Shelby County Sheriff’s Office observed a man handing over marijuana to a confidential informant in May 2010. They then put the man’s photo and name on their ‘Most-Wanted’ website and, when he turned himself in the Sheriff’s Office sought to arrest him. Perfect case? Unfortunately not… The Sheriff’s Office has mistakenly identified the drug dealer as Kenneth Dukes, a baptist church minister. Dukes is now threatening to sue the Sheriff’s Office for the case of mistaken identity and the damage it casued to his reputation. Shelby County Sheriff’s Office responded by saying “The actual subject who sold the marijuana has a strong physical resemblance to Mr. Dukes”, according to the Shelby Count Reporter. Hopefully the office will try to get their facts right next time…
Tag Archives: confidential informant
Senior narcotics officer caught selling confiscated drugs
The leader of a multi-agency anti-narcotics team in Contra Costa county (California) was charged this week having allegedly been caught on film selling a pound of methamphetamine to a confidential informant. The officer had allegedly stolen the drugs from a law enforcement evidence locker, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
Working in cahoots with another man, the officer is reported to have raided evidence lockers on various occasions in a bid to boost his earnings before retirement.
This is yet another example of the need to improve processes and procedures surrounding undercover narcotics operations – operations might be sensitive and confidential but this doesn’t mean they can’t be subject to good management oversight.
Unreliable informant leads to dropped drugs charges
Two suspected drug dealers have just had their charges dropped after the Sheriff’s department decided that the confidential informant who was crucial to the case was unreliable. As reported by The News Tribune, Pierce County sheriff’s office (Washington state) decided that the case against the two men could not stand as the confidential informant‘s testimony had come under question.
It’s a pity that the Sheriff’s department hadn’t established the informant’s reliability before arresting the two men. As a result of their u-turn, the credibility of the law enforcement agency has been dented and the two men at the centre of the allegations are free to continue as they had before. The medical-marijuana cooperative that they operate has apparently opened a second site.
Assessing the credibility of confidential informants is an important and essential part of the CI management process, particularly when criminal cases depend heavily on their testimony. Law enforcement agencies should make sure that processes and procedures are in place to ensure confidential informants’ proper assessment for reliability and risk.
Cop leaks confidential informant details to family
The Trentonian has reported that a police dispatcher for Dover Police (New Jersey) looked up criminal records of friends and relatives and revealed the identity of a confidential informant to one of his relatives. Such behaviour is clearly against law enforcement agency policy and the officer faces a four year prison term. Although the police say that his actions did not compromise any investigations, they will undoubtedly have a negative impact on citizens’ confidence in the agency’s ability to protect data and, more importantly, the identity of confidential informants.
Law enforcement agencies should learn from this that secure and reliable systems to enforce policies and protect informant data are an essential component of modern-day policing.
Whatever you do, don’t lose your informant!
When several drugs cases depend on the testimony of one confidential informant, it’s fairly important to know where that informant is. The Dickinson Press reported today that Stark County (North Dakota) have lost their crucial confidential informant in a case against alleged methamphetamine trafficker, Jeanifer Dutton-Meyer. The State’s Attorney has until 11th February to track him down, but he has been missing since September!
Stories like this illustrate the point that Confidential Informants need careful management. They aren’t objects that you can lock away in an evidence room – Confidential Informants can and will do unpredictable things and it’s essential that processes are put in place to minimise the risk involved in handling informants.
Washington State could get new Confidential Informant law
Senator McCaslin has put forward Senate Bill 5004: “An Act relating to disclosure and regulation of criminal informant evidence and testimony“. The Bill would implement various requirements for Washington State’s law enforcement agencies and prosecutors with regard to the management of evidence and testimony provided by informants.
The Bill would impose three major new requirements:
- all statements made by an informant will need to be electronically recorded (either video or audio)
- the prosecution must disclose information about an informant prior to using the informant’s evidence or testimony. The disclosure would include details of the informant’s criminal history, details of any inducements that the informant has received or has been promised, details of the statements made by the informant, details of other cases in which the informant testified and details of the relationship between the accused and the informant.
- a pretrial hearing must be held by the court to assess the reliability of the informant’s testimony and ascertain if there is sufficient additional evidence to corroborate the testimony.
Such a law would significantly reduce the vagaries of the current approach in Washington State and reduce the chances of wrongful conviction based on unreliable informant testimony.
Alexandra Natapoff, a well known expert on the US criminal justice system and the use of confidential informants, has praised the Bill heralding it as “an excellent example of the kinds of legislative change that we can expect more of, as legislatures and the public learn more about the risks of informant use”. She also explains how the Bill arose from the case of the wrongful imprisonment of three young men set up by a confidential informant. Read her post “Washington State introduces exciting new legislation” to find out more.
Informant gets shot in his own car repair shop
Omaha World Herald has reported that a confidential informant working for the FBI and Greater Omaha Safe Streets Task Force was shot dead in a staged drugs buy that went horribly wrong. According the the article, Cesar Sanchez-Gonzalez agreed to use his South Omaha, Nebraska body shop for a drug sale to a group of suspected dealers in October. FBI agents and members of the Greater Omaha Safe Streets Task Force monitored the sale nearby. All seemed to be going smoothly until one of the men pulled a gun on Sanchez-Gonzalez, shooting him dead.
Stories like this continue to emphasise the high risks involved in using confidential informants. While occasional systems failures may remain inevitable, it is imperative that law enforcement agencies manage risks properly to ensure that the dangers are averted wherever possible.
Confidential Informants’ details leaked on web
The names of confidential informants who worked with the Western Colorado Drug Task Force were accidentally released on the internet in April by Mesa County Administration according to the Denver Post.
This raises important questions about the security of data within Mesa County Sheriff’s Office and the Drug Task Force as well as the robustness of policies and procedures surrounding the management of confidential informant details. In an ideal world, there should be no need to upload large chunks of information to a website (whether it’s secure or not). Covert police software already exists that allows law enforcement agencies to securely record and share informant deatails, with advanced access control according to each police officer’s rank.
The question that stands, therefore, is why doesn’t Mesa County take data security and the protection of their confidential informants seriously enough to implement the tools and procedures required?
Police steal funds for informants and lie in drugs investigations
Two former Deputies at Bexar County Sheriff’s Office were found guilty on Wednesday of stealing funds for informants and lying in drug investigations. In 2008 and 2009 the two Deputies routinely requested money to pay informants for information but pocketed half of it for themselves.
The damages to the Sheriff’s Office are far greater than a few thousand dollars of stolen informant funds. The former deputies’ convictions throw a number of drugs convictions into question – 239 letters were sent to defense lawyers by the District Attorney advising them that there may be cause for appeals. If it goes the same way as the recent Tulsa corruption scandal, many convicted drugs felons may have their convictions overturned. According to the San Antonio Express article, there has also been significant restructuring the Bexar County Sheriff’s office, with all the deputies on the 15 member narcotics unit being replaced.
Management oversight of financial transactions in the necessarily secretive area of confidential informants may be difficult, but it’s far from impossible. Robust policies and procedures enforced in conjunction with reliable source management software can make it relatively easy for law enforcement agencies to improve the management of this area of covert operations.
UK Confidential Informant case law
Police Oracle have just posted an excellent article on case law surrounding Covert Human Intelligence Sources (CHIS) or Confidential Informants in the United Kingdom. Most importantly, the case law covers the extent to which CHIS can/cannot encourage others to participate in criminal offences. According to R v Mealey (1974) it is unacceptable for a CHIS to entice another person to commit an offence which he/she would not otherwise have committed. The article goes on to cite Teixeira de Castro v Portugal (1999) and R v Moon (2004) in which the accused were encouraged to take part in illegal activity.
In America, entrapment by Confidential Informants is often used by defence lawyers. Examples include a case of dog fighting charges in Indianapolis and a case of robbery in Texas in September 2010, the Florida case against John Nicholas Coors in a murder-for-hire plot in April 2010 and the August 2010 New York terror trial.
