A few weeks back, I gave an intensive two-day training course for private investigators at a New York City-based investigative firm. The course was called Gathering, Analyzing and Interpreting Internet Intelligence – Master Class (I totally stole the “Master Class” from my friend Eli Rosenblatt). It was an exhaustive look into how to gather and interpret information from open sources and public records (if you want to learn more about that, email me).
Teaching and learning are things I love to do. And I have come to learn over the years that I have a unique set of knowledge and a unique viewpoint, having worked with some of the best investigative firms in the world.
So here are a few lessons I came away with.
Education Is a Lifelong Commitment
While many states have requirements for obtaining a private investigator license (although a few states don’t have any licensing requirements), there is no standard “course” to become educated in conducting investigations, especially when it comes to searching open sources and public records, which happen to be some of the most critical sources of information for investigators these days. And very few states have any continuing education requirements.
While many private investigators are former law enforcement officers, they may not have training in gathering information without access to their old law enforcement tools. Other private investigators who enter the field come from all walks of life, with varied backgrounds and no formal training in anything.
This produces a diverse group of people with a varying knowledge base. For the end client, it creates a confusing set of standards, ethics and knowledge regarding investigative firms. Why does this background check cost $100 at one firm and $5,000 at another? Why does one firm say they can get bank records, while the other says that is not legal?
Investigators with a lack of any formal training and limited (good) resources learn through a varied system of “work by doing” and learning from colleagues, and a system of institutional knowledge is created and rarely shared. It’s a shame.
In order to stay current and relevant, you need to educate yourself.
[You can start by taking Eli Rosenblatt’s new course, Social Media & Background Investigation Master Class 2015.]
Tricks Are for Kids
There is an infectious disease in the investigative community called IANGSAS, or more commonly known as I Am Not Going to Share Any Secrets. It’s pervasive, but easily treatable.
In all seriousness, investigators like to hold things close to the vest. Sharing their “tricks” or “secrets” is akin to providing keys to the vault. While sharing investigative techniques may be more common with your own small group of colleagues, it is rarely done widely. The truth is that most tricks have been used by many investigators and are not tricks at all; they have probably been used by hundreds before you.
Tricks also get old. I was reminded of this while preparing for the training course. I had learned some “secrets” on how to hack Facebook a few months back while working on a case, only to find that Facebook had inexplicably removed those features and the secrets were completely useless.
However, a funny thing happens when you start sharing your secrets – people might share a secret or two with you. Or do you a favor when you need it most. Sharing is caring.
Understanding the Nuts and Bolts Is Critical
The nuts and bolts of conducting investigations through open sources are absolutely critical. Understanding what information you can obtain (or, more important, can’t obtain), how to get the information and where the information comes from provide a foundation for all investigators. Most investigators know how to run a name through a database, but they don’t actually know what they are searching, how the information is obtained or whether or not it’s complete or accurate.
The Science and the Art
I can teach everything I know about how I go about my investigations (the science), but the mindset of an investigator is something that is much harder to develop (the art). You can provide just about anyone with a checklist of things to do, and they will do it. But understanding and interpreting that information takes practice.
One person may look at a UCC filing with crossed eyes, while an experienced investigator may see it as a source for hidden assets (hint: check the collateral), bank relationships or possibly real estate ownership (shares in a cooperative apartment).
The collision of the art and the science is where all the magic happens.
It just takes some time, experience and training to get there.
Hi,
Ive read this article with great interest. Here in the UK you may of heard about the recent phone hacking scandal. As so many prominent figures have been targeted there are calls to finally license the industry here. Unfortunately from my experience that wont solve anything. The people who trade illegal information are merely data brokers, not investigators, and make their money doing such. In my opinion what makes a good investigator, is not just getting the results, but getting evidence that stands up in court.
It is difficult to educate yourself in the UK, many courses are developed by ex-police, yet our civil laws vary hugely from the criminal ones.
I do think that continual professional development is key to sustaining a long successful career. and long term the results will show.
Brian you set a great example for all investigators to follow. Would appricate any info on any class you give in the future
Hi Brian,
I very much support and adhere to you mindset of sharing information. However, I rarely see that effort reciprocated. So I’m not looking for it and I am pleasanly surprised when it occurs. I have a passion for my work, much of which is helping people. I would be interested in attending one of your courses. Please keep me apprised as to when your having your next one as I’m always looking to improve my skills and understanding, I learn something new everyday, which is what really makes investigation exciting.
I have used a few assett search contractors, but have found that as a rule they don’t check their work, so the value of what they produce is littered with inacurracies. This was an expensive lesson in the human condition in my never ending search for companies that care about the quality of their product which are few and far bewtween. Unfortunately, once again greed takes presidence.
Dave Small
Thought I would mention a recent post on LinkedIn about an “asset search contractor” (as you so nicely put it!) named Eddie who will get you real-time bank balance information and salary history as well. Shameful stuff, in my opinion. I know of zero way to get this information in an appropriate manner. I can get a salary approximation, if I know the precise job, and that should be more-than-good enough for my clients. Detailed bank balance information obtained legally? Forget it. These people tar the profession. I wish there were more investigators like Brian who are raising the image.
I particularly like your stance towards sharing information. I share most if not all of what I know on a particular topic on the LinkedIn boards. Why not? I’m not that smart, so it’s not as if I have some methods that are truly earth shattering. And, as you say, perhaps it will encourage others to share too – and then I will learn something. I recently learned a lot about obtaining bank information and credit reports from one of your topic threads. I am now convinced that getting credit reports – without authorization from the subject or a court order – is illegal in most situations. I am also convinced that the data brokers buy their bank information mainly from ChexSystems and TeleCheck. I am convinced that they also use credit reports to get this information. I am not convinced that this approach towards vacuuming banking information is entirely legal.
I would not use these brokers nor sanction any of my attorney-clients using them.
Even if their methods were entirely on the up-and-up, the information the brokers obtain is – by definition – not very helpful. Most of the kind of bank accounts that will show up on TeleCheck and/or ChexSystems are ones that are now closed or have hardly any money in them or were never opened in the first place.
Attorneys and other clients would be much better off paying the $250-450 these brokers demand to a local investigator instead – who will do high quality OSINT and ground-level investigative work to find an active bank account that might even have a substantial balance in it.
Sharing is caring. ;)