks to cut down on light and interior visibility.  Next thing to think about is creature comforts.  Make sure you thoroughly clean all your windows, both inside and outside, before you leave home base.  There is nothing worse than having difficulty seeing through on-coming headlight glare at night due to dirty windows.   You’ll need bottled water, protein bars and I always bring a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and some fruit.  Remember, you’re going to be in this vehicle for potentially four hours plus.  You definitely need something to use if nature calls.  I like to use something with a large rounded top, like a Snapple bottle or a hospital urine bottle.  Bring some pillows you can use to prop up your neck and back against the seat for creature comfort.  If you’re uncomfortable and moving around in the vehicle, this will cause it to shake and possibly give you away.  I like to bring a small portable radio to listen to on low volume because it helps the time go by.  Do not bring any reading material because you have to concentrate at all times.  If you’re a smoker, don’t do it in the vehicle.  Make sure the dome light is off or rendered useless.  Nothing worse at night then getting out of the vehicle and having the dome light silhouette you.

PURSUING GANG KILLERS

With all these seemingly insurmountable difficulties, how then do gang murders get solved.  My answer, in one word, is HEAT!  You have to be relentless.  You keep constant pressure on the rival gang, both with uniformed police presence, gang units, and good detective work. You make it difficult for them to conduct their criminal activities. I’ll give you an example.  My partner and I handled a gang murder where an OG (Original Gangster, or older member) had been shot down in front of his house shortly after being paroled.  Besides being out in that neighborhood every day, we arrested over the span of the investigation numerous gang members for guns, narcotics, parole violations and various other felonies and assorted misdemeanors.  We even arrested one individual for an outstanding traffic warrant on Christmas Eve. Like I said, the heat was relentless. You interview every arrestee in an attempt to gain intelligence on the gang and especially to turn them as an informant on your murder case.  You go into the jails every day and interview arrestees who have been arrested in the vicinity of the murder.  You’re looking to develop an informant who can give you the information you need to identify the killers. Believe me, not too many people, no matter how hard core they are, want to spend a lot of time incarcerated in prison if they can give out information that can cut their sentence down.  You just have to be patient and skilled on this approach.

The gang unit’s expertise is invaluable in identifying suspect(s) real names from their gang names and monikers. Eventually when an informant’s information is corroborated or a witness comes forward and the suspect(s) have been identified, you begin to close in on the killers.  Believe it or not, some people still refuse to be intimidated and come forward as witnesses and do the right thing.  The detectives then obtain search and arrest warrants and attempt to obtain additional evidence, like the gun(s) used, clothing worn etc.  Gang members don’t always get rid of guns, and they often pass them around to their fellow gang members.  Once the suspect(s) have been apprehended, the detective’s final effort is to attempt to obtain a confession.  Oftentimes it may come down to the suspect(s) walking on the charges unless the detectives are skilled interrogators and can obtain a confession.

MORE ON WALKING SURVEILLANCES

Here are some additional tips on conducting walking surveillances.  You don’t have to be on the same side of the street to follow someone.  I find it’s actually more advantageous to walk on the opposite side of the street when following someone.  Even when they’re ‘hinked up’ and looking for a tail, they usually only look behind and rarely if ever look across the street.  Try putting An object between yourself and the subject.  The best one is a parked car.  You can stand to the rear of a parked car and peer through the rear & front windows of the vehicle and observe an individual for a long distance without exposing yourself.  You can also use mailboxes, telephone poles or any other object that’s handy.  If there’s a bus bench around, sit down and enjoy the rest while you take in the subject.  Use store windows as mirrors and building entrances to mask your profile.  You can also walk pass the Subject and and view him as he walks by.  A great way to do that is to enter a store and then watch him through the window. 

My partner and I once followed two car burglars on foot during the Christmas shopping season for over 3 hours in downtown Los Angeles before they finally hit a car.  It was in the business district and there were numerous pedestrians, parked vehicles and open air parking lots along the streets.  They cased a number of vehicles but for some reason would back off on each one.  They finally went into a parking lot where they quickly punched the trunk lock with a screwdriver, removed the stored gifts and closed the trunk, all within a few seconds. They were surprised to say the least when my partner and I appeared from out of nowhere and hooked them up.  Remember, patience and good tactics are the key to any successful surveillance.

HOW TO DO WALKING SURVEILLANCES

Most PI’s do a lot of vehicle surveillances, but there will usually come a time when you’ll be out of a car and have to follow a subject on foot.  The first thing to keep in mind is to dress according to the neighborhood.  It’s wise to carry an extra set of clothes in your vehicle in case where you’re going doesn’t fit what you’re currently wearing.  Try to wear comfortable walking shoes.  I prefer black ones, because they can also pass for dress shoes if you have to go upscale.  Wear neutral colored clothing.  Don’t wear bright colors like red or orange that will make you stick out.  I also like to wear dark colored baseball hats without a logo.  You can take it off and stick it in your pocket for a different look.  When following someone on foot, the most important thing is to know how the subject looks from behind.  Rarely will you be in front of him/her to see their face.  The next important thing is to pay attention to the subject’s walking gait, because that’s what you’ll be keying on, especially in a crowd.  Don’t be too close to the subject.  Remember that you can only have to see a small portion of the subject and still successfully follow him.  I once followed an individual who was carrying a black gym bag in his hand on a busy downtown street.  At times all I could see was a portion of the bag, yet I was able to follow him successfully. 

THE BEST DETERRENT TO COP KILLING

As a brand new officer with the LAPD, I was fortunate to have as a training officer the best street cop I ever worked with, and I worked with a lot of them.  This was the first night I ever worked with him.  As it was getting close to End of Watch, we started the perennial circling pattern near the station so when the on-coming shift came down we’d get in quick.  It was near midnight and we were driving in a residential neighborhood when we both noticed two men peering into the picture window of the corner house.  Even though I had only a few months on the job, I knew something wasn’t right.  My training officer stopped the car, and we both jumped out with our guns drawn.  The two men both started walking away from the house in different directions.  As we yelled for them to freeze, they both reached into their waistbands and tossed guns on us.  After proning them out on the ground and calling for backup, they were taken into custody without further incident.

Once we got them back to the station, my training officer interviewed them separately with me just sitting there.  One of them confessed that they were hit men sent out from the East Coast to kill the people who lived in that house.  He was a parolee and had done a lot of prison time back east.  My training officer asked him, what with his prior record, the fact that he was on parole and had a gun, and knowing he would go back to prison again for this, why didn’t he shoot it out with us.  I will never forget what the suspect said.  He told my partner, “You both came out of the police car with your guns out, and you were ready.  I didn’t want to die!”  My training officer then told him, “Your right.  We’d of shot you down like a dog in the street.”

After we booked them, I talked to my training officer about that conversation.  He told me that every time he got a gun off of a suspect, he would always ask them why they didn’t shoot it out and try to get away.  Invariably they’d say something like you were ready, or it wasn’t worth it, but whatever the reason they’d initially give, they’d usually end by saying they didn’t want to die.  He would give them that signature line about being shot down like a dog in the street to make an imprint on their mind.  He told me, “Someday that guy may have the drop on some cop. I want him to think about the consequences and what’s going to happen to him if he kills a cop.  I figure someday that will save a cop’s life.”

From that day on every time I got a gun off of a suspect, I had the same conversation and told him the same thing.  I’m sure there’s more then one cop walking around alive today because a suspect who had a gun and had the drop on him hesitated when he thought of the consequences.

HOW I BECAME A PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR

One night while I was still a rookie police officer with the LAPD, my training officer and I made a felony arrest.  In those days, in order to book an arrestee for a felony, you had to get booking approval from the night watch detective.  On this particular night, our division night watch detective was on a day off, so we had to go to another division to get booking approval.  When I handed their night watch detective the booking approval, I noticed he was looking at what appeared to be an identification card that had his photograph on it.  Being naturally inquisitive, I asked him what the card was. He replied that it was his private investigative license.  I was non-pulsed, to say the least.  I asked him how a police officer could also be a private investigator.  He told me that the department allowed you to work as a private investigator off-duty as long as you didn’t work any criminal cases or civil cases involving the City of Los Angeles.  He added that you needed three years on the job before you could apply to the state and take the PI test.  You also needed a work permit from the department after you received the license.  I filed that away in my mind under things to do later, and thirteen years later I took the test and obtained my PI license.  Another chance encounter, but one that would later have a large impact on my life.

PS-Some years after I retired, after a headline grabbing case, the LAPD rescinded their approval of allowing officers work off-duty as PIs.

HOW I BECAME A COP

I’m a big believer in Divine intervention.  What I mean is that oftentimes we try to plan and calculate our important life decisions, but what usually happens it’s the chance encounter or the ‘lucky’ incident that dramatically affect our lives.  Take my life, for instance.  I became a Los Angeles police officer by what I think was divine intervention.  I was still in the Marines and had returned from my first overseas deployment.  I was stationed at a large naval base on the east coast.  I had decided to leave the Marine Corps and go into law enforcement.  I was due to be separated from the Corps in one week.  I was late for chow and took a shortcut to get to the mess hall.  Just by chance I ran into my old battalion Sergeant Major who I had served with overseas.  Neither of us had known the other had been stationed at this base.  After I advised him I was getting out of the Marine Corps, he asked me what I was going to do.  I told him I wanted to go into law enforcement, and I was going to apply to either Philadelphia PD or NYPD.  I also mentioned that they, like most police departments on the East Coast, had a one year residency requirement.  The Sergeant Major then asked me if I had ever thought about the Los Angeles Police Department.  He might as well have asked me if I had thought about a police department on the moon.  When I brought up the fact that not only did I not know anyone in Los Angeles, I thought I might have a tough time finding a job there while I waited for the one year residency to kick in.  He then floored me with the fact that not only did they not have a residency requirement; he had a high ranking contact on the department.  One week later, I was an honorably discharged Marine and flying across the country to Los Angeles.  I spent 22 years working as a police officer and later as a detective, and as they say, the rest is history.