Photo by Nicolas Halftermeyer (Own work), via Wikimedia Commons
Today’s private investigators seem to have it pretty easy compared to those of the past — cell phones, security cameras, and social media accounts are often used to obtain evidence for investigations. Gone are the days when private eyes had to flip through physical documents and phone directories, or find the location of someone with an actual map. And now, thanks to the advancements in drone technology, some investigators are opting to do away with physical surveillance.
A drone, or unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), is a remote controlled aircraft. Although they have been around for several years, flying personal UAVs is a relatively new hobby. These small crafts have been all over the media lately, even earning the endorsement of Martha Stewart. Like Stewart, many people use drones to take beautiful aerial photos. The market for drones is constantly expanding, and tech companies are keeping pace. Some drones can record a live feed, detect heat, or are small enough to fit in the palm of one’s hand. Others can fly four several hours at a time, scanning entire cities in a day.
Due to their discreet nature, private eyes have begun using drones to catch cheating spouses or dishonest employees. Instead of observing someone on foot for hours, investigators can use a drone to get a bird’s eye view of a suspect and collect video evidence. Using a drone is also safer for an investigator and are cheaper than chartering a plane or helicopter. A recent New York Post article featured a private investigator whose specialty is drones. According to the article, the investigator had to use a drone to record evidence of insurance fraud instead of physically surveying the suspect’s property for fear of being shot.
Because of their invasive capabilities, many are questioning the ethics of drone usage, including U.S. Senator Charles Schumer. Schumer recently called for federal regulations on drones, even going as far as proposing a ban on drone usage by private investigators. The idea of anyone being able to purchase a surveillance drone and using it to record whomever and wherever they want is fairly unnerving. The use of personal drones is uncharted territory, filled with flimsy guidelines and little regulation. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) prohibits the flying of UAVs for commercial use or payment. Drones are also not permitted to fly over heavily urban areas, and must alert control towers if they fly too close to an airport (FAA Website). Even so, investigators like the one featured in the Post article are still flying their drones.
Should we start expecting to see drones tailing us as we walk down the street? Probably not.
For now, most investigators are opting to stay on the ground and stick to their tried-and-true surveillance techniques. If evidence is gathered illegally, it may lose its value in court, and a private investigator could lose their credibility.
The recent surge of undocumented children entering the United States has brought up several issues, one of which is human trafficking. With so many minors coming in unaccompanied, many are worried that the children will become victims of this growing problem. Although slavery seems to be a thing of the past, the number of trafficked humans is much larger than it was centuries ago and continues to rapidly increase worldwide. Part of the problem is lack of awareness and the disbelief that slavery could occur, especially in the Western world. “No country is immune,” warns the United Nations, “whether as a source, a destination or a transit point for victims of human trafficking.”
Trafficking Worldwide
Although the exact number of victims is unknown, researchers estimate the amount of trafficked people to be between 12.3-25 million worldwide. Some are forced into unpaid labor, working in dangerous conditions for little to no pay. Others become victims of sexual exploitation, forced to become prostitutes and earn money for a pimp. Unsurprisingly, the biggest motive for trafficking humans is money. According to experts, the total market value of human trafficking is $32 billion, with nearly a third of that amount coming from the actual sale of victims (United Nations).
Trafficking in the United States
Despite the official abolishing of slavery in 1865, thousands of people are still trafficked within the United State’s borders. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, nearly 300,000 children become victims of sexual exploitation alone. Many of them are runaways or were abducted from their homes. One in three teens are lured into prostitution within 48 hours of leaving home (National Runaway Hotline). And once a child or teenager is trafficked, especially across country or state borders, it can become much more difficult to find them .
Even though the outlook seems grim, many non-profit organizations and government agencies have begun to battle this epidemic. Recently, the FBI rescued nearly 170 child victims of sex trafficking and arrested 281 pimps (CBS News). Many of these children were never even reported missing, and could very well still be on the streets if not for the FBI’s crackdown. The Bureau’s Innocence Lost program has identified and recovered almost 3,600 children who were victims of sexual exploitation since its start in 2003.
Hiring a Private Investigator
Despite the efforts of the FBI and other agencies, around 2,300 people still go missing in the United States each day (Crime Library). Because the amount of missing persons cases is so high, many families choose to look for outside help. A private investigator will work with the family and friends of a missing person and help generate leads for law enforcement. Private eyes have the time and resources to focus on a specific case, and those that have experience finding missing children know what signs to look for. “What is the PI going to do that the police won’t? He is going to keep on searching,” says Jerrie Dean of Missing Persons of America. “He is getting paid to find the person, not the reason they left.”
According to Dean, hiring a private investigator can help even if the person isn’t found right away. “He brings that information back to the family, the family tells the media, the media reports it and then the police are renewed and following a new lead to [the victim],” says Dean. Part of the problem with missing persons cases is publicity. Too often, the media only broadcasts photos of missing people that will gain the most viewers, and eventually the attention peters out. Keeping a case alive can be the driving force in finding a missing person.
Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, and other whistleblowers have sparked an intense debate on the ethics of leaking secrets. Â Some view these people as martyrs, others view them as traitors. Numerous laws and acts have been put in place to protect those who choose to expose an entity’s wrongdoings, but where do we draw the line between honest whistleblowing and smear campaigns?
Corporate Whistleblowers
The subject of a leak and the method in which a whisteblower announces their findings all play a role in the ethics of a case. Is the accuser attempting to enact revenge on a corporation by tarnishing their reputation, or are they genuinely trying to alert the public of fraud, harmful practices, and other misdeeds? Many employees keep quiet when they witness corruption because they fear losing their jobs and risk damaging their chances of future employment. And even if an attempt is made, businesses will go to great lengths to cover their tracks, including forcing employees to sign contracts that prevent workers from speaking up about company policies. Consider the case of Donna Busche, whose story was mentioned in thisWashington Post article. According to the Post, Busche was fired after raising safety concerns about the nuclear facility she managed. The nondisclosure agreement prevented Busche and her coworkers from reporting mishaps, and also made it impossible for them to receive financial rewards for whistleblowing. Like many others before her, Busche was accused of being fired for other reasons, despite her claims that she did it for ethical reasons.
Measures such as the Dodd-Frank act of 2010 and the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement act of 2012 are meant to protect people like Busche. However, some believe that the government isn’t doing enough to enforce these rules, while others believe that the law encourages people to lie for financial gain. Dodd-Frank rewards whistleblowers with up to 30 percent of the recovery, which can generate millions for the prosecution in a big case.
Going Against the Government
The legality of whistleblowing becomes even more muddled when it involves the government. Snowden’s most recent revelations about the National Security Agency (NSA) have some lauding him as a hero, while others accuse him of treason.
Most recently, a women by the name of Sabrina De Sousa is being punished for her involvement in the kidnapping of Abu Omar. Aljazeera America ran an article about the former CIA operative, who claims to be used as a “scapegoat” for the CIA. De Sousa was working with the CIA in Italy at the time of the kidnapping, but made several attempts to alert Congress to investigate the CIA’s actions. She believed that their treatment of Omar was a huge mistake, and after failing to receive support, found herself being accused for being the mastermind of the operation.
A Difficult Decision
Although the majority of Americans won’t be involved in cases like Snowden’s and De Sousa’s, some may find themselves in a difficult position. A whistleblower is oftentimes the spark needed to ignite a corporate fraud case. Before deciding to go public with information, it’s important for potential whistleblowers to look over contracts they may have signed and learn more about their state’s laws. Even corporations who find themselves the subject of a leak will need to launch an investigation to prove the accuracy of such claims.
For several decades, animal rights organizations have provided a voice to the animals that couldn’t speak up for themselves. The fight against animal cruelty is ongoing, and despite new regulations, many animals are still kept in abusive conditions worldwide. One of the best ways to catch the offenders and put an end to the cruelty is by gathering video evidence of inhumane situations. Many of these animal rights organizations have begun hiring private investigators to do surveillance on locations that have been rumored to be abusive.
A Voice for those Who Have None
In 2009, TIME ran an article about a private eye who went undercover at a hog farm. The investigator, who went by the name “Pete”, gave up his dream of becoming a cop and left behind his family and friends to pursue a career as an animal rights investigator. His account of the farm and the ensuing court case were featured in an HBO documentary called Death on a Factory Farm. Thanks to his video evidence, Pete has been able to uncover horrible conditions at farms and factories of all kinds throughout the country. According to him, the worst was chicken farms, where barely living hens were tossed into the trash after having their necks broken.
Farms aren’t the only places being targeted by investigators and organizations alike. The Ringling Bros. Circus and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have been in an ongoing battle over claims of animal abuse. PETA has launched its own investigation into the circus, documenting video footage of circus staff beating elephants and gathering witness accounts from past circus employees. Aquariums and zoos have also been in the news after documentaries like Blackfish brought abuse at SeaWorld to the public’s eye. Zoos, kennels, and even private homes are also hot spots that may require an investigation.
Doing it the Right Way
Often, the people who look into these claims and infiltrate businesses aren’t investigators at all. And when someone who’s inexperienced in the field of investigation goes undercover, there’s the potential for serious consequences. Consider the story of Taylor Radig, an animal right’s activist who went undercover at a cattle company in Denver, Colorado. Radig was a contractor for Compassion Over Killing, an organization dedicated to uncovering and preventing animal cruelty. Her investigation was centered around gathering video evidence at the cattle farm. During her time there, Radig witnessed workers pushing and shoving day old calves, a clear sign of animal abuse. Once she presented authorities with her proof, those workers were charged with cruelty to animals. However, Radig soon found herself charged with the Class 1 misdemeanor as well, because she had neglected to report the abuse as soon as she had seen it.
Taylor Radig isn’t the only person to be charged with the very abuse she was trying to prevent, and she certainly won’t be the last. Some states have laws that require cruelty to be reported immediately, and those who view it and fail to tell authorities in time are just as guilty as the offenders. That’s why it’s important to hire someone who is experienced in the field. Even Pete, the private eye who investigated the hog farm, was unlicensed at the time of the article. He and others like him run the risk of criminal charges and lawsuits if they get caught, and the evidence might not hold up in court as well if it was obtained illegally.
For these reasons, several animal rights groups have decided that simply having an organization member go undercover isn’t enough. These groups are dealing with big companies, and investigations require careful planning that are performed according to the law. Hiring a licensed, experienced investigator who is familiar with the law can ensure that this video evidence is collected in a safe matter. After all, a court battle involving an amateur investigator takes away time and attention from the true victims here: the animals.
Hiring a new CEO, CFO, or COO can be a long and arduous process for many corporations. Sometimes, it’s easy to overlook risks in a high-ranking executive or trust dishonest information. Before making a decision, corporations should consider hiring a private investigator to perform executive background checks of a potential corporate officer. Doing so can stop an unscrupulous individual from tarnishing a company’s reputation and prevent possible litigation for negligent hiring.
Risks to Consider
Do you know if the candidate has a criminal record? Do they have a good reputation among other businesses in the market? Past mistakes aren’t always a deal-breaker, but they can provide some insight on a person’s character and ability to perform in a high-ranking position. Individuals will go to great lengths to hide their offenses or lie about themselves. A DUI may be an indicator of someone who has had a substance abuse problem, or a record of domestic violence could suggest a history of anger problems. A bad credit report could be a sign of future embezzlement problems. Some of the most common red flags that an executive background investigation should uncover are as follows:
DUI/DWIs
Domestic violence arrests/restraining orders
Bankruptcy
Arrests/convictions
Bad bredit reports
Theft/fraud
Reasons for leaving past companies
There have been several cases of executives who lied about their credentials or fudged their resumes. Consider the case of Scott Thompson, once CEO of Yahoo!, who lied about having a computer science degree. Or take note of Marilee Jones, Dean of Admissions at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), who never earned any of her supposed degrees. These people are able to get away with dishonesty because no one had thought to question them in the past. It’s easy to look at a candidate’s job history and assume that the other big companies they worked for had already checked their credentials, but clearly that is not always the case.
Too often, executives are able to hide these red flags for years until they are discovered by an investigative reporter or through someone within the company. A corporation that hires a shady CEO can face public embarrassment and loss in shares. In 2002, shares for Veritas SoftWare Corp. dropped 20 percent after it came out that their CEO had lied about his education. Thefallacies that jeopardized these corporations’ reputations could have possibly been prevented if a comprehensive executive background investigation had taken place.
Hiring a Private Investigator
Most basic background checks will uncover things such as names, addresses, past employers, and a criminal record. It may be tempting to perform a Google search of a candidate and call it a day, but this will only give you a very general outline of a candidate and won’t always be accurate. Nowadays, people have become more aware of their presence online and have found ways to cover things up. An online search won’t turn up as many results as an investigation will, either. Many official documents and records are not available publicly online, and some states have different laws regarding arrests and offenses. Hiring a private investigator to check out a candidate’s background can uncover information that an online search cannot. A typical executive screening may include a search of:
Employment history
Criminal records
Driving records
Education
Civil history
Executive background history investigations will provide corporations with a detailed report of a CEO’s character and work ethic before a hiring decision is made. An experienced private investigator knows what to look for and where to find it, in an ethical and legal way.These investigators will work with companies to provide an in-depth assessment of a potential executive’s background and ensure that a company has a clear view of the person they are hiring.
,” says Jerrie Dean of 
