Exploring Private Investigation Agencies’ Experience of Collaboration with Law Enforcement in Investigations of Human Trafficking Cases
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Law Enforcement–Private Police Partnership Crimes
1.2. What Is a Private Investigator?
1.3. PIs’ Distinctive Competencies
1.4. PIs’ Potential for Human Trafficking Investigations
2. Methods
2.1. Research Design
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Participant Characteristics
3.2. Experiences of Collaboration between PIAs and LEAs for Human Trafficking Investigations
3.2.1. Frequency of Collaboration between PIAs and LEAs for Human Trafficking Investigations
3.2.2. Extent of Collaboration between PIAs and LEAs
Pretty well, because I am a former law enforcement officer. I do cooperate with the police if I have some questions, I know who to go to, and who to talk to, and if I have some human trafficking going on, I get their cooperation too, and I give them my information. I don’t think they’re hesitant towards me or the human trafficking cases I work with.
Well, we worked exclusively with different organizations of law enforcement organizations when I was operating in New York, mostly on federal and state levels, for that matter, and the local level area of deputy sheriffs. We were able to collaborate with the state and the federal government where we actually had resources that we could make referrals by telephone.
There’s never been a need for me to because I’ve been hired by families and private clients. I think the only real circumstance where I would use law enforcement is if I need to do what we refer to [as] a dynamic entry into a building. But other than that, I wouldn’t want to involve law enforcement because I think that it would reduce my chances of recovering a victim successfully.
3.2.3. Successful Interagency Collaboration between PIAs and LEAs for Human Trafficking Investigations
One of the labor trafficking cases that we worked on in our investigations culminated in a successful prosecution of a labor trafficker. A school district in upstate New York had hired a general contractor who, in turn, hired a subcontractor whose bid came in significantly lower than the local area economy dictated. So, we were asked to investigate the subcontractor, who happened to be from New York City. Through the course of on-site interviews and videotaping and monitoring of the project, we learned the workers were all undocumented immigrants being housed together. They weren’t being paid proper rates, and some of them weren’t being paid at all. We documented the case and referred it to the New York State Police and to the General Attorney’s Office. The state ultimately prosecuted the contractor for labor trafficking and gained repayment for wages to the workers who were grieved. There are a number of those kinds of cases that we’ve worked on through the years.
We had monthly meetings with law enforcement representatives from different counties, states, and government officials and we’ve developed these relationships with our community and their community. We discussed how we were going to approach cases, what cases were on the rise, how we felt, what we need to get better addressed, and what they needed to get better addressed.
We were conducting a counterfeit product investigation and the merchandise was being sold in a flea market. As we conducted and concluded our investigation, we realized that the folks that were working in their booths selling were more than likely folks that were human trafficked, brought into the country specifically to do the work for the folks that owned and ran that enterprise. So, once we determined these folks aren’t really doing this voluntarily, we then notified the Vice Unit of the Metropolitan Police Department. They handled the rest of the human trafficking investigation based on the information that we had turned over to them. Yet, I don’t honestly know the outcome of the investigation because it was turned over to law enforcement.
One case that comes to mind is one man, very brilliant, who was missing for weeks. He was taken to Mexico, missing for weeks when we got the call on day 18, and I had him home by day 21. The police had not even responded yet; they responded the day after we got him home. I did a lot of Internet and phone investigations like the old style. Calling neighbors, looking at maps. And I found out it was a drug cartel keeping him, and I figured out where their safe house was. I went to their safe house and I told them, ‘I will never leave this house until that young man is home’, and I had a very big scary guy with me. I got the victim home that night. The way that they targeted him was that he was working in a nearby gym and they became friends with him and helped him build up his muscle and get stronger and bigger; then they lured him to be a controller in one of their brothels in Mexico. That was a U.S. citizen.
3.3. PIAs’ Potential Contributions to Human Trafficking Investigations Initiated by LEAs
3.3.1. PIs’ Disposition to Cooperate with LEAs
I think the biggest thing that they [LEAs] can do, if they could promise me that if I’m pursuing the victim and they’re not going to arrest the victim, and that they could put something in writing because I need more than a handshake from them or the DEA.
3.3.2. Providing Training to LEAs for Human Trafficking Investigations
They [police officers] don’t get that type of training at the academy, and they don’t get it at their office. My training is post-certified; law enforcement has to have 40 h of training throughout the year, and the block of instruction we offer is free to them. We train them on what to look for, and what websites to go to because a lot of these websites that these victims are advertised on, don’t know.
3.3.3. Serving as Intermediaries between Families and LEAs
I mean, there’s quite a few ways. One, I’m in plain clothes, I am not law enforcement and getting someone to talk to law enforcement and I am someone who looks like a mom, all that can make a huge difference in getting a name, a location, who a victim’s friends are, etc. So, I think that’s one aspect is that we are not an authoritative figure that police are and people are not scared to talk to us. I am a mom and I can talk to people and they don’t expect what I do and people are more trusting of a female to give them information about their neighbors or all that kind of stuff. I do think it is an advantage.
One of the things law enforcement has used me to do as well is sometimes being a go-between with family members. Some mothers can be super manic. Like I had a case in California where the mom was just a wreck because her child was being trafficked. Her boyfriend was trafficking her daughter. So, the police have me basically case managing with the mother, so she’s not bothering the police. I know the police appreciate my help. I’ve had a few detectives who have said really kind things about me and even referred private cases to me.
3.3.4. Locating Missing People, Gathering Intelligence, and Conducting Surveillance
We can do all the skip tracing; we can do the locating and the leg work. The police don’t have the resources. If there is a special victim’s unit, I think we can help them and tip them off eventually.
We are familiar with the ins and outs of the way a business operates, we’re familiar with the specific areas within our geographical region, some cases in states you don’t know where necessarily to go or who to talk to, and I think that us as part of the community we are able to know who the players are.
There is information that I can get, and I can get it legally, and I don’t need a subpoena because we get our information from different sources. So, we can cooperate with them [LEAs] not only with the actual case in the investigation but also with our sources of information and our assets. This is what we can contribute.
They still are not going to tell you their secrets, but they want you to tell them what you know. When you tell them something, and they find out it’s the truth, they will go back to you immediately and ask you for other things because you have already proved once or twice that the information you have is the truth.
The police are not winning the war against human trafficking. However, if they start working with PIs, then they would probably catch more human trafficking perpetrators. What they would be getting from PIs would be additional expertise, additional sources, and actually a different viewpoint on how to approach investigations.
3.4. LEAs’ Potential Contributions to Human Trafficking Investigations Initiated by PIAs
3.4.1. Importance of Reaching Out to LEAs for Human Trafficking Investigations
If someone hired me because they suspected their daughter was involved in human trafficking, for example, and we found evidence to indicate they were, the next step would be to get a criminal investigation going, which we’re not able to do. We would have to get law enforcement involved.
Unless you have personal contact with law enforcement, forget about them assisting you. Now, most, if not, all PDs require you to file some sort of report before they investigate the matter, and in all cases, a PI is not the victim, so they can’t file a report.
As a PI, you can’t wait until you need assistance from law enforcement and then go in and expect that assistance to go over. You have to go proactively before you have any cases and develop that relationship, you need to go in and talk to law enforcement on the local level. If you develop those relationships upfront and don’t wait until you need their assistance, you can be way more successful.
You need to reach out to law enforcement to let them know that you have something so that there’s already Intel and they already have someone assigned to contact and so we literally were able to get them on site within three hours after the initial call.
We could generate a lot of information that they could use, but they are going to be the ones that are handling the filing of the criminal case and all that, so ultimately, I mean I would say they are very important because if it’s a criminal thing they are going to take care of that.
3.4.2. Sharing Information and Resources with PIAs
In some instances, I would say some PIs might be at the end of their rope as far as finding out information on individuals, and it would be great to collaborate with law enforcement to say, ‘Hey, this is who I am investigating, I think that they might be connected to this person or this other person and into this activity, can you look these people up in these systems to help me out?’
It is imperative that there is close coordination between PIs and law enforcement for these cases to be successful. We have to work hand in hand, we have certain abilities that they do not have, law enforcement has a jurisdiction area and they can’t go outside of that jurisdiction; we can, we can go outside of a jurisdiction to continue an investigation somewhere else. But they also have the ability to subpoena and the ability to run cell phone traces and things of that nature, so it needs to be a collaborative effort for successful completion of a case because we don’t have all the tools that they have and they don’t have all the tools that we have.
I don’t often count on police; I use them as one of my many tools. I don’t let them be the first part of the case, and I develop many human trafficking task forces with law enforcement; so, I’m knowledgeable of who and which agency to use for what. So, I use them in that way… Only when it’s time to investigate for the purpose of prosecution is the time to start using them as a tool in the case.
… If you are stuck and you go to the police, they are not going to give you their information and there is no help unless when they see that you are a paid agent from the family member or whatever, then they will ask you for a lot of information they cannot find by themselves… So, they will use your information to get their file complete… they may talk to you, but they will give you all the information they want to give, not the accurate information.
3.5. PIs’ Perception of Challenges for Collaboration with LEAs for Human Trafficking Investigations
Obstacles and challenges are many. First that private investigation is not a political entity and is a business, and the purpose of a business is to make money. You can only afford to do so much pro bono work. Second, the police, in most cases, do not like working or taking referrals from private investigators as they view PIs as second-class citizens not the professionals they are. Or the police view your nosing around as interfering with their investigations or informants.
I think one of the problems that I’ve encountered, particularly in my state, is that there is a lack of interaction between PIs and law enforcement. Law enforcement community in my rural, poor area is not available to have a discussion or for me to make a report or referral about labor trafficking or sex trafficking for that matter.
3.5.1. Law Enforcement’s Culture of Distrust with PIAs
You just don’t get cooperation from law enforcement to the private sector. Like me, if you ask them questions, they look at you like you’re deaf, dumb, and blind. Eh, like again, my experience is that you come to make the complaint and then you leave it with them because you’re out of the picture.
Really the only time that law enforcement will be open to cooperating with PIs is two ways. One is if you’re a process server, if you are serving court papers to defendants or plaintiffs, you’re then an extension of the court by doing that. Second, if you happen to get a contract with a state entity, then they know you and come to you for information. Before a law enforcement officer comes out and asks for your opinion or your help, I would say it does not happen unless your name comes up in an investigation.
Cops don’t want other people working alongside them. They want you to give them all the information you have. But they aren’t going to give you any information. In general, police do not like to work hand in hand or alongside PIs on anything, unless they know you.
I think it is very important for law enforcement to collaborate with whoever is willing to help them. But they don’t have the ability to do that, and I don’t know if they would really want to. They don’t like to share; you know they don’t like to entrust things to other people. And they don’t need more work given to them. They don’t look for more crimes.
You have LEAs that won’t collaborate with each other. So, you have city, county, and state agencies that will not collaborate, and then you have the federal agencies, and everybody is competing against each other, and it makes it very difficult to get a job done.
3.5.2. LEAs’ Self-Centeredness and Feeling of Power Entitlement
Law enforcement has egos that become involved when you have an experienced retired officer who is now a PI and knows how to do the talk. And they approach the law enforcement officer, and he quickly realizes that he or she does not have that experience. So, the ego becomes affected, and that’s the first issue you have to deal with. Then, the second one is the current law enforcement officer saying, ‘You’re trying to tell me how to do my job, this is my job, not your job. You are interfering’, even if they may not have anything going on.
There is even a double ego issue against me because I am a female and because they assume when I tell them I’m a retired FBI agent, they assume that I sat at a desk and pushed paper around on a computer and I wasn’t actually out on the field working on violent crime. So, the first thing I do when I present to a law enforcement audience is just give them a little bit of my background that I’ve been on the street and I know what I’m doing and I’ve done this and you can benefit from my experiences.
Many law enforcement officers do their thing, and they think they are right, but they are not right. There have been so many crash reports that I’ve had to change, of course, you can’t get them changed, but you have to show why a crash report isn’t accurate because that investigator didn’t do a good investigation. They don’t like to be told by someone outside their department that they didn’t do it the right way.
Oh, you know it’s a funny weird thing. It’s like when you are in law enforcement, you don’t want to give it out. Everybody thinks that everybody else can’t be trusted, and then they get out and go like ‘Why can’t you trust me?’ They don’t want anybody else to be as powerful as them. It’s kind of the personality of most cops, and it’s become systemic.
3.5.3. Law Enforcement’s Lack of Understanding of PIs’ Competencies
The biggest obstacle, anytime you do an investigation with law enforcement is their lack of understanding of the private investigation industry. They don’t understand us; all they think we do is cheating spouses, and that’s all. So, they tend not to take us seriously.
In my experience, we also have people out there who are involved in law enforcement, and who also work for the other side. That makes it very difficult when you are giving them training. They say human trafficking is not going on. And I have been to those trainings where I argued with them, and they said, ‘No, you are absolutely wrong; why you are lying to the crowd right now?’ They become very defensive because they’ve been bought.
3.5.4. Legal Restrictions to LEAs’ Ability to Share Information
They like you to make the cases for them, but they won’t cooperate with you to get information that will help you and your investigation because it’s actually illegal to do that. It didn’t use to be so, but it is now. If you have a personal relationship with somebody, they might give you information, but they’re giving you information illegally. Informal, but also illegal. If they got found out, they would be fired at the least.
There are a number of laws that prevent it, I can’t give you a citation. But for example, in the NCIC (National Crime Information Center) information, it’s illegal for LEAs to provide that to anybody. They have to have a legitimate reason just to inquire for themselves; they can’t inquire into the NCIC system on behalf of somebody else.
So, a lot of times, even if the police close a criminal case, it’s not available under the Freedom of Information Act because even if it’s closed and it’s not been solved, it’s just an appending status, it’s not been resolved; so, it’s still outside the scope of the Freedom of Information and that applies locally, in the state, and federally.
A law enforcement officer cannot share back with us because they are limited in what they are allowed to provide to us, so that’s where the inter-agency collaboration becomes difficult, unless there was some agreement or waiver or if we were hired on a voluntary or contractual basis from the agency itself.
Even if those laws were eliminated, the reality is that there’s a great deal of insecurity among law enforcement investigators. For one thing, every investigator thinks he’s the best out there, so he doesn’t like someone else second-guessing what he’s doing. If they open information up to someone from the outside, even from somebody from their own department, they’re often hesitant to share. That exposes them to potential criticism, so they like to keep everything close to the vest.
In almost all the cases, on some level, number one, we need to make sure that we’re not stepping on an investigation or sting operation that they’re doing. Then, number 2, we need to make them aware that if we do find any lead, then we are going to need to contact somebody to move in quickly.
One thing that you have to be very knowledgeable about and to know not what to do is you don’t want to put yourself in a position of obstruction or that, so that if it ever came up with me, what I would do is, you know, go to the state’s DND [not defined], keep them informed of what you’re doing and where you’re going for you to ensure that you’re not stepping on their toes or not interfering with something that you don’t know with what they’re doing. That’s just common courtesy for professional relationships.
3.6. Addressing PIA’s Challenges for Collaborating with LEAs
An association of both PIs and law enforcement officers that come together under one header and one topic so that we can have that ability to communicate with law enforcement officers. They also then have the availability to reach out to those PIs in those areas. So, it really needs to come under one umbrella.
I would start locally and have a spokesperson. You know, more teaching and training about it and bringing the PIs together with law enforcement. We do group meetings more like every quarter, we always have a speaker or a topic. ‘Here’s what we can do, do you see a lot of this?’ and ‘Do you know how prominent this is in your area?’
Some PIs don’t really know whom to call because they don’t have the skill. So, let’s give them the tools. If you have a family that comes in and they are asking and bringing this up, your antenna should go up, and you should immediately call law enforcement and pass that information along.
Hey, we are a dozen PIs here in the state of Tennessee; we volunteer our time; this is the name of our group. I think power comes from numbers, and I’ve even thought of expanding that. Here in the southeast region, if we could have a network and expand that network of volunteer PIs into other states, that would be powerful.
You may be able to recover a victim and get them back to their family, but there is still a trafficker out there that must face justice and be arrested. If you don’t have a connection or a liaison with the law enforcement officers or the prosecutors, then you’ll never be able to get that person prosecuted.
We’ll bring our cases directly to her, and then sometimes she’ll send us cases and say, ‘Hey, I can’t get metro PD to work this case because they don’t have the time. Can you go flush it out and let us know if it is trafficking or if it’s not trafficking?’ and we’ll do that with her. But having a relationship with prosecution or law enforcement is a must, concluded S.R.
They need to donate their time in the human trafficking division in the district attorney’s office. They will find civilians working in that office. The district attorney’s office is not like the policemen; it will cooperate much more with PIs than the policemen will.
4. Discussion
4.1. Interagency Collaboration between PIAs and LEAs
4.2. Obstacles to PIA–LEA Partnership
4.3. Improving Partnerships for Investigations of Human Trafficking
5. Implications and Limitations
5.1. Implications for Practice
5.2. Implications for Policy
5.3. Implications for Research
5.4. Study Limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Farrell, A.; McDevitt, J.; Fahy, S.; Pfeffer, R.; Fahy, S.; Owens, C.; Dank, M.; Adams, W. Identifying Challenges to Improve the Investigation and Prosecution of State and Local Human Trafficking Cases; Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice: Washington, DC, USA, 2012; pp. 1–321. Available online: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238795.pdf (accessed on 8 April 2019).
- Farrell, A.; McDevitt, J.; Fahy, S. Understanding Law Enforcement Responses to Human Trafficking. In Final Report; Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice: Washington, DC, USA, 2008; pp. 1–249. Available online: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/222752.pdf (accessed on 6 April 2019).
- Grubb, D.; Bennett, K.J. The readiness of local law enforcement to engage in US anti-trafficking efforts: An assessment of human trafficking training and awareness of local, county, and state law enforcement agencies in the State of Georgia. Pol. Pract. Res. 2012, 13, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mapp, S.; Hornung, E.; D’Almeida, M.; Juhnke, J. Local law enforcement officers’ knowledge of human trafficking: Ability to define, identify, and assist. J. Hum. Traff. 2016, 2, 329–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Police Executive Research Forum. Critical Issues in Policing: How Local Police Can Combat the Global Problem of Human Trafficking; Police Executive Research Forum: Washington, DC, USA, 2020; pp. 1–70. Available online: https://www.justiceclearinghouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/PERF_CombatHumanTrafficking-Report.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2021).
- Bales, K.; Lize, S. Investigating human trafficking: Challenges, lessons learned and best practices. FBI Law Enforc. Bull. 2007, 76, 24–31. Available online: https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/investigating-human-trafficking-challenges-lessons-learned-and-best (accessed on 12 January 2018).
- Clawson, H.J.; Dutch, N.; Cummings, M. Law Enforcement Response to Human Trafficking and the Implications for Victims in the United States; National Institute of Justice & ICPSR: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; pp. 1–31. Available online: https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/studies/20423/datadocumentation# (accessed on 20 April 2017).
- Daniels, E.B. Living outside the rule of law: The data on Department of Justice human trafficking prosecutions and where we go from here. Dep. Justice J. Fed. Law Pract. Novemb. 2019, 67, 169–190. [Google Scholar]
- Deeb-Swihart, J.; Endert, A.; Bruckman, A. Understanding law enforcement strategies and needs for combating human trafficking. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Proceedings, Glasgow, Scotland, 4–9 May 2019; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farrell, A.; Bright, K.; de Vries, L.; Pfeffer, R.; Dank, M. Policing labor trafficking in the United States. Trends Organ. Crime 2019, 23, 36–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- David, F. Trends & Issues in Crime and Crim. Just. In Law Enforcement Responses to Trafficking in Persons: Challenges and Emerging Good Practice; Australian Institute of Criminology: Canberra, Australia, 2007; Volume 347, pp. 25–102. Available online: https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi347 (accessed on 6 April 2019).
- HMICFRS. Stolen Freedom: The Policing Response to Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking; HMICFRS: Birmingham, UK, 2017; pp. 1–105. Available online: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/wp-content/uploads/stolen-freedom-the-policing-response-to-modern-slavery-and-human-trafficking.pdf (accessed on 8 April 2019).
- Nietzel, T. Collaboration is Key in Human Trafficking Investigations. In Notes from the Field; Department of Justice National Justice of Justice: Washington, DC, USA, 2020. Available online: https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/notes-field-collaboration-key-human-trafficking-investigations (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- Farrell, A.; Wills, C.; Nicolas, C. Police engagement in multidisciplinary team approaches to commercial sexual exploitation of children. In Science Informed Policing. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications; Fox, B., Reid, J., Masys, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 195–214. [Google Scholar]
- International Association of Chiefs of Police. The Crime of Human Trafficking: A Law Enforcement Guide to Identification and Investigation; International Association of Chiefs of Police: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2018; pp. 1–24. Available online: https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2018-07/CompleteHTGuide.pdf (accessed on 8 April 2019).
- International Association of Chiefs of Police. Private Security/Public Policing Partnerships; Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services: Washington, DC, USA, 2004; pp. 1–40. Available online: https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/all/b/BuildingPrivateSecurity_0.pdf (accessed on 17 April 2020).
- Cunningham, W.C.; Taylor, T.H.; Hallcrest Systems, Inc. Private Security and Police in America: The Hallcrest Report I; Butterworth-Heinemann: Boston, MA, USA, 1985; pp. 29–132. [Google Scholar]
- Joh, E.E. The forgotten threat: Private policing and the state. Indiana J. Glob. Leg. Stud. 2006, 13, 2. Available online: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijgls/vol13/iss2/2 (accessed on 30 April 2020). [CrossRef]
- Kakalik, J.S.; Wildhorn, S. Private Police in the United States: Findings and Recommendations (R-869-DOJ); Rand: Santa Monica, CA, USA, 1971; pp. 1–130. Available online: http://www.rand.org/pubs/reports/2006/R869.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- Law Enforcement-Private Security Consortium. Operation Partnership: Trends and Practices in Law Enforcement and Private Security Collaborations; U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services: Washington, DC, USA, 2009; pp. 1–144. Available online: https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p169-pub.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- McKenzie, S.E.H. Partnership Policing of Electronic Crime: An Evaluation of Public and Private Police Investigative Relationships. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, 2006. Available online: https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/handle/11343/39159 (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. Law Enforcement and Private Security Sources and Areas of Conflict; Department of Justice Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Private Security Advisory Council: Washington, DC, USA, 1976; pp. 2–32. Available online: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/147387NCJRS.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- Lee, C.; Yun, I. Factors affecting police officers’ tendency to cooperate with private investigators. Polic. Int. J. Police Strateg. Manag. 2014, 37, 712–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gill, M.; Hart, J. Private investigators in Britain and America: Perspectives on the impact of popular culture. Polic. Int. J. Police Strateg. Manag. 1997, 20, 631–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gill, M.; Hart, J. Exploring investigative policing—A study of private detectives in Britain. Br. J. Criminol. 1997, 37, 549–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Connors, E.F.; Cunningham, W.C.; Ohlhausen, P.E. Operation Cooperation: A Literature Review of Cooperation and Partnerships between Law Enforcement and Private Security Organizations; Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance: Washington, DC, USA, 1999. Available online: http://www.ilj.org/publications/index.html (accessed on 1 April 2019).
- Sarre, R.; Prenzler, T. The regulation of private policing: Reviewing mechanisms of accountability. Crime Prev. Community Saf. 2000, 1, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benny, D.J. Private Investigation and Homeland Security, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017; pp. 20–181. [Google Scholar]
- Bayley, D.H.; Shearing, C.D. The New Structure of Policing: Description, Conceptualization, and Research Agenda; Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice: Washington, DC, USA, 2001. Available online: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/187083.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2018).
- Golsby, M. Police and private security working together in a co-operative approach to crime prevention and public safety. In Proceedings of the Conference Partnerships in Crime Prevention, Convened Jointly by the Australian Institute of Criminology and the National Campaign Against Violence and Crime, Hobart, Australia, 25–27 February 1998; Available online: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.553.3375&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed on 8 April 2019).
- Montgomery, R.; Griffiths, C.T. The Use of Private Security Services for Policing. In Research Report; Public Safety Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2015; pp. 1–100. Available online: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/archive-2015-r041/2015-r041-en.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- Shearing, C.D. The relation between public and private policing. Crime Justice 1992, 15, 399–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strom, K.; Berzofsky, M.; Shook-Sa, B.; Barrick, K.; Daye, C.; Horstmann, N.; Kinsey, S. The Private Security Industry: A Review of the Definitions, Available Data Sources, and Paths Moving Forward; Department of Justice: Washington, DC, USA, 2010; pp. 1–98. Available online: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/232781.pdf (accessed on 30 November 2021).
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. National industry-specific occupational employment and wage estimates. In Occupational Outlook Handbook; Investigation, Guard, and Armored Car Services: Washington, DC, USA, 2020. Available online: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_561600.htm (accessed on 30 November 2021).
- Statista. Number of Law Enforcement Officers U.S. 2004–2020. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/191694/number-of-law-enforcement-officers-in-the-us/ (accessed on 30 November 2021).
- Button, M.; Kapend, R.; Stiernstedt, P. Investigative private policing beyond the police: An exploratory study. Polic. Soc. 2022, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ohlhausen, P.; Connors, E.; Cunningham, W. The Changing Relationship between Private Security and Law Enforcement; Institute for Law and Justice: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2002; pp. 22–98. [Google Scholar]
- Shearing, C.; Stenning, P.; Addario, S. Police perceptions of private security. Can. Police Coll. J. 1985, 9, 127–154. [Google Scholar]
- Sparrow, M.K. Managing the boundary between public and private policing. In New Perspectives in Policing Bulletin; Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; pp. 1–28. Available online: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/247182.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- Prenzler, T.; King, M. The role of private investigators and commercial agents in law enforcement. Trends Issues Crime Crim. Justice 2002, 234, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Paek, S.Y.; Nalla, M.K.; Lee, J. Determinants of police officers’ support for the public-private partnerships (PPPs) in policing cyberspace. Polic. Int. J. Police Strateg. Manag. 2020, 43, 877–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruddell, R.; Thomas, M.O.; Patten, R. Examining the roles of the police and private security officers in urban social control. Int. J. Police Sci. Manag. 2011, 13, 54–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McMahon, M. Practical Handbook for Private Investigators, 1st ed.; CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2001; pp. 45–250. [Google Scholar]
- Manley, A. The Elements of Private Investigation: An Introduction to the Law, Techniques, and Procedures, 1st ed.; CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009; pp. 10–400. [Google Scholar]
- Nemeth, C.P. Private Security and the Investigative Process, 3rd ed.; CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2010; pp. 4–345. [Google Scholar]
- Data USA. Private Detectives and Investigators. Available online: https://datausa.io/profile/soc/339021/#demographics (accessed on 6 April 2019).
- King, M. What makes a successful corporate investigator: An exploration of private investigators’ attributes. J. Financ. Crime 2020, 27, 701–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hadley, M. Sex trafficking: Can Private Investigators Fill Gaps Left by Police? The Crime Report. 6 September 2018. Available online: https://thecrimereport.org/2018/09/06/sex-trafficking-can-private-investigators-fill-gaps-left-by-police/ (accessed on 8 April 2019).
- Gill, M.; Hart, J. Private investigators: Under-researched, under-estimated and underused? Int. J. Risk Secur. Crime Prev. 1996, 1, 305–314. [Google Scholar]
- Leea, C.; Leea, C.; Choib, J.; Leec, J.; Hong, E. Factors affecting likelihood of hiring private investigators (PI): Citizens’ traits and attitudes toward police and PI. Int. J. Law Crime Justice 2014, 42, 188–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Canadian Special Investigations. Human Trafficking and How Private Investigators Can Help. 13 March 2018. Available online: https://canadianinvestigations.com/archives/2787 (accessed on 20 April 2017).
- Global Investigative Group. Missing Persons and Human Trafficking Investigations. Available online: https://www.Globalinvestigativegroup.Com/Human-Trafficking-Missing-Persons (accessed on 6 April 2019).
- Irvine, S. How Private Investigators Fight Human Trafficking. Investigator Center, 2 March 2020. Available online: https://www.pinow.com/articles/2868/how-private-investigators-fight-human-trafficking (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- Lauth, T. Fast Facts on Missing Children. 24 April 2019. Available online: https://www.lauthmissingpersons.com/fast-facts-on-missing-children/ (accessed on 30 April 2020).
- Waugh, D. I-Team: Private Investigator Easily Finds Suspected Sex Trafficking in Local Hotels. 2020. Available online: https://cbs12.com/news/cbs12-news-i-team/i-team-private-investigator-easily-finds-suspected-sex-trafficking-in-local-hotels (accessed on 20 April 2021).
- Blumenthal, M. Inside Human Trafficking Investigations. Thorn. Available online: https://www.thorn.org/blog/what-human-trafficking-investigations-look-like/ (accessed on 10 December 2018).
- Hounmenou, C.; O’Grady, C. Private investigators’ experiences in human trafficking Investigations. J. Hum. Traffick. 2021, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variables (N = 39) | Frequency | Percent |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Male | 29 | 74.4 |
Female | 10 | 25.6 |
Total | 39 | 100.0 |
Age (M = 59.6, SD = 11.3) | ||
Age 22–30 | 1 | 2.6 |
Age 41–50 | 5 | 12.8 |
Age 51–60 | 11 | 28.2 |
Age 61–70 | 17 | 43.6 |
Age 71–80 | 4 | 10.3 |
Age 81–90 | 1 | 2.6 |
Total | 39 | 100.0 |
Number of years as a PI (M = 23.8, SD = 14.5) | ||
1–5 work years | 5 | 12.8 |
6–10 work years | 5 | 12.8 |
11–15 work years | 3 | 7.7 |
16–20 work years | 3 | 7.7 |
21–25 work years | 5 | 12.8 |
26–30 work years | 5 | 12.8 |
31–35 work years | 2 | 5.1 |
36–40 work years | 8 | 20.5 |
Over 40 years | 3 | 7.8 |
Total | 39 | 100.0 |
Current PI position in the agency | ||
Owner and Senior Investigator | 22 | 56.2 |
CEO/President | 5 | 12.9 |
Director/Managing Director | 5 | 12.9 |
Chief Investigator | 5 | 12.9 |
Field Investigator | 2 | 5.1 |
Total | 39 | 100.0 |
Profession before becoming PI | ||
Law enforcement officer | 19 | 48.7 |
Intelligence services agent | 5 | 12.8 |
No prior profession | 5 | 12.8 |
Security consultant | 4 | 10.3 |
Armed forces agent | 4 | 10.3 |
Insurance/paralegal agent | 3 | 7.7 |
Bodyguard/security officer | 2 | 5.1 |
Total | 39 | 100.0 |
Variables (N = 39) | Frequency | Percent |
---|---|---|
In your opinion, how often do private investigations agencies and law enforcement agencies (i.e., police departments, sheriff’s office, FBI, U.S. Marshals Services, etc.) collaborate on human trafficking investigations? (M = 2.42; SD = 0.68) | ||
1 = Never | 1 | 2.6 |
2 = Rarely | 23 | 60.5 |
3 = Sometimes | 11 | 28.9 |
4 = Often | 3 | 7.9 |
5 = Always | -- | -- |
Total | 38 | 100.0 |
How would you rate collaboration between private investigations agencies and law enforcement agencies on human trafficking investigations? (M = 3.51; SD = 1.17) | ||
1 = Not difficult | 1 | 2.7 |
2 = Slightly difficult | 6 | 16.2 |
3 = Somewhat difficult | 14 | 37.8 |
4 = Moderately difficult | 5 | 13.5 |
5 = Very difficult | 11 | 29.7 |
Total | 37 | 100.0 |
How would you rate law enforcement agencies’ help for human trafficking investigations conducted by private investigations agencies? (M = 3.35; SD = 1.47) | ||
1 = Not important | 4 | 10.8 |
2 = Slightly important | 11 | 29.7 |
3 = Somewhat important | 2 | 5.4 |
4 = Moderately important | 8 | 21.6 |
5 = Very important | 12 | 32.4 |
Total | 37 | 100.0 |
How would you rate private investigations agencies’ help for human trafficking investigations conducted by law enforcement agencies? (M = 3.64; SD = 1.41) | ||
1 = Not important | 4 | 11.1 |
2 = Slightly important | 5 | 13.9 |
3 = Somewhat important | 5 | 13.9 |
4 = Moderately important | 8 | 22.2 |
5 = Very important | 14 | 38.9 |
Total | 36 | 100.0 |
Has your agency ever collaborated with any law enforcement agencies on human trafficking investigations? | ||
Yes | 28 | 73.7 |
No | 10 | 26.3 |
Total | 38 | 100.0 |
How often has your agency collaborated with law enforcement agencies on human trafficking investigations? (In number) | ||
Collaborated with LEA 1–5 times | 18 | 64.3 |
Collaborated with LEA 6–10 times | 6 | 21.4 |
Collaborated with LEA 11–20 times | 4 | 14.3 |
Total | 28 | 100.0 |
Variables | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Perception of collaboration between PIAs and LEAs. | 2.42 | 0.68 | 1 | |||
2 | Difficulty in collaboration between PIAs and LEAs. | 3.51 | 1.17 | −0.490 ** | 1 | ||
3 | LEAs’ support for investigations by PIAs. | 3.35 | 1.47 | 0.092 | −0.365 * | 1 | |
4 | PIAs’ support for investigations by LEAs. | 3.64 | 1.41 | −0.026 | 0.008 | 0.616 ** | 1 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hounmenou, C.; Toepp, S. Exploring Private Investigation Agencies’ Experience of Collaboration with Law Enforcement in Investigations of Human Trafficking Cases. Societies 2023, 13, 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13020044
Hounmenou C, Toepp S. Exploring Private Investigation Agencies’ Experience of Collaboration with Law Enforcement in Investigations of Human Trafficking Cases. Societies. 2023; 13(2):44. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13020044
Chicago/Turabian StyleHounmenou, Charles, and Sachi Toepp. 2023. "Exploring Private Investigation Agencies’ Experience of Collaboration with Law Enforcement in Investigations of Human Trafficking Cases" Societies 13, no. 2: 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13020044