“Easy to work with, year after year.” —Lex Steers
As the Editor of Working PI, I’ve been traveling a lot this year—visiting PI conferences across the country, getting to meet so many of you and hear your stories.
One of the things that has really intrigued me is the many different specializations that PIs have carved out for their businesses. From conducting international investigations on DEA-related criminal defense cases, to crypto-bitcoin data fingerprinting, to corporate counterintelligence, to digital forensics—I’ve been incredibly impressed (you might be too!) by the wide variety of skill sets that our private investigator community brings to the table.
That is something we hope to showcase in this and future issues—sharing the unique stories of private investigators with different skills and perspectives with the industry at large.
In this issue, you’ll discover the role that digital data plays as evidence (pg. 10), hear the challenges facing a criminal defense investigator when the complainant is a child (pg. 36), go behind-the-scenes during a biological family investigation (pg. 14), and uncover facts about the most significant invasion of privacy and trespassing lawsuit currently being litigated in the United States (pg. 20).
Our mission at Working PI is to connect all private investigators across the United States and provide the latest news, information and community to YOU—the bootson-the-ground professional.
This issue of Working PI, which you hold in your hands, has been mailed to over 25,000 private investigators and is reaching 60 to 70 percent of private investigators across the country.
We are very excited to serve the industry and are proud to be the only print and digital publication that reaches beyond association ties and paid subscription models. That’s why active private investigators can enjoy Working PI magazine for free—the way it should be.
If you enjoyed this issue and would like to guarantee delivery of the print magazine— as well as stay up-to-date and get the latest news delivered directly to your email inbox, please subscribe at WorkingPImag.com.
Thanks for reading.
Catherine Torrez has been a police offi cer for 20+ years. She attended the Law Enforcement Management Institute of Texas to gain her Management Certificate. She has achieved a Police Instructor Cer tificate, Mental Health Officer Certificate, and Master Peace Officer Certification during her career and her last position was that of Chief of Police. Torrez has worked as a private investigator since 2010 and is now the owner/manager of Stiletto Spy and Company Investigations, LLC. She previ ously served on TALI in many capacities and most recently as President. She is a Texas Board Certified Investigator.
Hal Humphreys is co-owner and director of instruction at PIEducation.com, and execu tive editor of Pursuit Magazine. As a certified fraud examiner and licensed private investi gator, Hal has spent nearly 30 years chasing down information by knocking on doors and digging into musty courthouse archives. As owner of [FIND] Investigations, a PI agency in Nashville, TN, Hal discovered the work he loves best: criminal defense investigations. Follow him on Twitter: @FINDPI or go to: findinvestigations.com.
Thomas E. Santarlas, Ph.D. is the founder of the My Private Eye® software program. He has been involved in the private investi gation and process service industry for the past 26 years. He's a notary with 10+ years of experience and a certified process server with over 23 years of experience. Author of various published works, Dr. Santarlas has significant research and writing experience within the industry. To reach Dr. Santarlas and learn about My Private Eye® software, visit www.mypi.us.
Adam Visnic, President of Gravitas Investi gations, has been finding facts, mitigating risk, and solving complex problems for his clients for nearly twenty years. He founded Gravitas Investigations in 2015 and is a licensed private investigator in Ohio, Ken tucky, and Indiana. Previously, he was a contract Special Investigator conducting national security background investigations for federal government agencies. He com pleted a Master’s degree in Safety, Home land Security, and Emergency Manage ment in 2016 and graduated from Eastern Kentucky University’s Criminal Justice pro gram in 2005.
Isaac Peck is the Publisher of Working PI magazine and the President and Senior Broker of OREP.org, a leading provider of E&O insurance for the PI industry. Work ing PI is the most widely read print maga zine for investigators nationwide, reach ing over 25,000 PIs. PIs who become OREP Members enjoy an 8-hour CE course at no charge (see page 9 for details or visit OREP.org/PI) . Reach Isaac by email at isaac@orep.org or call (888) 347-5273. CA License #4116465.
Kendra Budd is the Editor of Working PI magazine and the Marketing Coordina tor for OREP, a leading provider of E&O insurance—trusted by over 10,000 profes sionals nationwide. She graduated with a BA in Theatre and English from Western Washington University, and an MFA in Creative Writing from Full Sail University.
“The moment that I realized that this was kind of a legendary story was when about a decade after this happened, I’m at this business conference...”
About a decade ago, I was hired (and went undercover) to catch a workers’ compensation claimant who was suspected of defrauding the insurance system. This seemed to be a standard case—my client hires me to catch this employee of hers who had just injured his shoulder on a construction job. And there were rumors from other employees that he wasn’t quite telling the truth.
When we dug into his social media profile we found he had been an amateur “powerlifter” and was posting pictures that he was still heavily involved in weightlifting. And so, each day he was receiving up to two-thirds of his paycheck despite never actually working, and my job was to help the client eliminate those losses.
In order to catch him, I did a few days of surveillance on the guy and attempted to get compromising video of him working out. But it wasn’t fruitful. The guy was a nomad—his family lived out of state where he’d frequently visit, so I couldn’t pinpoint his location day to day.
So, after looking through the internet back to front and front to back, I finally tracked down his email address, which he used for a Craigslist ad—he was advertising powerlifting lessons. This was the perfect opportunity to get evidence on the guy. But how could I pull this off without him catching on? I’d never gone undercover before.
Well, I wouldn’t be a PI if I didn’t accept the challenge.
So, I placed a phone call to the number provided on his Craigslist post. And he answered.
He seemed to be a nice guy over the phone—we talked for a while and set up the first session. We planned to meet at his uncle’s construction business for our first workout. The trap was set. I was going undercover.
Two days later, I headed over to meet him—but when I arrived onsite, I noticed this wasn’t your average home gym. Instead, it was basically a junk yard with construction debris, leftover parts from old equipment, huge tires laying around, and of course a ton of
barbells and dumbbells everywhere. I hadn’t slept well the night before and now I’m starting to get nervous. I pulled into the lot and got out of my car looking around for him. I was a little uneasy.
And then I see him. Now, I’d seen him before on stakeouts, but instead of wearing normal clothes, this time he’s wearing an a-style shirt, also known as a white wife-beater. He’s got black serpen tine tattoos all over his body, a beard, and a freshly-shaved head—intimidating, to say the least. But, he’s only 5’7”. Pretty average height. He’s like a mini-me version of The Rock. But I noticed one thing—he had these pink shoelaces. Which was odd, but I took it to mean he had a soft side.
And this dude had already worked up a sweat, and the top of his forehead glistened. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t sweating as well, but not because I’d been warming up. I looked him in the eye, reached out my arm, and we shook hands. I introduced myself.
He introduces himself, and says “let’s get to work.”
The truth is, it’d be a more interesting story if I was some scrawny guy who had never lifted in his life and I just got destroyed by this guy’s workout. But the opposite was closer to the truth. This is kind of the moment I felt like I was born to not just do this case, but to be a private investigator.
You see, I’d been lifting weights for months on my own, and once upon a time, I was a college athlete. So, by the time we started the first lift, I was ready. I was no fraud. Our first exercise was Power Hang Cleans with 200 lbs.
For perspective, lifting 200 pounds in that motion would rip off the average person’s shoulders. So, it surely would have resulted in excruciating pain for someone who claimed they had just sepa rated their shoulder. But that’s where
we started, just for warm-ups. This guy didn’t hold back. He was intense. And he showed no signs of injury. Rep after rep. And so, we’re both lifting this weight.
Eventually, we moved on to 500-pound tire flips, then deadlifts, and then rows. He was actually cheering me on. And I think he respected that I could lift with him, and not pass out. Meanwhile, I’m thinking, this would make for great video evidence. My eyewitness testi mony won’t do any good.
How was I going to bust this guy? How was I going to get video of this?
Usually, I’d use some covert camera in this situation. But I couldn’t use it for the risk of getting caught. So, my genius plan was to ask the guy during our next session, if I made it through this one. But, towards the end of the lesson, in this serious voice, he calls me over and sits me down face to face.
I think I’m caught. I get a little nervous. But he asks me: “Why do you want to power lift?”
And in my most sincere voice, I said I played slow-pitch softball in this very competitive league and that someday I wanted to be the best player. I mentioned that in order to compete with guys who were on the juice and who were power lifters and could hit balls 500 feet, I needed to be stronger.
He bought it.
Then, we talked for about 30 more minutes on nutrition, supplements, and form. I just listened. I realized he just wanted someone to train with. A friend.
So, that’s what gave me the courage to bring in my regular camera during our second session and ask if I could roll some tape. My exact words were “You wouldn’t mind if I… you know… video taped us working out, would you? Just to look at my form and stuff?”
He says, “No problem. You gonna put it on YouTube or something?”
I say, “Yeah, something like that.”
I set up my camera on a table in the corner of the room and we continued our powerlifting session. For the next two sessions, we’re doing bench presses and all sorts of shoulder exercises. Then we do a whole day of leg workouts with squats and straight leg deadlifts.
He’s still not showing signs of injury, and my video is rolling the whole time. Afterward, I shook his hand and we parted ways and I never saw him again. He didn’t even charge me for the sessions. He was a really nice guy. But, once I gathered the evidence, pulled together a detailed report, and presented it to the client, we used it to prove that this guy was abusing his work restrictions.
The claim gets settled for pennies, so the client was happy, and my boss was happy.
The moment that I realized this was kind of a legendary story was about a decade after this happened, I’m at this business conference. And, I’m chatting it up with some salespeople—some of whom are from the company I worked at when I did this case.
By this time, I have my own business. I tell this one salesperson I’m a private investigator, and this is true, she looks me in the eye and tells me the exact story I just told you. The two of us had never met before and she’s using my story to start a conversation.
I just ask, “Have you ever met the PI who did that case?”
She says, “No, he left the company before I did.”
And I just reach over, extend my hand, and say, “Well, now you have.”
The look on her face was priceless.
“Private investigators, especially PIs with a concentration in digital forensics, are increasingly tasked with collecting and reporting metadata, including EXIF data. ”
I
t was the verdict heard 'round the world: Amber Heard found guilty on all counts of defamation against Johnny Depp. Depp previously sued his now ex-wife in London, England for the same allegations. Heard prevailed in that case.
However, in the United States justice system, it was a different story. The legal saga that ensued in the Circuit Court of Fairfax, Virginia was televised and watched by millions of people worldwide. For better or worse, it was the most widely viewed (and debated) legal case in recent years.
One fact that was not discussed by the general public is the way this popular legal spat intersected with the private investiga tion and digital forensics communities. While Depp and Heard undoubtedly hired their own private investigation teams to try to dig up dirt on one another—one key witness in the case ended up being a digital forensics expert. Norbert “Bryan” Neumeister, CEO at USAForensics LLC and a renowned video and photographic forensic expert hired by Depp,
played a key role in the trial by discrediting some of Heard’s strongest “evidence.”
Neumeister’s testimony was based on his analysis of the meta data associated with several photographs that were presented as key evidence of Depp’s domestic abuse of Heard.
But what exactly is metadata? Metadata is defined by many as “data about data.” Or, as the Oxford Dictionary puts it: “a set of data that describes and gives information about other data.”
As it turns out, the metadata (and the lack thereof) became a key point of contention in the case.
Private investigators, especially PIs with a concentration in digital forensics, are increasingly tasked with collecting and reporting metadata, including EXIF data, on cases involving collecting and reporting one (or both) parties’ digital finger prints and proving the authenticity of digital evidence.
Here are the details of how digital forensics played an impor tant role in this (un)popular case.
Depp and Heard met on set of The Rum Diary in 2011 and soon after began a romantic relationship—later marrying in 2015. The marriage would only last until 2016 when Heard filed for divorce. Less than a week later, Heard filed a restraining order against Depp, fueling rumors of abuse.
In 2018, Heard penned an op-ed for The Washington Post in which she claimed she had been previously abused. In her article, Depp is never mentioned by name, however, people connected the dots and the damage was done. The world was convinced Depp physically assaulted Heard throughout their marriage. As a result, Depp allegedly lost several movie deals including his most famous role as Captain Jack Sparrow in The Pirates of the Caribbean franchise.
Depp fired back at Heard by suing her for $18 million dollars for defamation in 2019. Then in 2020, phone recordings between Depp and Heard were released, in which Heard willingly admits to hitting Depp. Heard is caught saying: “I’m sorry that I didn’t hit you across the face in a proper slap, but I was hitting you, it was not punching you. Babe, you’re not punched.” Suddenly, public opinion seemed to turn in Depp's favor.
In the litigation that followed, the Court sided with Heard in London, and Depp was denied the right to appeal twice. However, in the United States, the court sided with Depp this time around, awarding him $25 million dollars.
While the case involved a myriad of “experts” and eyewit ness testimony, Neumeister’s testimony and his analysis of the forensic evidence proved to be a key turning point in the case.
Heard’s defense team produced several photos in their case, many of which depicted Heard’s alleged injuries. Depp’s legal team argued that all these photos were edited by Heard with the attempt to defame Depp and misrepresent the facts. This is where Neumeister’s expertise came into play.
Once Neumeister took the stand, Depp’s legal team showed him exhibits 12 and 13. Both exhibits were photographs of Heard, looking down with an apparent bruise under her eye. However, in one of these photographs, Heard’s face appeared to be “washed out,” and it was hard to tell if there was any bruising at all. In the second, the bruise appears darker, as does the whole photo itself. These two photos were a huge point of controversy in the case, because other than the “lighting” of the photographs, they appeared to be exactly the same— despite Heard claiming they were two different photos.
Neumeister shot down this claim quickly, by simply presenting an overlay he had made of the two photos with one on top of the other. When Depp’s attorneys prompted him why they were looking at this overlay, his response was simple: “They’re two different exhibits, except they’re the same exact photo graph. One’s been edited, one hasn’t.”
In theory, this should have been the end of the argument. Especially since part of Heard’s defense was that the photos were authenticated with an operating number—something Neumeister says is impossible. “Nobody can identify the authenticity of these photos marked with operating system numbers.” He continued, “There is no way for any forensic expert to validate any of these photos.” It soon became clear that the defense lacked the proper knowledge of digital forensics.
As the two sides dug into the metadata, Exchangeable Image File (EXIF) data became a key point of contention. EXIF data is a format that specifies the information about a snapshot or other media files produced with a digital camera. It can reveal when, and on what device, a photo was taken.
EXIF data associated with graphics can contain valuable infor mation such as the time the photo was taken, edited, and even geolocation of the photo. This data can be commonly created by taking photos from smartphones.
Regarding the photos in question, Heard’s defense strategy then morphed into a twisted (reversed) rendition of “innocent until proven guilty.” They attempted to argue that there was no way to prove that the EXIF data had been modified—and that conse quently, the jury should accept the photos as verifiable proof. However, Neumeister took the opposite approach and made a convincing case that there was no way to prove the photos had not been altered.
During Neumeister’s cross examination, it became exceedingly clear that Heard’s defense team would try to push their narra tive without fully understanding the science of digital forensics. The defense asked Neumeister if he was able to find any modi fication in the EXIF data. His response was simple, “There is no way to answer that scientifically because, given the evidence we were given there is no way to positively or negatively answer that. It is not a question that can be answered.” This began a long back and forth between the defense and Neumeister, wherein the defense kept demanding a yes or no answer. Due to the science of EXIF data, this was impossible.
Neumeister went on to explain further when asked if Heard’s trial exhibits showed if the photograph went through an editing application. “First of all, that’s not a yes or no ques
tion because a lot of the exhibits that you have put up [are] not photographs, they’re screen grabs. They’ve changed from an Apple format, which is jpeg, to a jpg Microsoft format,” Neumeister says. “So, you have actually changed the exem plars. You have changed the data yourselves that we actually ran EXIF data on. Some of your own examples that you’ve entered in the evidence, they are not photos from an iPhone. Those were edited on a personal computer (PC).”
In other words, there was no scientific way for Neumeister (or anyone!) to authenticate the photos, because they were photos of photos. To make things more interesting, the original iPhone these photos were taken on had been recycled years earlier.
In fact, Neumeister commented on how odd it was that Heard had not kept the phone. “In 95 percent of all cases we work we have the actual phones. It doesn’t matter if the phones are 10 years old. The reason is, if people have something they want to keep as evidence, they don’t recycle their phones,” Neumeister theorizes. Additionally, Neumeister argued that verifiable forensic extractions were not possible because, “the extractions we were provided were backups of backups of iTunes exports. So, it’s third generation and there is no way to verify the file paths and the history of any single photo that we’ve looked at,” Neumeister explains.
Without the original file path due to the phone being recycled, in combination with Neumeister’s overlays of the photographs, Heard’s defense team had a very difficult time remaining cred ible in the eyes of the jury.
Amber Schroader, a 30 year digital forensics veteran and CEO and founder of Paraben, a leading digital forensics software company, points out that metadata is a key variable in a variety of investigations. “Metadata has a valuable impact on all types of digital evidence. It can show the author of a document and when they last worked on the information or if it was sent to someone else. These valuable digital fingerprints can be impactful in any investigation,” Schroader says.
Private Investigators typically need to be very mindful to preserve metadata when compiling digital evidence. “Some of the keys to the preservation of metadata include keeping the original device the data was generated on and making sure it is processed in a forensically sound manner. Making copies of this data will simply generate new metadata,” reports Schroader.
Although Neumeister played a relatively small role in this case, his expertise in digital forensics clearly planted doubt about the defense’s credibility. The photos of Amber Heard’s “bruised” face were a strong piece of evidence for her case and without Neumeister’s testimony, it is unclear whether or not Depp would have prevailed in the trial.
The fact that Heard’s first phone was “missing” and her team could not show the original file path, opened the door for a digital forensic expert like Neumeister to cast serious doubt on the authenticity of the photographs. This, in combination with Neumeister cunningly overlaying the two photos to show that they were in, fact, the same photo, created a powerful argument that Heard’s allegations were not believable and undoubtedly swayed the jury in Depp’s favor.
Digital forensics is a budding science that more private inves tigators are utilizing and exploring. Private investigators are frequently tasked with collecting and reporting metadata, including EXIF data, for cases. Having proper training and expertise in digital forensics gives private investigators a leg up in the industry, and it is becoming more expected to have said expertise. With cell phones, social media, and digital fingerprints becoming more prevalent in court cases, digital expertise will be more in demand.
For those private investigators who are looking to learn more about digital forensics and build their skillsets by adding digital expertise, there are a number of PI focused training options. One industry leading training program is Paraben's Training Academy. Specializing in digital forensics for over 30 years, Paraben offers a suite of informative courses and Certificate training programs, including Digital Forensic Fundamentals, Computer Forensics, and Mobile Forensics. Visit Paraben.com/ dfir-training-3/ to learn more. Stay safe out there!
by Kendra Budd, Editor
“Biological family investigations are frustrating, emotional, but 100 percent worth the turmoil you’re going to face.”
Odds are that at some point in your career, someone will ask you to find a lost biological family member. More times than not, this will be the result of a closed adoption. Whether you’re looking for the biological parent or child, these cases need to be handled with acute sensitivity toward your clients.
It’s not as simple as going up to a person after one Google search and saying, “Hey! Your daughter that you gave up for adoption 18 years ago wants to meet you!” Without knowing how to properly handle these investigations, you could be causing more harm than good with an unprepared approach.
Rachele’ Davis is a private investigator
who specializes with reuniting birth families and has extensive experience working alongside United States adop tion attorneys to locate birth parents for termination of parental rights.
Working PI sat down with Davis to hear some real-world advice on how to best investigate these cases both effectively and empathetically.
The very first step in your investigation will be meeting your client, which will require a lot of emotional preparation. Davis suggests starting the investiga tion process by preparing your client for all potential outcomes. Managing expectations with your client will help
determine if they want to move forward with the investigation. Davis warns, “It’s such an emotional rollercoaster and you don’t want them to be unprepared for that. I might keep hitting dead ends, or the person we find might not want a relationship with my client. It is just as much a counseling endeavor as an inves tigative one.” By painting a clear picture for your client, you can help them avoid potential disappointment.
This means your emotional prepared ness is also key. Many adoptees just want to know why they were given up, and many believe they have no informa tion about their birth parents. However, this all depends on the client. Davis says a
client may know more than they realize, “I always ask to hear their adoption story, in every detail.” Whether it was an offhanded comment by a client’s adoptive parents, a family rumor, or paper your client came across as a child that didn’t make much sense, you’ll want to know. “You never know what bit of informa tion will lead to a breakthrough,” advises Davis. The information you gather initially can be used later on to deter mine if you’ve found the right person by matching it with uncovered records.
Davis urges investigators to familiarize themselves with the laws in which the adoption potentially took place. This can be one of the biggest factors in the investigation, because it will deter mine the information available to you. “When you’re born you are issued an original birth certificate, and then when you’re adopted you get an amended birth certificate. An original birth certifi cate can be vital to your investigation, because not only will it give you the birth parents’ names (unless the birth father wasn’t listed), but it can give you an address and various other facts,” says Davis. However, only some states allow you to send in an application to receive an original birth certificate.
Going from there, Davis says you’ll have to determine the type of adoption you’re dealing with: whether it was an inter national adoption, private adoption through an attorney, or if it was through an agency. This will help determine how to proceed with the information you’ve gathered so far. Davis uses the example, if your client was adopted through an attorney, you’d want to know if they’ve contacted them before. However, Davis notes attorneys and agencies will typically only release a host of “non-identi fying information” to you. “That infor mation can give you clues as to the person you’re looking for, including: age, job, number of siblings, etc. but nothing specific to give away the person’s actual identity. However, they won’t always release this information to you,” Davis informs.
If all of this sounds time-consuming, good. That’s exactly what you should expect. Davis says the first meeting with your client should be, “a session of exhaustive questions to try to elicit every detail you can get from the client. Every bit of possible information matters.”
Once you have completed this line of questioning, it’s time to start the research phase of your investigation.
You’ll not only want to tell your client to access the above information to the best of their ability, if they haven’t already, but you’ll also want to get their DNA if there is no other information to spark a search.
Having your client complete DNA tests could be vital to your investigation. Your three best options are going to be 23andMe, Ancestry.com, and Family Tree DNA. These are arguably the most popular DNA testing companies world wide. However, Davis says, “The best option for the client when choosing a company depends on their ethnicity. Some databases are strong in South American or African ethnicity, while others are not. So, it’s very dependent on each client’s genetic makeup. Overall, I recommend Ancestry.com because their data base is the most robust.” Regardless of which database you or your client chooses, DNA testing “can be a great resource for adoptees who don’t know anything besides the fact that they’re adopted,” Davis informs. Your client can purchase these kits, where they will then be asked to collect a DNA sample via saliva, then send it back to be processed in a lab. At times, results can take a couple of months to process.
Gathering DNA from a client can be vital to your research because “DNA doesn’t lie,” says Davis. However, she also informs us that it isn’t always necessary to an investigation. “I don’t use it with every client, but most of my cases I will if my client hasn’t registered their DNA already.” Using genealogy to figure out familial relation is quite common, but if your client already has quite a bit of
information on their birth family then there may be no reason to wait months on end for results, advises Davis.
So, how does DNA determine familial relation? Well, almost all people are born with 23 sets of chromosomes, a DNA molecule that contains all or part of an organism. We each get one set from both of our biological parents. Chromosomes contain centimorgans (cM), a unit used to measure genetic linkage. One cM equals a 1% chance that a marker on a chromo some will be related. The total number of cM’s you share with another person can determine how you’re related.
However, more than likely, all of your client’s matches are going to have the cM equivalent of a cousin rather than an immediate family member. This is where their Ancestry.com account comes in handy. Ancestry has a “family tree” function where they can add and track their family history. From your client’s matches, you’ll be able to access other family member’s trees to find useful rela tives' names that aren’t in the database.
In the event that an immediate family member does come up as a match, tell your client not to contact them yet. For the best results you’ll want to contact them first. However, since this result is unlikely you’ll need to use other resources to gather information.
From websites to libraries, there is an endless sea of resources for you to access hard-to-find information. After checking the DNA websites, and gath ering information from a client, Davis will begin drafting a family tree to document her search. “A family tree will allow you to track who you may need to contact, or whose ancestry you need to search with more fervor. It can also give you a visual representation of missing information,” says Davis.
Aside from DNA testing, Davis suggests using databases such as TLOxp TransUnion to assist in your search.
This website holds thousands of records that may otherwise be hard to find. This can include finding individuals' new addresses and verifying identities. Davis is also a fan of using databases that are often overlooked. This includes Newspapers.com, “I use that website a lot, especially for adoptions that are older. People used to put everything in the newspaper. In fact, there are many articles that connect the dots by way of family relationships, close friendships, and where people lived,” says Davis.
Another resource to consider is obitu aries. “They are just gold when it comes to making familial connections,” Davis shares. She will often build separate family trees for possible connections she finds from obituaries, especially if the person has a common name. Davis says, “If you’re looking for someone named Jane Smith, and you come across an obituary, mapping out their separate family tree might help you verify if that is the same person you’re looking for by comparing the information you already have.”
Finally, Davis suggests adding yearbooks, property records, and of course, social media to your search. “Even if the biolog ical birth parents aren’t on social media, another family member of theirs is.” Yearbooks and property records can also be useful to confirm names, addresses, and even compare the likeness of your client using photos.
Using all of these resources should, at the very least, help you find a grain of information that you didn’t have before.
If you’re lucky, you’ll find exactly who you’ve been searching for. This is when it’s time to prepare for making contact.
After finding your subject, it’s time to make contact. The first thing Davis does in this part of her investigations is to tell her client that they’ve found who they’ve been searching for. Setting up boundaries with your client in this scenario is necessary. “It really has to be handled with care,” advises Davis.
“From my very first meeting with the
client, I tell them that my policy is that I like to make contact first. The main reason for this is I never want to give out someone’s personal contact infor mation. Of course, you’ll give your client some information, but you want to avoid the possibility of your client just showing up on their biological parent’s doorstep,” Davis says. This can end up fracturing the relationship before it even begins.
From that point forward, Davis and her client decide between one of two ways to proceed with contact. Either via phone call, or a letter. The phone call will always be made by Davis, but the letter can either be written by her client or herself—depending on what the client chooses. More often, clients choose a phone call. “When they answer, I do my best to identify myself right away. I let them know immediately I have sensitive information for them and ask if they’re in a place where they can talk about it,” Davis says. This is when
using empathy as a private investigator is imperative.
Once the subject is in a place to speak, Davis says it’s best to just dive right in. “I let them know about the client and why I was hired. But I do it gently. I want to give them the chance to process and respond to that information. During this call, it’s vital not to make assumptions about the biological family member.” Davis urges people to reas sure their subjects that your intent is not to disrupt their lives. “The family member might need some time and will want to call you back, but be prepared for the harsh reality that they might not,” warns Davis. After this, inform your client that you’ve contacted the subject. If both parties want to meet, you’ll then help them proceed.
It may take some time for your clients to contact one another on their own. However, Davis cautions it’s best to only stay as long as you’re needed. “I just act as the go-between as long as I need to. First,
you’ll want to gauge the reaction of both parties. One party may be eager to make contact, while the other party is a bit more cautious.”
Offering multiple ways of contact is key. Davis says, “Some may just want to email first, others will want to meet immediately, and some could even just want to mail back and forth for some time using my address, where I then forward it to the correct address.” Davis recommends letting your client make the decision that is best for them: “it just takes time where I have to mediate for a while.” Once they no longer need you, and reunification has been accom plished in whatever method is brought forward, your job is done.
In other cases, not everyone wants to meet the person they’ve been searching for. Davis tells us, “Sometimes, all my client is looking for is health infor mation. They don’t want to ever make direct contact themselves. Other times, a meeting might not be the end goal,
but some kind of direct communication instead.” There are multiple outcomes an investigator must be prepared for.
Biological family investigations are frus trating, emotional, but 100 percent worth the turmoil you’re going to face. Davis warns, “You must place yourself in your client’s shoes and realize this is no ordi nary search. Many emotions run deep on both sides of these investigations. Both for your client and the individual they seek to find.” Whether ending in reuni fication or not, your investigation will often lead to both parties’ closure.
It is important to handle these investiga tions with patience, empathy and abso lute thoroughness. This won’t be like any other cases you take on, and you’ll need to practice these tips to accurately find a match. Sometimes these cases can take days to months to uncover, but just as Davis says, despite the piles of research, “it is one of the most rewarding posi tions to be in.”
“For both the trespass and invasion of privacy claims, Cruz argues her claims deserve to be heard in front of a jury.”
There is currently a very sensational lawsuit playing out in a Georgia court that private investigators (PIs) every where may find of interest.
This case has it all!
A hard-charging personal injury attorney, an aggrieved plaintiff who has been “severely” harmed by the actions of an insurance company, its defense lawyers, a private investigation firm, and five private investigators individually—and a demand for, you read that right, over 13 billion dollars.
While some observers may find the amount demanded to be over the top— this case is of particular interest to private investigators because it centers on a key liability exposure that PIs face on a regular basis in their line of work: the allegation of “invasion of privacy” and “trespass.”
PIs face this risk (legal exposure) across a variety of assignments—insurance fraud investigations, fidelity investigations, corporate investigations, workplace investigations, and more. The “investi gated” party usually has every reason to get the evidence dismissed (if appli cable), lash out at the PI, and even sue— if they can.
This case (Mezquital v. American Family Insurance et al ) is a perfect example of
how an investigation assignment can go very wrong (fast!) and result in serious litigation against the private investigator, their client, and their client’s client!
But it is also instructive as a cautionary tale for PIs on what they can do, what they should avoid, and how they can protect their businesses and stay out of trouble.
Here’s the story.
In late 2012, Luisa Cruz Mezquital was driving a minivan when a Jeep Wrangler swerved into her lane, hitting her vehicle head on. Her left, dominant hand suffered a degloving injury. There was a substantial loss of skin, muscle, and nerves—leaving her hand permanently disfigured and with a limited range of motion.
American Family Insurance (AmFam), the insurer for the driver of the Jeep Wrangler, misjudged the case. They declined to settle for the policy limits of $100,000 and ended up defending their insured in front of a jury where Cruz was awarded over $30 million for general damages and medical expenses in 2014.
AmFam successfully appealed the $30 million verdict and over the next few years fought both Cruz and their own insured in court.
After fighting to throw out the initial verdict and retry the case, the law firm representing AmFam—Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell and Berkowitz (Baker Donelson)—hired Martinelli Investigations, Inc. (Martinelli) to surveil Cruz; hoping to gather information they could use in their ongoing litigation.
After being engaged by Baker Donelson, the Martinelli private investigators began an incredibly intensive surveillance oper ation over a span of three weeks. Cruz ultimately discovered that Martinelli was surveilling her and immediately called an emergency hearing with the court—demanding that Baker Donelson produce the surveillance and make the Martinelli investigators available for depositions. After emergency deposi tions and a review of the videos and photographs, it became clear the PIs had routinely been on Cruz’s private property and put GPS trackers on her car while on her property. Cruz then successfully got much of the evidence Martinelli collected thrown out by the court.
On the eve of the retrial in late 2019, after years of litigation, AmFam settled the matter with Cruz for $11 million.
The catch is that Cruz’s lawyer, Ben Brodhead of Brodhead Law, worded the “release of liability,” which Cruz signed as a condition of receiving the $11 million, in a way where Cruz did not release AmFam (or anyone) for any wrongs or damages related to the invasion of privacy or tres pass claims she was planning to bring.
The result of Brodhead’s clever release of liability is that on the same day that Cruz signed the release, Brodhead sent “pres ervation of evidence letters” to all parties related to the alleged unlawful surveil lance. A year later, Brodhead sent a demand letter to AmFam demanding $50 million to “settle the claims of invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress” related to Martinelli’s investigation tactics.
Cruz subsequently sued AmFam (the insurance company), Martinelli (the private investigation firm), and Baker Donelson (the law firm that hired the investigators), as well as five other private investigators who worked for Martinelli—alleging that all defendants committed crimes and intentional torts “with the specific intent, purpose, and result of causing severe emotional distress, fear, intimida tion, and harm” to Cruz.
Cruz’s case rests heavily on the fact that the Martinelli investigators allegedly trespassed onto her property. This stems from the fact that Cruz’s home is acces sible via a dirt road that continues on past her property but which is nonethe less included within her property lines. (See Figure 1 for an approximation of the property lines.)
The private investigators involved in the case admitted in their depositions that they had not reviewed the property lines for Cruz’s property and had assumed that the dirt road was not included in her property. They further assumed that the area of land on the other side of the dirt road opposite Cruz’s home was not her property.
These two assumptions turned out to be extremely detrimental to their investiga tion and are at the root of Cruz’s claims. Cruz argues that these allegations, if proven, “would establish that Martinelli committed multiple felonies.”
Outside of the offhand allegation that the PIs acted inappropriately by briefly surveilling Cruz’s 17-year-old son even when they knew she was not present, the core of Cruz’s lawsuit rests on the following facts:
1. The GPS trackers placed on Cruz’s vehicles were installed on her private property;
2. Martinelli investigators unlawfully trespassed onto Cruz’s property and installed a Spypoint Link-Dark “trail cam” on a tree located on her private property that could allegedly see into the windows of her residence; and
3. Martinelli investigators routinely ventured onto her private property to capture additional surveillance, swap out GPS tracker batteries, and retrieve SD cards from the trail cam.
It’s worth noting that in Georgia, unlike the majority of U.S. states, the use of GPS vehicle trackers by PIs is not illegal per se. Private investigators are allowed to use GPS vehicle trackers but they have to be installed when the vehicle is on public property. The fact that the PIs admitted to placing the trackers on the vehicles when they were located within Cruz's property lines is what makes their actions problematic. Due to the amount of driving that Cruz was doing on a daily basis, the PIs ventured onto her prop erty to swap out batteries on the GPS trackers multiple times during the three week investigation.
Cruz was able to effectively implicate both Baker Donelson and AmFam in the private investigators’ actions, in part, by discovering an email from a senior attorney at AmFam which was sent to the law firm with the following instruc tion for the PIs: “We need to have them do whatever they need to do to get a visual on her. Have them follow the van or do whatever else they can.”
This suggests “direct involvement in a criminal scheme, not merely [a] passive role in hiring a subcontractor,” Cruz argues.
Cruz posits that the PIs trespassed on her real and personal property. In their initial depositions, the PIs attempted to justify their actions by pointing out that there were no posted “No Trespassing” signs, there were no signs that indicated entry was forbidden, and that no one confronted them or otherwise informed them that entry was forbidden.
Answering these defenses, a key distinc tion Cruz makes is that there is a differ ence between wandering onto someone’s property when going for a walk, for example, and entering someone’s prop-
erty to surveil them, installing a trail cam pointed right at their house, installing GPS trackers on their vehicles (on their private property), and repeat edly returning to the private property for additional surveillance and to service said GPS trackers and a trail camera.
In this way, Cruz’s trespass claims go beyond the PIs merely entering the prop erty, but extend to the placing of the GPS trackers on the vehicle and the other activities that occurred on her property. These actions were unlawful, and in the case of installing GPS trackers on private land, constitute felonies, according to Cruz. But aside from being criminal violations, these actions entitle Cruz to bring a civil claim—the argument goes.
In February 2022, perhaps at the urging of Cruz’s counsel in an effort to bolster the “criminal” aspect of the case, the local county Sheriff’s office issued arrest warrants for three of the private inves tigators related to the alleged unlawful surveillance in this case.
There is long established precedent in Georgia, as well as throughout much of the United States, that plaintiffs bringing a personal injury lawsuit necessarily expose themselves to scrutiny. For example, the Georgia Court of Appeals has held that “[by] making a claim for personal injury, [a plaintiff] must expect reasonably inquiry and investigation.” And that a plaintiff’s “right to privacy... is waived by one who files an action for damages resulting from a tort to the extent of the defendant’s intervening right to investigate and ascertain for himself the true state of the injury.”
AmFam, Baker Donelson, as well as the Martinelli defendants cite this case law to justify their actions.
However, Cruz’s answer is that there necessarily has to be a “bright line” on such activities. Specifically, a plaintiff making a personal injury claim doesn’t lose ALL
rights to privacy—and even the courts have specified that investigations must be “reasonable.”
Cruz’s rebuttal reads: “For them, it is reasonable for investigators in a personal injury case to go onto someone’s property and install a camera and tracking devices that afford the defendant round-the-clock images and information that could not be gleaned from any public place. This argument invites sequential victimiza tion of injured parties without any possi bility of refuge. It is not reasonable to require injured parties to forfeit all property and privacy interests [emphasis added] to seek redress for their inju ries. Baker Donelson’s argument to the contrary is radical and a marked depar ture from foundational norms of the civil justice system.”
Cruz’s lawsuit was filed in July 2021 and so far, her case has survived multiple “Motions to Dismiss” filed by the defen dants. For both the trespass and invasion of privacy claims, Cruz argues her claims deserve to be heard in front of a jury.
New depositions of the private investi gators and Cruz herself are now being scheduled in the Fall of 2022. With Cruz insisting on a jury trial, it will be inter esting to see if this case will be tried publicly in front of a jury or if it will be settled for a confidential amount on the eve of the trial like Cruz’s last case.
A big part of Cruz’s $13 billion demand is based on her request for punitive damages from all defendants—including a demand from $12.2 billion for AmFam “to punish and to deter like or similar conduct.”
Isaac Peck, President of OREP Insurance, a national provider of liability insurance for private investigators nationwide, says that this case provides a good example of how things done “out of sight” often come to light. “PIs, especially those doing surveillance work, may assume that their actions or activities may never come
to light—that nobody will ever ask ques tions. But as this case demonstrates, Cruz very quickly asked the judge for an emergency hearing and subpoenaed the PIs’ photographs and video, as well as called them in for depositions. Given the fact that the photos and video had already been turned in to the client (AmFam and Baker Donelson), even if the PIs had tried to conceal what they had done, it was unavoidable that Cruz would discover that they had trespassed on her property,” Peck points out.
Hal Humphreys, Director of Instruction at PIEducation.com and Executive Editor at Pursuit Magazine (PursuitMag.com), was careful not to pass judgment when asked about the case. “It’s easy to look at a case after the fact—and hindsight is always 20/20. I wasn’t there and I want to be clear that I don’t think it’s fair for us to quarterback what was surely a diffi cult investigation,” Humphreys said.
Humphreys does offer some general advice for investigators as it relates to surveillance and being careful to avoid tres passing on private property.
First, private investigators should always attempt to research property lines when they’re doing surveillance of a personal residence or are doing an investigation that might place them anywhere near private property. “In many cases, an investigator can go online and visit the county tax assessor’s website where the subject is located and pull up the subject’s property. In this particular case, the county assessor’s website actually shows a map that includes an aerial photo with property boundaries. It is available to the public and I didn’t have to login or register to pull it up,” says Humphreys.
So first and foremost, Humphreys recom mends checking property lines. “It’s very easy to do and PIs doing surveillance work need to be mindful of it. This is especially true if you’re installing hidden cameras as part of your work, but can apply to regular surveillance jobs as well. The last thing you want is to be hit with a trespassing claim. I get heartburn about
installing trail cameras on private property personally. If you’ve done the research on where the property line is, then you might be able to approach the neighbor and get permission to put a camera up. I’ve done that before and got the neighbor to send me an email granting me permission,” Humphreys says.
If you end up avoiding private property, then you might have to put something in a public right-of-way. “There are very reputable companies that can sell you cameras that look like utility boxes, fake locks, fake rocks, and so on. In my state, AT&T owns the telephone poles, so you need to be careful about that too. If you install a camera on that pole, you’re still installing it on AT&T’s private prop erty. My personal rule is I don’t install cameras without getting permission,” Humphreys advises.
Being intimately familiar with the laws in your state is also key, according to Humphreys. “State laws can vary widely by state and GPS tracker placement is a great example of that. Depending on the type of work you’re doing, it might make sense to have an attorney you work with that you can put on some kind of retainer so they can give you legal advice. In some cases, I’ve even asked my attorney to write a letter citing case law so I’ve got some legal opinion on why it's OK for me to do certain things, etc.,” Humphreys reports.
Lastly, Humphreys says this is an impor tant reminder about the risks associ ated with the work. “My home state of Tennessee does not require PIs to carry liability insurance and many states are similar. But this is the perfect example of why I carry insurance. Even if these guys were 100 percent in the right and they win the case, they’ve been named in the lawsuit and it’s going to cost a lot to just defend it. Having insurance is absolutely key,” Humphreys argues. Stay safe out there!
This is a developing story—To receive the latest PI news and information, please visit WorkingPImag.com.
A quick Google search on “signs of infidelity” returns no fewer than 200,000 hits for how to spot a cheating spouse , how to tell if he’s stepping out, or ways to tell if he’s got a new lover. These lists are almost always the same: new perfume, new interest in phys ical appearance, secretive phone calls, mysterious expenditures, etc.
If you’ve ever had reason to perform that particular Google search, you know the feeling: it’s that little kernel of doubt that sneaks into a marriage and destroys confidence, trust, and peace. Maybe it presents itself in small doses, meting out insecurity in infinitesimal portions. Maybe it walks into the room and screams.
Either way, those lurking unknowns and suspicions fuel a growing unease that can rapidly escalate to anxiety, stress, or even a sort of mental paral ysis. And the cheater experiences a form of anxiety as well as the stress that accompanies the need to lie to maintain a façade of normalcy.
Anxiety is a byproduct of fear, and fear of the unknown is, perhaps, the most distressing variety. Anxiety closes down the thinking brain and activates the body-protecting lizard brain—the reacting brain. As Gregory Hartley puts it in his book, How to Spot a Liar, philan derers are “brokers of anxiety.” When a
person thinks his spouse is cheating on him, he receives a jolt to his idea of self and his frame of reference.
We organize our idea of self by assem bling input from others and various situations. Our frame of reference, our view of the outside world, is prejudiced by experience. When one suspects infidelity, both self and frame of reference are questioned. Confusion and emotion take charge. Anxiety rents space in the brain.
When people have affairs, they lie to maintain their cover. Big and small nontruths leak out in a sludge of constant
“Our frame of reference, our view of the outside world, is prejudiced by experience. When one suspects infidelity, both self and frame of reference are questioned.”
mendacity. From hiding credit card receipts to sneaking off to the back porch for late-night small talk via cell phone, every aspect of a deceptive person’s life is caught up in half-truths, fabrication, and deceit.
And when someone tells a lie, he places himself under stress. He lives in constant fear of discovery.
When the mammalian body perceives a threat, the sympathetic nervous system takes over and kick-starts the body’s “fight-or-flight” response. Blood is routed away from the face and skin to the muscles. Blood is diverted away from the digestive tract. The bladder no longer has the ability to contract and expel waste. The liver floods the bloodstream with glucose, preparing for physical activity. Heart rate and respiration increase and nostrils flare, offering the lizard brain a heavy dose
of oxygenated blood. Metabolism is heightened, sweating intensifies. Pupils dilate to collect as much data about the threat as possible. Gregory Hartley calls this “your mind at war.” The outward signs are always visible, if sometimes only in minute forms. The stressed person’s hands may shake. His complexion may appear pallid. His mouth and lips dry out—a result of dramatically reduced blood flow. Mucosa shrink, leading to pale thin lips and drooping lower eyelids. The brow clinches and draws downward. Shoulders draw tight in preparation for defense. Elbows are in, close to the rib cage in a defensive posture.
Inside, the stressed person feels jittery, hypersensitive. A lack of blood in the digestive system makes the person feel a sensation of butterflies in the stomach; he may even feel nausea. With the heart racing blood away from the skin, the anxious person feels a high core temper ature and cool skin—that clammy feel-
ing. His focus becomes narrow and his sense of hearing is directed at the source of the threat. He hears his own heartbeat. His mind reverts to a prim itive state, and emotions work their way involuntarily to the fore. The person under stress often becomes defen sive, argumentative, and emotional.
These systems turn on at the cost of rational thought, leading to what Seth Godin calls “lizard brain.” Irrationality is the rule at this point.
There’s a simple way to eliminate this kind of stress: Do not cheat. Alternative solution: stop telling lies.
In one case last year, we were hired by a woman’s attorney to document a philandering husband’s activities. We placed him under heavy surveillance— three cars and four investigators. We
documented the man’s every move, dates, picnics, overnight visits, etc. Confronted with his lies, the man took an unusual tack, opting to eliminate his ongoing stress and simply carry on the affair in the open. He even brought his new girlfriend to a meeting at the attorney’s office. He thereby removed the burden of a lie, and his stress level seemed to drop. From a purely prac tical perspective, this wasn’t a bad call.
Ending the affair is always the best solution. But coming clean about an affair can at least remove the deceit variable from the equation and, along with it, some of the accompa nying stress. And it might even allow the dallier to regain access to rational thought, which just might lead to more productive discourse.
Simple solution: Remove the unknown.
Again, anxiety is a byproduct of fear, often fear of the unknown. Do not guess.
Do not assume. Anxiety leads to “lizard brain,” and in that state, irrationality becomes the rule.
Shakespeare didn’t need to under stand the sympathetic nervous system to recognize it at work on the human rational mind. He sketched this lizardbrain descent from suspicion to anxiety to madness (to brilliant effect) in his 1603 play Othello, in which a man desperately in love with his wife allows his unwarranted suspicions to prompt a series of escalating irrational acts, ending in tragedy—the old one-two punch of murder-suicide, always, unfor tunately, performed in that order.
Though potentially painful, it is always best to eliminate the unknown. Once a person has the facts…once he elim inates the unknown, he can remove anxiety, and (potentially) act rationally.
I’m not trying to sell you on surveil lance. Before you ever call a PI, consider having a heart-to-heart with your
spouse. Because if you can’t trust each other, what’s left?
For the cheating spouse: Gregory Hartley says, “You will simplify your life enormously if you eliminate complete fabrication from your repertoire.” Simply put, stop lying and placing yourself under needless stress.
For the spouse who fears a partner is having an affair: get the facts. Consider hiring a competent and qualified investigator to learn those facts on your behalf. Find out what’s really happening, then act rationally from a place of knowledge and power.
Reprinted
The READI Rapid Response team provides on-demand private investigator services to auto and trucking accidents, workplace violence, internal investigations, and other major incidents.
When a situation arises, READI Response gathers timely evidence needed by our clients.
Sign Up Today and get assignments from leading corporate clients and insurance companies.
“GL policies typically exclude any bodily injury, property damage, and personal injury claims that arise from professional services.”
As a nationwide provider of liability insurance for private investigators (PIs), one question that I regularly hear from our current and prospective insureds is: What’s the difference between General Liability insurance and E&O insurance?
One investigator I spoke to a few months ago knew what general liability would cover, but questioned why a PI would even need coverage for E&O (errors and omissions). “What types of claims could a PI face where they would need to have E&O coverage, as opposed to just basic General Liability?,” he queried.
Here’s a quick comparison of the two types of insurance.
General Liability Insurance: This is what most private investigators purchase and this coverage is actually required in a number of states. General liability (GL) covers you primarily for bodily injury and property damage (BIPD) claims. In other words, if it is alleged that someone got hurt or property was damaged because of your actions, then the GL policy covers you.
GL also typically covers “Personal and Advertising Injury,” which includes coverage for libel, slander, and certain instances of invasion of privacy. It can also provide coverage for an insured’s tools and equipment, as well as property in the insured’s “care, custody, and control.”
GL is carried by most physical profes sions (security guards, contractors, elec tricians, etc) as well as most retail shops (Little Caesars, Walgreens, etc)—being the core coverage that defends against the classic “slip and fall” lawsuits we see against retail establishments.
Errors and Omissions (E&O) Insurance: E&O insurance, also known as professional liability insurance, covers you for mistakes—errors and omissions (E&O) that you make in your profes sional capacity as a private investigator. In other words, a mistake in the services provided. This type of insurance is very common for providers of professional services, including lawyers, doctors, real
estate appraisers, architects, engineers, and so on.
So what are some scenarios where a private investigator would need Errors & Omissions coverage?
Here are two examples we’ve seen in recent lawsuits against investigators: Preservation of Evidence: An accident investigation firm was hired to investi gate an explosion on a drilling rig and a fire at a thrift store. In both cases, the PI firm “failed to preserve the evidence,” causing their clients to be found guilty of “spoilation of evidence” and severely prejudicing their clients ability to defend themselves. The PI firm was subsequently sued.
Negligence: This is a broad claim and we’ve seen suits that range across the spectrum, including (A) overpromising the outcome of services, (B) failing to report important information in an in-
vestigation, (C) reporting incorrect infor mation in an investigation, and/or (D) performing poorly in an investigation. If a poor, incomplete, or inaccurate inves tigation causes financial (or emotional) harm to a client or any stakeholder, the PI may have a liability exposure relating to their professional services, i.e. E&O insurance exposure.
One caveat: GL policies typically exclude any bodily injury, property damage, and personal injury claims that arise from professional services. This highlights the necessity for PIs to carry both GL and E&O coverages.
The good news is that most leading providers of investigator liability insurance (including OREP) are offering a single policy that has both of these key cover ages built-in, removing the need for PIs to purchase two separate policies.
However, this is still something you need
to be careful about. Many insurtech plat forms, as well as brokers without suffi cient experience servicing investigators, simply offer a basic General Liability policy to PIs—not understanding how this creates a significant liability expo sure for you and your business.
If you ever have any questions about liability insurance or investigator risk management, or if you’d like a second set of eyes on your insurance policy, please contact us at OREP.org. Stay safe out there!
Opt-In for the Digital New at WorkingPImag.com
The latest news, right to your inbox twice a month.
“It is the one with the highest degree of protections in place that has your best interests in mind .”
C
ase management software plays a critical part in determining the effi ciency of your business. It is the foun dation underpinning the rest of your operations. Without a solid program, your business may be operating at a snail’s pace and costing thousands of dollars in a loss of productivity.
A good assessment of your software should include the following areas: Outdated Software: There have been substantial changes in our society over the past decade. Computer hardware and software have seen incredible advancements. E-mail, once a rarity, has replaced the need for a personal letter. Blogs, Facebook®, Snapchat®, Twitter®, text messaging and blogging are now a common media for communicating; and cellular phones have been adopted as the primary American telephone.
A database system designed five years ago will be unable to manage modern needs such as e-forwarding and e-filing. As our high-tech world advances, pro-
cess servers and private investigators must stay on top of the trend to provide a high level of service. Ideally, any data base package a private investigator or process server utilizes should be actively growing to meet the constantly changing nature of the legal industry. Is your software provider on the leading edge of technology or does it merely copy advancements and play “catchup?” Remember that antique furniture is nice to have but antique computer software is unsustainable.
Poor User Interface/Site Architecture: The site architecture should provide an easy flow of well-organized data throughout the program. A software program can have an unlimited amount of functionality. However, what good are those features if they are not readily accessible, or you must continually read a manual to operate them? Ease of oper ation is a mainstay of a good program.
Take a hard look at the design of the private investigator/process server soft-
ware when comparing products. Functionality is not the key to a good program. It must be designed in such a way to be functional AND user friendly. A layout that is hard on the eyes, requires excessive numbers of clicks and page loads are all “red flags.” A bad user interface will certainly cost you a bunch of dollars in the long run. Your staff will be wasting countless numbers of hours reading manuals and calling customer service instead of sailing through a user-friendly program.
Lack of Backup System: The legal field is demanding and conflict-oriented. Information is time sensitive and, in most cases, confidential. Your software program's storage and retrieval capa bilities are essential aspects of internal security and customer satisfaction. The loss of critical data is one of the worst things that can happen to you. So, bear in mind how often a backup of your data occurs.
Some private investigator/process server managers fail to incorporate a solid plan of action regarding the backup of sensitive data. Many of these companies simply do not employ a backup system at all. In the event of a hard drive crash, these companies are often left with nothing. Unfortunately for many process servers, the need for a backup system is often not apparent until it is too late.
Others believe that it is best to backup their data on their own servers, i.e., a manual backup. This is a fallacy and can lead to monumental problems in the future. A company that undertakes this task simply sets a schedule and has an employee or part-time computer person manually copy the database in prepa ration for an anticipated loss of data. Unfortunately, this process can be coun terproductive if not managed correctly.
Reputable software providers have a solid plan regarding data backup incorporated into their program. It is a seamless operation that should not cost the end user any additional monies. The backup should occur in the wee hours of the night to a remote location separate and apart from the main server envi ronment offering you peace of mind, protection, and cost effectiveness.
Your software company should provide you with access to your data 24/7 via the cloud AND an archiving function ality. Archiving allows you to harvest your data from the software program. Whether daily, quarterly, or annually, it is of critical importance to have care, custody, and control of YOUR data! Remember that not all private investiga tors are technically oriented and not all programmers understand the investigation business. Consider leaving task specific jobs to the experts. It is not the best idea to “have all your eggs in one basket!”
Inadequate or Lack of Security: Most everyone has heard the real estate phrase: “Location, Location, Location!” In the computer industry that equates to: “Security, Security, Security!” Your data must be
secure from unauthorized encroaching eyes and alien keystrokes for that matter. The protection of your clients’ data is paramount. Therefore, you must focus on eliminating potential leaks and secu rity breaches. Ensure that the software provider that you hire takes this task seri ously and incorporates all protections.
Be wary of where the data is stored. Is the company server located in the owners’ backyard or garage? An affir mative response should be a glaring red flag. A software provider should house their servers at a remote location that provides 24/7 monitored security, both by CCTV surveillance and human presence. Limited access to the server rooms must be contained by a series of locked doors within a safe perimeter. You want an onsite expert monitoring the server around the clock. Why compromise your security with a company whose only protocol is to have the owner wake up in the middle of the night and walk to the garage or fire up a laptop from home to investigate a problem?
The database security system of a program must encompass a sound level of protection. As technology evolves, the sophistication of protection and the skill level of hackers increases. Many older databases are built on systems that can be easily compromised. For instance, password protections can be manually disabled with password recovery tools in the retail market. There are also minimal user access variations in the older programs which limit the goal of secure accessibility. Some of these older data base systems may not be able to employ variable access points. Thus, the inves tigator manager is forced to limit access to one or two closely trusted employees/ contractors. Field personnel and clients should each have their own entry point with limited data being exposed.
Let us be realistic though, no computer programmer can ensure complete protection of your data. However, it is the one with the highest degree of protec tions in place that has your best inter ests in mind.
Import/Export Modules: Many data base systems fall within the category of “write-only.” Enormous amounts of data can be input; however, it is cumber some or even impossible to retrieve and use the desired information. Contemporary programmers realize that end users require speed and a competitive edge in our age of acceleration. Private investigator/process server software should provide state-of-the-art tech nology with a user-friendly context. At a minimum, the program should employ import and export options so the data transfer can be easily prolif erated. The import/export function ality must include a marketing option, server/client data center and paper less e-forwarding mechanisms built into the program. Review the method ology of transferring data electronically when analyzing process server software programs. As the e-filing phenomenon rushes in, you won’t be left holding the hardware wishing you had a true web-based software program to handle the needs of a technological revolution in the service of process.
Sticking with the Status Quo Bear in mind this adage: “Business is business and friendship is friend ship.” That is an accurate statement that will run the course of time. Just because others are using a partic ular program does not make it the best product for your growing busi ness. You must consider and anticipate future technological advancements and the needs of your industry. Failing to adopt this mentality will lead to certain disaster for your business. Jumping on board is not always wise because everyone else is in the same boat. When that boat sinks, will you and all the others that fail to envision the winds of change be on it?
While switching investigator/process server database systems can be scary, a problematic database is far more worri some. By carefully evaluating your options, you may be able to solve substan tive problems, save significant amounts of time and avoid a future crisis.
Delivering the latest news, information,
25,000
Working PI is the only
you the top stories and breaking news from across the country—available
all PIs
MAKE
no charge in print and online!
print issue
No
does
way we do.
“In criminal cases, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, unless it is a 'he said, she said' case.”
Most people believe “Innocent Until Proven Guilty” is a part of the U.S. Constitution. However, it’s not in those exact words. The Bill of Rights and the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments form the notion of presumed innocence, by establishing that no person be compelled to speak against himself, the right to a speedy trial and public trial by an impartial jury, and the right to due process of law. If you want to see the words “Innocent Until Proven Guilty” you will need to go here:
Article 11 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the
right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.”
It wasn’t until March 4, 1895, where presumed innocence over presumed guilt was cited as the starting point in the Coffin, literally. Coffin et al. v United States established the presumption of innocence for our courts to this day. We are used to the concept of presumed innocence in our modern-day courts, where the prosecution must work to prove a person’s guilt. This range of legal clauses, otherwise known as “due process,” is designed to protect us if we are falsely accused of a criminal act.
As a Licensed Private Investigator,
I primarily work in the Criminal Defense arena. As a Criminal Defense Investigator, my job is not to “make a guilty man innocent or an innocent man guilty,” but to gather facts and provide all the information the defense attorney needs to best represent his client and advise his client of the options that face them. As the defense investigator, specializing in Crimes Against Children cases (among others), it is my job to turn every stone that can possibly be turned. If I do my job correctly and thoroughly, and the accused is found guilty by trial, he or she will preserve their right for an appeal, but the likelihood of retrying
the case will be slim. If the accused is truly innocent, I pray that no innocent man spend one day of their life in prison, and my investigation will help their attorney to prove that.
As a former law enforcement officer, it was much easier to get people to talk to me, or at least to gain traction in my investigations with witnesses, suspects, and victims. I had the law on my side, as well as the powers of arrest and subpoena. Now, as a private investigator, I don’t enjoy those powers. I must use the power of my charming personality, quick thinking, and persuasive argument to win people over. Often, it is tough to get a witness to care enough to speak out. I tell them, “Think about the situation if you were in the other person’s shoes, and there was only one witness who knew the truth to keep you from going to jail. You would want that person to speak up, right?” Sometimes that works, but there are still many people who say, “Yes, but I have a job and can’t take time off” or some other baseless excuse.
Can you imagine, when it is a “Crimes Against Children” case, that this is the response I get? As soon as a potential witness realizes what the charge is, they immediately throw up a wall. You can read the judgmental attitude as they are thinking, “If they are really innocent, no one would accuse them of something like that.” An investigator must be extremely skilled in the art of communication to get those kinds of witnesses to talk. Sometimes, I am able to help them understand I am not there to manipulate anyone into saying something they don’t want to or to twist the meaning of their words. Other times, I get the door slammed in my face.
That is only one of the many issues with these cases that inhibit the ability of a defendant to obtain a fair trial. Gathering witness statements, and willing witnesses to speak at a trial is critical. The next hurdle is trying to approach and speak to the complainant.
Some people automatically call the complainant the victim. I started off with the same mindset, until I was able to get my thinking process straight enough to remember that not all complainants are truly victims. Some are mere accusers. In Crimes Against Children cases, the complainant or victim is a child, or at least was a child at the time they said a crime occurred. If the complainant is a child, it is appropriate to first go to the parents to obtain their consent to interview them. Most parents immediately try to shield their child from speaking to anyone from the defense side, because they want the accused perpetrator to fry!
Many parents are told by the prosecutor that they should not speak to anyone other than those from the prosecutor’s office. The prosecutor is not allowed to tell them they cannot speak to anyone else, but their warning insinuates that. The defense investigator should absolutely tell the parent who they are and why they want to speak to and interview the child, parents, or any other family members who may be witnesses. If they don’t inform them of their true purpose, the person could unsafely assume that the investigator is part of the prosecution team and when they learn otherwise, they will scream to the judge that the investigator misrepresented themselves. This could be disastrous for the defendant! So, the “gift of gab” and the art of persuasion, which doesn’t cross the line into coercion, is a musthave tool and talent for private investigators who conduct these types of interviews.
Another hurdle is law enforcement. I have been a police officer well over 20 years and worked these types of cases. I learned that most officers assume that a child would never lie about being sexually assaulted. It is difficult to discern the truth from a false accusation at first, and sometimes all the way through the investigation. Some people, even kids, have the manipulative ability to convince everyone of a totally made-up story. They
have the ability to tap into one’s emotions and to bring in enough truth or fact to form an incredibly convincing story.
Law enforcement officers are trained to look at the various aspects of facts in cases but sometimes, officers’ emotions get wrapped up in the cases and this can cause them to lose objectivity. The officer will then go off chasing the rabbit down a trail to prove the guilt of the suspect, rather than chase the leads that could possibly prove their innocence. If the police investigator tries to turn every stone to try to prove their innocence, and they cannot, then they have just sealed their case where no one defense could overturn the charge. When an officer or investigator is not objective and only tries to prove guilt, they have created an injustice. Officers don’t mean to be a part of an injustice, but losing objectivity leads to it. Yet another hurdle is the prosecutor’s office. I have walked in to see signs stating this:
“In the Criminal Division, our pros ecutors will ensure fair, impartial, and equal administration of justice, advocating for severe punish ment of dangerous and violent offenders, while preserving the rights and dignity of crime victims and their families.”
This is the mission statement of the Clermont County, Ohio Prosecutor’s office. Notice, that they state they are impartial, however, we often find that Prosecutors and DAs seem to be in a numbers game. They want to show they are “tough on crime” and tout an 85 percent conviction rate so that they can win the next election. I have realized, after leaving law enforcement as my full-time career, that justice doesn’t always seem to be the goal of the District Attorney’s office. I always believed, as a police officer, that the "justice system would sort it out” line that I heard from other officers was true. I believed there were further investigations by the DA’s office to help prove or disprove a case, but I personally overheard a prosecutor screaming in anger that my client
better take the deal, or she would work to bury him. This DA knew that there were four different stories about how the allegation occurred, but that didn’t matter to them. They wanted a deal for a conviction. They wanted the conviction so badly, knowing their case was so bad, that they offered the defendant, charged with Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child, a Class A Assault charge, non-sexual, time served. The defendant was so terri fied that he might be found guilty, that he accepted the plea. I, on the other hand, was the investigator who found several witnesses who told other versions of the teen complainant’s story, and all the close-friend witnesses were sure that she made it up.
The defendant was young, but not igno rant. He realized jurors were likelier to believe the child on the stand than him. The child was a fourteen-year-old black female, and the defendant was, by the
time the case went to trial, a 19-year-old black male. He was accused of raping this then 12-year-old girl in the back seat of his car. The truth was, he met the girl in the Wal-Mart parking lot, and she asked him for his number because she was unable to give her number to him. She began calling him and after lots of “phone tag” they spoke two or three times over the phone only.
He wondered why she was never able to meet him at the movie theater until he learned she lied to him about her age. She told him she was 15 years old at the time, while he was only 17 years old. He was shocked! He didn’t own a car or even have a driver’s license to borrow a car. He walked to work and to his college class every day. He never met up with her after giving her his phone number! The defendant felt that the jury would see this cute young girl and automatically believe her because
no one lies about these cases. BUT THEY DO! Not often, but occasionally people have ill motives. In this case, the girl was lacking familial attention. She said as much to her close friends.
The bottom line is this. In criminal cases, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty unless it is a “he said, she said” case. The accuser is most likely to be believed. In Crimes Against Children cases, you must prove the defendant’s innocence, or they are going to prison. It was somewhat shocking when I learned that there are innocent people in prison and that there are injustices in our justice system. As a law enforcement officer, I thought most police officers were impar tial like I was, and worked hard to find the truth, but I had to face the fact that many officers and attorneys are lazy or allow their emotions to get in the way of justice. But if I do my job right, then justice is more likely to be served!
Each issue of Working PI magazine features an industry professional specializing in a unique service that may help your firm. Working PI sat down with Amy Ward, Principal Investigator and CEO of Investigative Results for this issue to learn about her story as a PI and the value her team brings to the industry.
“I joined the army when I was 17, then got my bachelor’s degree in criminal justice and my associate’s degree as a paralegal. In 2007 my friend hired a private investigator, so I immediately picked his brain and became interested in the industry. I already had all of the requirements, so I jumped at the first opportunity to work for a PI agency. In 2008 I started my own private investigation business working in retail loss prevention, and that’s where I began my career with Sears, BestBuy, and Walmart. I soon realized what I do best—talking and listening to people during the interview process.”
“I primarily conduct interview-based investigations in fraud, criminal defense, capital murder cases, and federal and state background investigations. I specialize in witness locates and client interviews. I discovered during insurance investigations that people found it very easy to talk with me. I think it’s because I’m a woman. People feel comfortable with me—they tend to open up quickly.”
“Attorneys don’t realize the value of an investigator— they have an exhaustive discovery process. I can shorten their workload by properly vetting witnesses. I summarize information for attorneys, allowing them to be more productive in other areas. When you hire me, you are buying time to do the things that demand your expertise.”
“Always be curious and never quit. Talk to your colleagues and establish a support network around you. You need to work hard as a PI, and sometimes for free. If you're starting your own business, you’re not going to get a paycheck for 40 hours a week. You might have to do four hours of research before you even start on a case. Be patient, work hard and keep your client’s needs ahead of your own.”
Call Amy Ward at (254) 319-6979 or connect by email at amy@investigativeresults.com. Learn more about Investigative Results at investigativeresults.com
Broad coverage should never be optional, according to Isaac Peck, Senior Insurance Broker at OREP. “If you want to do the best for yourself, your family and your business, be sure to choose a profes sional insurance policy that will protect you adequately should the unexpected happen,” Peck says. “A broad policy covers you for the threats that you can anticipate as well as the unexpected ones that you don’t see coming.” The PI Shield Program offered by OREP includes General Liability with E&O (errors and omissions) coverage endorsed onto the policy—giving private investigators both cover ages in a single policy. Additionally, it includes coverage for armed PIs—an important coverage that is excluded by many PI policies in the marketplace. Please ask your OREP agent for details. All mem bers enjoy these benefits: free claims assistance/risk management, a training class at no extra charge—Surveillance Strategies for Success, approved for 8 hrs of continuing education in most states (6 hours in NC), guaranteed delivery of Working PI magazine, discounts on office supplies, and more. Call OREP at (888) 347–5273 or visit OREP.org/PI. OREP Insurance Services, LLC. Calif. Lic. #0K99465.
Corporate savings is a significant cost-saving benefit of being an OREP member. Private Investigators who join OREP can save money with Office Depot, Staples, Dell, FedEx, UPS, and more. The program is free. OREP/Working PI saves over $1,000 a year on office supplies alone. A cost comparison of a typical office shopping list netted a savings on supplies of $500 ($3,500 total order). "We are saving 19% on our Verizon bill and I order all of our office supplies through the discounted Staples portal. We are taking advantage of it and truly enjoying the program." —Cynthia T. You can enjoy significant discounts on the goods and services you already use. This program is a benefit of OREP membership. For details, email subscription@workingpimag.com.
OREP members in California enjoy group access to several medi cal plans, including certain Kaiser Permanente and Blue Anthem plans. The group plans provide benefits not available to individu als and at no extra cost. Those who purchase their medical coverage through the OREP group plan, also enjoy a $10,000 life insurance policy included at no extra cost. The policy, written through Mutual of Omaha, is guaranteed-issue without any exclusion for medical condi tions and pays double in the event of an accidental death and dismem berment (AD&D). Also included is the New Dental Choice Special Discount Plan that gives you significant discounts of 15–60 percent for dental services. There is no cost above the medical plan itself for these services, including expert help navigating Covered California. If you are a California resident and an OREP member email info@orep.org for more information.
