Working PI Magazine - Issue 4

“I have used OREP for more than 10 years and have found them to be consistently helpful and a good value. I highly recommend them.” —Tom Jackson

“Easy to renew. Thanks!” —Larry Albertson

by Isaac Peck, Publisher

by Jay Paulino, CPI

Dr. Carlo Gallo, Enquirisk

Isaac Peck, Publisher

by Kendra Budd, Editor

by William F. Blake, CPP, CFE

by Isaac Peck, Senior Broker at OREP.org

by Kelly E. Riddle

MIAAI, PI

Doing What Others Won’t Do

I’ve been traveling a lot—supporting private investigator organizations like the Florida Association of Licensed Investigators (FALI) and helping PIs stay out of trouble by teaching on investigator liability and risk management. Being on the road (for me) is always hard, but it’s been a special privilege to spend time with PIs across the country, break bread, and talk about the issues they’re facing in today’s market.

I’ve been impressed by the stories I’ve heard along the way. Stories like Dan Riemer’s, a criminal defense investigator who was tasked with uncovering the truth in an incredibly publicized murder case from the 1990s. Riemer dug in—sniffing out leads for a murder that happened over 30 years ago and helped resolve the case after the defendant had already spent over five years in jail awaiting trial (See Killer Clown Case Resolved by Defense Investigator, pg. 20).

Stories like Kelly Riddle’s, one of the most accomplished private investigators who runs a successful multiinvestigator firm in Texas, but still finds the time to travel to conferences around the country and teach investigators how to be better at what they do. All that travel has paid off, Riddle tells me, as he’s met clients and made contacts at PI conferences that have led to multiple seven-figure contracts over the years.

Or Bob Nalett, who was instrumental in reviving the Arizona Association of Licensed Private Investigators (AALPI)—helping the association change its trajectory and nearly tripling its membership over the last six years. (See Building AALPI and Why Investigators Should Join an Association , pg. 16.)

One of the things I’ve been reflecting on—the common thread in these stories and something I’ve seen surface repeatedly in my own journey—is that the individuals who succeed despite the odds, whether in growing their businesses or in building an association, are the ones who are willing to do what their peers (or competitors) won’t do. To chase down those “dead” leads, do that extra marketing, or, like in Riddle’s case, travel to private investigator conferences across the country, provide training to other investigators, and build his network.

We try to take the same approach here at Working PI magazine and OREP Insurance—to be willing to do what our competitors will not do. For me, that means traveling to 25 to 30 cities this year, sponsoring private investigator associations, speaking with PIs across the country, adding new benefits to support OREP’s Members (like the new Marketing to Plaintiff Attorneys eBook, see pg. 19), and personally calling our insureds and answering their questions—making it clear that our commitment to outstanding service is not just a tagline.

I’m not sure what this looks like in your business—developing new skills, branching out into a new investigative niche, joining a professional association, learning how to use new tools, or building your network with attorneys and other private investigators. But from one small business owner to another, I encourage you to go that extra mile. We are all facing certain challenges in today’s economy, but we still have opportunities to grow.

I hope this issue keeps you informed and gives you some ideas that can help your business. If you ever need assistance with your private investigator liability insurance, please visit us at OREP.org (it takes less than five minutes to get a quote online!). Lastly, if there’s anything I can do personally to be of service, please reach out to me at isaac@orep.org. See pages 32-33 for a list of PI conferences we will be attending—I look forward to meeting you!

Isaac Peck Publisher of Working PI and Senior Broker at OREP Insurance

Dr. Carlo Gallo

Dr. Carlo Gallo is the Director of Enquirisk. He has 17 years of experience helping multinationals navigate complex business environments. Before founding Enquirisk in 2012 (initially in London, UK), he was Control Risks’ lead Russia/FSU analyst. He holds a Ph.D. from the LSE and has been a reputable business risk commentator on various programs. Previously, he completed a Masters and PhD at the London School of Economics (LSE). Born and raised in Italy, Dr. Gallo spent 20 years in London before moving to Santa Monica, California. Enquirisk operates under California PI license (n.189080).

Kelly E. Riddle

Kelly E. Riddle is the President of Kelmar Global and the PI Institute of Education, training more than 7,500 PI’s since 1989. With more than 41 years of investigative experience and author of 16 published books he is only one of 50 PI’s who’s a Texas Certified Investigator. Riddle is also the founder and President of the Council of Association Leaders, Association of Christian Investigators, and a graduate of University of North Alabama where he earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminal Justice.

Isaac Peck

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. Working PI is the most widely read print magazine for investigators nationwide, reaching over 25,000 PIs. PIs who become OREP Members enjoy an 8-hour CE course at no charge (see page 39 for details or visit OREP.org/PI). Reach Isaac by email at isaac@orep.org or call (888) 347-5273. CA License #4116465.

Jay Paulino, CPI

Jay Paulino is an in-house investigator at Casey Gerry Schenk Francavilla Blatt & Penfield, LLP. In 2022, the California Association of Licensed Investigators (CALI) awarded him Investigator of the Year. Paulino is a California state-licensed private investigator, certified professional investigator, and a remote pilot for small unmanned aircraft systems. He has over 15 years of experience handling investigations for law firms and insurance companies.

William F. Blake, CPP, CFE

William F. Blake is a graduate of Michigan State University with a Bachelor of Science in Police Administration. He also holds a Master of Science degree in Foundations of Education from Troy State University and is a retired Chief Warrant Office of the U.S. Army. He has over 60 years of experience in civil and criminal investigations, bank security, executive protection, loss prevention, disaster recovery planning, counterintelligence operations, security risk analysis, and security training.

Kendra Budd

Kendra Budd is the Editor of Working PI magazine and the Marketing Coordinator for OREP, providing E&O for over 12,000 professionals in the US. She graduated with a BA in Theatre and English from Western Washington University, and an MFA in Creative Writing from Full Sail University.

James T. Born, PI, CFI, INCI, MIAAI

James T. Born is a private Investigator in California (since 1978) and in Nevada (since 1988). He also held a role as former Sheriff’s Captain (Chief of the Detective Bureau), 8th Judicial District Court recognized “Forensic Expert” and “Fingerprint Expert.” Visit TristateDetectives.org for more info.

Using AI in Your Investigations

Technology is advancing rapidly—and the tools available to private investigators continue to grow along with it.

From using drones to help with accident reconstruction (Using Drones in Your Investigations, visit WorkingPImag.com), to the latest advances in artificial intelligence (AI), I continue to be amazed at how technology is developing and providing new tools to help private investigators deliver a higher quality product and work more efficiently.

“Work smarter, not harder” is a core part of my philosophy. If I can use tools and technology to be more efficient, save time, or improve the quality of my work, then I will be able to serve my

clients better and I’ll make more money too. I try to constantly challenge myself to learn something new on a daily basis and stay on the cutting edge of technology. The day I close my mind on learning something new from anyone at any time, is the day I am through.

Many private investigators are aware of a new AI tool called ChatGPT—a natural language processing tool driven by AI technology that allows you to have human-like conversations with the chatbot.

Use of ChatGPT has exploded in the span of only a few months, with the latest numbers showing over 100 million users now on the platform. Its poten-

tial uses seem nearly endless—middle schoolers are using it to “write papers,” teachers are using it to create lesson plans, marketing professionals are using it to curate ideas and write “draft” marketing copies, and even lawyers are experimenting with it. A judge in Colombia recently used it to explain part of his ruling in an insurance case.

As a private investigator, I’ve found ChatGPT to be an incredibly useful tool in my work, saving me time, helping me be more efficient, and helping me formulate ideas. I think of ChatGPT as my own personal “AI Assistant,” helping me to quickly answer questions, giving me information, and pointing me in the right direction in my investigations. I do not

“I now have an assistant who can give me a convenient and efficient way to access information and perform tasks.”

by Jay Paulino, CPI

use it as my only source of information, but rather as an artificial intelligence teammate. I team up with the chatbot.

At the time of this writing, ChatGPT is now only one of a myriad of AI tools. Google has launched Bard, Bing has BingAI, and there is a rapidly growing list of AI chatbots, AI programming engines, and even AI generated photo and design tools. For the purposes of this article, I’m going to be focusing on ChatGPT.

Here’s how I use ChatGPT as a private investigator—and how you can too.

Real World Examples

ChatGPT is a great tool to use when you are investigating in arenas that you are not familiar with, from investigating in a new city or even a new (to you) investigation area. I like to think of it as tapping into an artificial mind that can provide answers within minutes. In many areas, it is able to piece together all that information rapidly, much faster than you or I can do by Googling or scrolling through dozens of webpages.

I work as a private investigator for Casey Gerry, a personal injury and complex litigation law firm that has recovered over $25 billion for its clients. In any given year, I might work on 300 different investigations across a variety of areas.

Here are some specific examples of how I use ChatGPT in my investigations.

Example 1: I recently worked a case where the incident took place in Sacramento. We get cases from all over the state and it can be a hassle because the law enforcement agencies and other investigating agencies are not in my hometown and not in areas I’m familiar with. I don’t have access to the same resources or the same relationships that I do down in San Diego. I don’t know the processes, the agencies, or the avenues to get the information I needed.

Since I was not familiar with the law enforcement agencies and other inves -

tigating agencies in Sacramento, I was having a difficult time getting on the phone with someone to request the accident reports and other public information. I kept getting automated messages and I couldn’t get through to anybody. The reason I needed to talk to a person is the client didn’t have the report number. Without a report number, it can be a lot harder to send out a written request or follow the prompts on an automated message.

After getting the go-around for 30 minutes and only dealing with prompts and automated messages, I was frustrated and decided to try ChatGPT. In less than 2-minutes, ChatGPT was able to provide me with a direct phone number that got me in touch with a person that I could talk to. I was then able to ask more concrete questions. I was able figure out what the fees were and track down the report number associated with the incident. All of this is important when we are starting a case because we need to do conflict checks and make sure the person who is at fault isn’t a former client of ours or a party in separate matter. Time is currency, so to have access to an AI assistant was extremely pivotal. Think of it: 30 minutes versus two minutes using ChatGPT!

Example 2: ChatGPT can help investigators find information on how to submit public records requests and Freedom of Information Act requests. As long as you know how to provide ChatGPT complex instructions on what you need from what agency, the AI can help provide online information, emails, and addresses. Accident history reports are just one example.

How many accidents have happened at a particular intersection? When I need to get accident history on a particular intersection, ChatGPT can direct me to the city or government agency that I need to contact, in many cases giving me instructions or providing contact information—emails, phone numbers, etc. For a lot of newly licensed PIs or maybe an experienced PI that is in a

new territory or a new area. ChatGPT can be a great resource to give you leads on where to go and who to contact. Remember to always fact-check any information provided by the AI model with other reputable sources.

For example, you can ask: “Where can I submit a request for an animal control report in San Diego, California?” Or ask it about where to verify professional license information, you name it. It’ll show you steps of where you can go, do it online, go to this link, mail the request, or call this number. The AI is smart enough to tell you what agencies you should consider contacting. City of San Diego, local police department, highway patrol, also provide telephone numbers, addresses, fax numbers, and so on. If you are not getting the answers you are looking for, try asking better questions to find better answers.

Example 3: Our firm is constantly getting inquiries from potential clients about defective products and product recalls. We were recently investigating a case involving a particular brand of eye drops. When I asked ChatGPT if there were any recent recalls, the AI gave me instructions on how to find this information on the FDA’s website, where I was able to locate something recent. Instead of spending hours on Google and reading through hundreds of pages online and scouring the FDA website, ChatGPT told me exactly where to look and I located something recent regarding recalls about that particular product. It might’ve taken me an hour or two (sometimes six!), clicking on everything that comes up. But instead I was able to find specific information in a matter of minutes.

Product recalls was one of the first areas that came to mind when our firm had discussions about ChatGPT. We do a lot of work with class actions and mass torts, so this gives us a whole new avenue to do product recall research and class actions. When our clients are having an issue with a product or collaboration with AI, I am able to get leads from the AI on where to look for info on

the FDA’s website. Whether I am looking at a generic string trimmer, or a car, or a home appliance product, I can ask ChatGPT about a specific product and it’ll direct me to the appropriate agency I need to contact.

Example 4: Our firm was recently evaluating a case where a landscaper was using a particular electric trimmer and sustained a serious eye injury. The potential client bought the equipment brand new and had it over a year. A big component of using this equipment was wearing safety glasses. In addition to looking at the manual online, we also asked ChatGPT for best practices using this electric tool. The AI also concluded that the potential client should have been wearing protective glasses, providing reasons and examples.

We held a meeting to discuss the merits of the case and whether it was worth pursuing. Sometimes we bring in regular people and hold a focus group to help determine the viability of cases. It’s a big part of what we do. This time, we asked ChatGPT. The AI didn’t cite case law (we didn’t ask for case law), but it added one more voice in our analysis and ultimately helped us make a difficult decision about whether to take the case or decline it.

Example 5: I was working a case where our firm was suing a large corporation that owned a bunch of smaller entities. They face a lot of litigation so

they have a complex corporate structure and that makes it hard because any potential plaintiff has to sort through a whole tree of different entities. As part of my investigation, I needed to identify all these different businesses, figure out what they do and where they are located. ChatGPT made it so much easier for me. In many cases, I was able to ask ChatGPT what type of business it was and the AI gave me a bio about the entity or gave me enough information (like what state) where I was able to go to the Secretary of State website, get the agent of service information, etc. for all of the entities.

Without ChatGPT, I’d be stuck Google searching every single business, going through all the links that pop up, and so on—for every single business. Some prompts for these entity searches include asking: What is [Company Name], explain [Company Name], describe [Company Name]; as well as asking where the headquarters is for a given entity. If you have the city or state where the entity is located, use it, otherwise ChatGPT might be able to help you find it.

Ask the Right Questions

Just like when you are questioning a witness or speaking to a high-value source, the key to getting better answers from AI is to learn to ask better questions.

Great investigators know how to talk to a witness. They know how to ask a question, ask the question a different

way, and keep asking the question in different ways to get a witness to open up. Sometimes the witness remembers more as time goes along, or asking a question in a certain way elicits a different response or leads you down the right path.

The same is true for ChatGPT. This tool can help you find answers fast—but it can take time to learn how to get the best responses.

Here are some tips on how to get the best answers from ChatGPT.

Be Clear and Specific: The more specific and clear your question is, the better ChatGPT can understand your query and provide relevant information.

Ask One Question at a Time: Avoid asking multiple questions in one sentence or message. This can confuse AI and yield less accurate responses.

Provide Context: When asking a question, provide as much context as possible to help ChatGPT understand the topic and provide a more personalized response.

Be Patient: ChatGPT may take some time to generate a response, especially for complex questions. Be patient and wait for the AI model to provide a detailed and informative response.

page 10

Check Sources: While ChatGPT is designed to provide helpful and accurate information, it’s always a good idea to fact-check any information provided by AI with other reputable sources.

If you ask a vague question, you will get a vague answer. If you ask a detailed question, you’ll get a detailed answer. It takes practice. Anything you practice you get good at. You want to be very articulate and detail oriented. Add the details that you need and structure your question in a way where you help the AI look for those specific details and key points. If you don’t get what you’re looking for, just like when interviewing a witness, sometimes asking the question in a different way can get you what you want. Treat the AI the same way.

AI Assistant

I see ChatGPT like having an assistant–an AI assistant. It’s an additional tool I have in my pocket. I use it on my cell phone when I am out in the field. I was out at an accident reconstruction investigation earlier this week and I started asking ChatGPT questions about reaction time. I was investigating a traffic collision, measuring tire marks, and trying to figure out how fast the defendant was traveling.

So I asked ChatGPT what is the perception reaction time the driver would have to be able to stop in time and it did all the math for me. It told me the exact distance the person would need to stop at a given speed, how many feet the person would need. This gave me an idea of how far away the driver was, and depending on the speed, how much time the defendant had to swerve out of the way. In this initial part of the investigation, I used ChatGPT to help me with the math and formulas, and I reversed engineered the information. We don’t have to do all that math alone anymore.

Basically, I now have an assistant who can give me a convenient and efficient way to access information and perform tasks. I’m convinced that as technology continues to advance, we will see more

and more applications of ChatGPT and other AI powered assistants in various aspects of our lives.

Verification

While ChatGPT can be incredibly useful and save you a lot of time, you will still need to verify the information it gives you. Just like you wouldn’t give a client a phone number or other information without verifying it first, you need to make your best effort to verify the information ChatGPT delivers to you. Sometimes that’s as simple as calling the phone number it gives you, and so on.

You shouldn’t solely rely on ChatGPT and never use it for legal advice! But instead use it as a complement. Treat it like your assistant. Any good investigator can do reverse engineering on it as well. It helps get me thinking quicker on where I need to be looking and what agencies I need to reach out to. I can cross-reference the data as well. ChatGPT is not without its flaws, but it is an extra tool in the toolbox.

Complement, Not Replace

One question that I have been asked recently is: Should PIs be worried about AI replacing them or taking work from them? The answer is no! AI will never replace investigators because such a big part of what we do is being the eyes, ears, and feet of our clients. AI lives in a computer. A big part of what we do requires a person. Taking work away from us is a possibility, but only if we don’t learn how to use AI to keep the work. That’s why it’s important for us to get ahead of it. We shouldn’t fear it taking work away from us if we learn how to use AI to keep the work.

AI is going to be an asset—a foundational tool for investigators. If we learn how to use it, we’re going to be able to keep the work and serve our clients more efficiently too.

Conclusion

We are in a period of unprecedented technological growth. AI tools are

growing and improving exponentially. And yet, I know it will take five to 10 years for most people to catch on to it and start using it in their everyday lives. Think about the adoption of Microsoft Office: Word, Excel, Outlook; or Adobe Acrobat and PDF technology. People held tight to their typewriters and there was even negative press about it. People said it was going to steal jobs.

What happened to the people who learned to use these tools before everyone jumped on the bandwagon? They had a decade head start and outproduced the ones who refused new technologies. Lawyers and consultants may be some of the first ones to adopt AI and find ways to work with it. Private investigators should join the race.

In the future, I think the use of AI tools will be super normal. People that do marketing, people that do real estate— we will see it across the professional spectrum. It is important for private investigators to get ahead of it now. If we don’t get ahead of it, someone else will.

I love to be on the cutting edge of technology and finding ways to deliver better results for my clients and leverage the tools available to me. One of my driving motivations is to improve myself, so I can help others improve. A rising tide lifts all boats. Feel free to reach out to me if I can be of service.

You can check out ChatGPT online here: https://chat.openai.com/chat

WorkingPImag.com The latest news, right to your inbox twice a month.

Investigative Services for International Business: Opportunities and Challenges

by Dr. Carlo Gallo, Enquirisk

Investigative services play a key role in enabling sound and compliant international business. Despite economic and geopolitical headwinds, international business is still big business. Over 80 percent of the world’s GDP is produced outside of the United States (US) and, in 2022, the US exported more than $2 trillion worth of goods and $930 billion of services.

International business often involves dealing with very opaque jurisdictions. In those cases, the real beneficiaries of local business entities are often hidden. They may include corrupt state officials, defense-sector entities, US-sanctioned entities, or even organized criminal groups. Moreover, foreign counterparties may rely, directly or indirectly, on illegal or unethical labor or environmental practices.

As part of legal compliance programs, fraud detection and brand protection, US companies must run scrupulous checks on the foreign entities they want to acquire, form joint-ventures with, onboard customers, or engage as suppliers and distributors. Certain lines of business, industries, locations or types of third-party relationships will be associated with higher risks. In those situations, investigative skills are required to perform the necessary enhanced due diligence.

At the same time, as US regulators expect companies to exercise more scrutiny over foreign third-parties, doing so is becoming more difficult due to the rise of authoritarianism globally. Autocratic regimes are tightening up control over the information space, making investigative reporting more difficult.

Journalists are increasingly targeted by police persecution or even extra-judicial violence. Moreover, sharpening geopolitical competition can place US businesses abroad in the crosshairs of local governments.

As private investigative services become more important due to growing regulatory requirements, they also face rising challenges in many opaque and repressive jurisdictions.

A Growing Regulatory Burden

The US and G7 sanctions enacted in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 are some of the most extensive issues. They banned businesses from dealing with hundreds of Russian individuals and entities in specific economic sectors, and with specifically designated administra -

“Finding out the names of the company principals will not be enough.”

tive and political organizations, and functionaries. They also blocked the assets of designated persons, banned the supply of Western dual-use technologies, and mandated price caps on Russian crude oil and oil products. The US government is enforcing such sanctions very robustly.

More generally, the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) manages over 35 sanctions programs. Targets range from whole countries or regions (Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Crimea region of Ukraine), to foreign governments (Venezuela, Nicaragua); and from specific economic sectors, to particular individuals and entities. All in all, OFAC has targeted well over 9,000 individuals and entities worldwide. Importantly, sanctioned individuals may reside in countries that are not sanctioned.

Besides OFAC, several other US government agencies also administer their own restrictions on international trade. For example, one prominent area of growing regulation is the control of technology exports to China. Regarding export controls, it is important to note that, if a US company employs a foreign national, within US territory or outside, sharing technology with them is also a “deemed export”.

Other laws require companies to proactively check that their direct and indirect suppliers do not engage in child labor or forced labor, are not violating environmental standards, are not sourcing inputs from sanctioned countries or entities, etc. Moreover, under the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and similar legislation from other countries, companies must ensure that their agents, intermediaries and contractors are not paying bribes on their behalf anywhere in the world.

Finally, financial institutions must perform in-depth screening of customers hailing from jurisdictions considered “high-risk” from the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Finance perspective. They must keep mon-

itoring the risk profile of high-risk customers, including their reputation in foreign language media.

Compliance with all of these laws often requires insights into third parties that cannot be achieved with automated screening or superficial desktop research. For situations of heightened risk, an investigative approach is needed.

The Need for Investigations

While legal advice is essential to ensure compliance with such a plethora of legal requirements, investigators are often needed too. Concerning US sanctions, two aspects, in particular, underline the need for in-depth due diligence:

• 50% ownership rule: sanctions apply not only to designated individuals and entities but also to any entity they own 50% or more of, individually or jointly. Companies must find out whether a company they are dealing with meets these ownership criteria—there is no official list of such entities. Automated screening and public records are unlikely to help, as ownership is often hidden behind complex ownership structures that may involve shell companies registered in lowtransparency jurisdictions.

• Foreign direct product rule: It allows the US Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) to restrict the export of controlled technologies (components, software, etc.) to customers anywhere in the world that use them to build products sold on to sanctioned entities, countries or sectors. Therefore, companies selling relevant goods and services need to be reassured about their customers’ customers.

Investigators can also help businesses audit their supply chains to ensure they are free from illegal or unscrupulous activities, such as bribery and fraud. Investigators can support international litigation with asset tracing

and perform enhanced due diligence for Anti-Money Laundering purposes.

Finally, investigators are key to pretransaction due diligence: A US company that seeks to acquire a foreign entity must investigate the legal, integrity and reputational risks associated with the target’s geographical footprint of sales and operations. It is necessary to conduct due diligence not only on the acquisition target, but also on the company’s third-party relationships.

Conducting Investigations in Challenging Environments

Enhanced due diligence is all the more necessary when the client is dealing with counterparties in opaque, repressive and generally “high-risk” jurisdictions. In those cases, the first rule should be to avoid breaking local laws. Typically, investigative methods that are illegal in the US tend to be illegal anywhere else, too: eavesdropping, hacking, breaking and entering, stealing information, etc. Unfortunately, from time to time, media scandals bring to light allegations that leading due diligence firms have resorted to such methods, typically in emerging markets.

The second rule should be to ensure the safety of local collaborators. Running confidential inquiries on the ground is becoming more difficult in authoritarian jurisdictions that tighten control over the information space. For example, some governments are expanding and blurring the definition of “national security” in ways that could criminalize the sharing of due diligence information—for example, on the track record, associations and reputation of local business players—unrelated to state secrets. Authoritarian governments also restrict foreign access to previously public databases, such as corporate registers.

From time to time, foreign governments may implement anti-Western page 14

campaigns that can lead to intimidation tactics against Western companies, including due diligence firms. This may include police raids on company offices, interrogating personnel, slapping heavy fines, detaining and charging business managers, etc. Moreover, the targets of due diligence investigations often are very wealthy and well-connected individuals who can trigger police investigations on an intelligence firm in retaliation for a ‘frank’ report.

Such challenging conditions place a premium on PIs with true regional and country expertise and know-how to extract relevant information from a shrinking pool of sources. While there are no “magic” databases in many emerging markets that will provide easy answers, expert eyes can detect interesting patterns and infer useful conclusions from available information. In the first instance, a lot can be achieved without setting foot in highrisk countries.

Other considerations to bear in mind include the fact that documentary evidence may not be obtainable in business environments where informality is widespread and business agreements are reached verbally—as opposed to being written down. Furthermore, national governments may be involved in business life in multiple ways that go well beyond formal state ownership of stakes in a given company. Finding out about this requires careful analysis by investigators who can look at local parties through the lenses of their local knowledge and experience.

Powerful and politically-connected players often run companies through proxies and nominees to conceal their involvement. The real owners may often be corrupt state officials. Knowing who the Ultimate Beneficiary Owner of a company is will not help if that person is only fronting for somebody else. Similarly, finding out the names of the company principals will not be enough. One must also look into track records and associa

tions to detect “red flags.”

In summary, legal compliance and risk management for opaque and repressive jurisdictions require patient, clever investigative work that leverages language skills and deep knowledge of the operating environment. Much can be deduced by critically examining opensource, legally available documents and registry items. If it is necessary to run on-the-ground human source inquiries, relying on tried and tested local collaborators who are seasoned and cautious professionals is essential. An international network of trusted local sources makes all the difference and cannot be improvised.

Building AALPI and Why Investigators Should Join an Association

by Isaac Peck, Publisher

“Everybody is a resource. There is so much we can learn from each other and ways for us to work together—I’ve seen it pay off so many times for myself and others.”

Many private investigators (PIs) go it alone.

Despite the numerous active state and national associations available to PIs, Working PI ’s best estimate is that less than 15 percent of all licensed private investigators are members of a professional association.

That begs the question: Why is that?

Bob Nalett, owner of Lawman Investigations in Phoenix, Arizona and the President of the Arizona Association of Licensed Private Investigators (AALPI), shares his journey of reviving his state association and why he believes private investigators should give their state associations a second look.

Professional associations can help pri-

vate investigators develop their tradecraft, stay informed, and build their businesses, Nalett argues.

Here’s his story.

Rebuilding

When Nalett first became involved in AALPI’s turnaround, the organization seemed to be on its last leg. A meeting was held in late-2016 about what to do about AALPI’s dormant membership and declining participation—but only 12 people showed up to the lunch.

Part of Nalett’s passion for recruiting at AALPI stems from his own experience as a newly minted PI. After serving in the San Jose Police Department for 25 years, Nalett and his wife moved from California to Phoenix, AZ. But Nalett didn’t want to simply “retire.” He got

his private investigator license in 2011. “When I started out, I was fairly new to the area and didn’t know anybody. One of the things I did back then was reach out to AALPI and started running things by a few of the PIs that I met. I took a few of the courses they were offering at the time and they helped me get up to speed on the laws in Arizona,” says Nalett.

As he built his PI business, he tried to avoid leadership positions at AALPI—but when the organization faced a turning point six years later, Nalett stepped up.

AALPI entered 2017 with just two elected officials, Daniel Bekins as AALPI’s President and Bob Nalett as the Vice President. Even as Nalett took on the challenge of reviving the organization, the consensus was that if things didn’t change, the association might not

survive. “We sat down and finally got to look at the books. We had less than $15,000 in the bank and we had a lot of money going out, with not very much coming in. We decided that if we couldn’t turn things around, we would pay off all our liabilities and just close the association down—returning any surplus back to our Members,” Nalett reports.

Thankfully, things got better. Nalett immediately got to work calling dozens of PIs on the Membership Rolls who had not paid their Membership dues—for years, in some cases. “We started with looking at who was listed on AALPI’s website that was not a duespaying Member. The AAPLI association website ranks on the first page of Google so it was a good way for our ‘Members’ to get work when a potential client was searching for a PI. I got a list of all Members that haven’t paid and personally called each and every one of them,” says Nalett.

He would start by introducing himself and explaining what AALPI was trying to do—to rebuild and become a true resource for PIs in Arizona. “I told them we were revamping everything and we’d like to have them continue to support us and be a part of our community. Some people were on board, others gave me a very colorful description of why they weren’t coming back. At the time, having your PI business listed on AALPI.com was one of my big selling points. You’re just two clicks away from getting business, is what I’d tell them. So we started by winning back past Members and then cleaning house and making sure only current Members were listed on our website and enjoying the benefits of AALPI membership,” Nalett reports.

After winning back nearly a dozen past Members, the next step was to reach out to licensed PIs across Arizona and invite them to get involved. “We devel-

oped a battle plan for recruiting. We went to the Department of Public Safety (DPS), which licenses and regulates PIs in Arizona, and got a list of all actively licensed PIs. We began emailing them inviting them to events and promoting the benefits of membership and networking with other like-minded professionals,” Nalett says.

When Nalett first attended the 12-Member lunch back in 2016, AALPI only had 52 dues-paying Members and any annual conference they tried to organize had to be combined with process servers, security guards, and other professionals. “The first conference we had was a combination of PIs, process servers, and the security guard association. We had to have three associations combined to do three days of training because we didn’t have the numbers,” Nalett laments.

Today, AALPI is approaching 150 active Members and is expecting to draw 100 private investigators for its annual conference this year in September (see pg. 32 for conference details).

Why Join an Association?

Nalett’s journey of rebuilding AALPI deals directly with the question of why a private investigator would want to be a part of a professional association to begin with. What’s the big deal?

One of the things that many PIs don’t appreciate until they experience it, Nalett says, is how networking and sharing information leads to more work for everyone. “AALPI always had a listserv, a type of group email chain, but once we revived it and started really using it, the referral opportunities really exploded. As a PI, you don’t need to turn down work. If a client comes to you and needs a 5-day surveillance job, you can call one of your contacts from

your state association and ask them their rate, then go back to your client and present a proposal. Whether you are too busy or it’s something outside your wheelhouse, you don’t have to turn away work,” Nalett argues.

Not only does it mean you don’t have to turn away business as a PI, but it is also a great source of work for the PIs who can step in and provide those needed services. The result is a robust variety of business opportunities for those investigators who choose to get involved and network. Some PIs have billed six or seven figures on jobs that came to fruition because of an association contact or from a connection they made at a professional investigation conference.

Outside of helping grow one’s business, Nalett says that state associations like AALPI also help keep PIs up-todate on the latest laws and licensing issues. “We keep our Members updated

on the changes that are happening in the laws and anything regarding the PI industry. We bring up any disciplinary actions and help PIs stay out of trouble,” Nalett explains.

The biggest advantage to being involved in your association is the network, Nalett argues. “Everybody is a resource. There is so much we can learn from each other and ways for us to work together—I’ve seen it pay off so many times for myself and others. Not only can we all grow our businesses more, and earn more, when we work together, but we can share knowledge and information. A big segment of our upcoming conference in September is going to be on how to run a profitable private investigator business, how to market yourself to clients, and how to avoid claims and protect yourself. It’s invaluable information from experienced PIs that help us grow and be better,” Nalett says.

Take Your Business to the Next Level Toolkit for Professional Investigators

1 2

Plaintiff Attorneys

3

8 Hour CE Class Surveillance Strategies for Success

Prepared by an attorney and former FBI agent.

Prepared

After nearly 30 years, the famous Palm Beach, Florida “Killer Clown” case has finally reached a conclusion via a shocking plea deal. Sheila Keen-Warren has officially pled guilty to second-degree murder in a Florida courtroom— in exchange for a reduced sentence, including time already served. KeenWarren has been in prison since 2017 and her attorneys expect her to be out within the next ten months.

However, anyone who has been following the case might recall that originally the prosecution was seeking the death penalty. So, why was the plea deal introduced as an alternative instead? Well, once the defense brought in their own private investigator, the prosecution’s case began to derail.

KILLER CLOWN CASE

Resolved by Defense Investigator

by Kendra

Dan Riemer, a private investigator for over 27 years, owner of South Florida PI and the current President of the Florida Association of Licensed Investigators (FALI), was brought in as a criminal defense investigator for Keen-Warren’s legal team. He looked back on the 30-year-old case and found several flaws in the original investigation. From possible cross-contamination of evidence to conflicting eyewitness testimonies, it was clear to Riemer that there were too many holes in this case to be ignored.

Here is what he told us. The Case

On the morning of May 26th, 1990, Marlene Warren answered her door to

be met with—surprisingly—a clown. The clown handed Warren balloons and a bouquet of carnations, before shooting her in the face. Her then 21-year-old son Joe Ahrens witnessed the attack, along with some friends—each confirming the clown calmly walked back to their car and drove away. Two days later, Warren was pronounced dead.

A month later, detectives discovered a car abandoned in a parking lot which they believed to be the getaway car. The car had previously been repossessed by Bargain Motors, a company owned by Michael Warren, Marlene Warren’s husband. Inside the vehicle was brown hair and orange fibers—the hair was believed to belong to the page 22

“These cases are serious. You could be what is standing between life or death.”

Budd, Editor

Grow Your Revenue and Your PI Business

Do you struggle with the “cash flow” part of your business?

Are you ready to grow your business but don’t know the mechanics of working with subcontractors or employees?

Want to develop a more consistent work product?

Want to market your business to plaintiff attorneys but not sure how to go about it?

These are GOLD! Using these manuals takes the guesswork out of the expectations for a quality investigator.

- Dorothy Grutzner Vandergrutz Investigations Agency

If you’re better at investigating than running a business, you’re not alone.

The Profitable PI’s series of Books and Manuals help you supercharge your marketing and streamline your business operations, so you can increase your profit margin.

murderer and the orange fibers to that of a clown wig.

Upon further investigation, it was alleged that Marlene Warren’s husband, Michael, was having an affair with KeenWarren—whom he would marry 12 years after the murder. Both have denied this claim, but detectives viewed the husband as a key suspect for several years due to the nature of the accusation. Investigators even searched Keen-Warren’s apartment and found an orange fiber matching the one found in the suspected getaway car. However, the evidence was too circumstantial to pin either to the case.

Leads poured into investigators, but the majority led to dead ends. Grocery store workers recall someone purchasing a balloon and flowers similar to those found at the crime scene—but could never give an in-depth description of the person. Only that the individual had long brown hair, was tall, and skinny. Meanwhile, two women who owned a costume shop told detectives they sold a clown costume to someone who also had long brown hair, but was “androgynous” and they couldn’t tell if they were a man or woman. However, all of the witnesses agreed that the person was at least six feet tall. All leads seemingly ended there.

Reopening a Cold Case

The case went cold due to lack of evidence until 2014 when the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office reopened it. Detectives re-interviewed all witnesses, examined the evidence again as well as submitted it for DNA analysis.

Upon examining the brown hairs for a second time, detectives alleged it to be an exact match to Keen-Warren. Then, a new orange fiber had been found on the balloon strings, which had been missed before—confirming it to be the same as the one in the getaway car as well as the one found in Keen-Warren’s apartment. Detectives now believed they had enough evidence to prove Keen-Warren was indeed the killer clown and a grand jury indicted her of the crime in 2017.

What the defense team uncovered over the next few years would ultimately lead to the shocking plea deal. So, how did the defense untangle these accusations?

The Defense Investigator

Shortly after Keen-Warren was indicted, her defense team brought in their own defense investigator: Dan Riemer. Riemer has been an investigator for 27 years now—specializing in criminal defense investigations.

When he was brought into this case, he was shocked by the lack of evidence the detectives actually had. “In a criminal defense case, our job isn’t to prove ‘who-done-it’ but rather to prove there is reasonable doubt. And this case was filled with plenty of reasonable doubt,” explains Riemer.

One of the ways defense investigators find reasonable doubt is by discovering or following up on leads that detectives, for one reason or another, had dismissed or failed to pursue. This includes studying the police report front and back and uncovering anything the prosecution may have tried to hide. Here is what Riemer’s investigation uncovered.

Contaminated Evidence

One of the first things Riemer does as a defense investigator is to look at the reputation of the Sheriff’s office employees involved. The Palm Beach Sherriff’s Office evidence room was less than satisfactory, according to Riemer. Riemer tells us that in 1999 the Palm Beach County Auditor was sent to examine the evidence room. “Let’s just say they found cases that were misplaced and evidence that was mixed into other cases,” reports Riemer.

In fact, that same report mentioned the “Killer Clown” case as one of the several improperly stored cases. “The bags were ripped open and were lying on the ground, mixed with other evidence. So the evidence they were holding was basically contaminated,” Riemer argues. The prosecution would go on to

defend the evidence citing that only the outer bags of evidence were torn, not the inner bags.

Unfortunately for the prosecution, once their forensics expert took the stand during pre-trial and was trying to retrieve a balloon string from an evidence bag, the string fell out of a tear in the bag—a gasp could be heard throughout the court room. These were the same balloon strings that had the orange fiber tangled in it, which hadn’t been found years prior. Keen-Warren’s defense quickly called for the evidence to be dismissed, however the judge ruled against it.

Although the evidence was still in play, the defense was able to raise enough reasonable doubt in the court, especially once the world saw the balloon strings fall in the forensic expert’s lap— literally. The defense team’s discovery had the prosecution now scrambling.

DNA Evidence

Remember the hair that detectives found in the car, claiming that it was a 100 percent match to Keen-Warren? Well according to Riemer, that’s not exactly true.

“All the DNA evidence proved was that the hair could potentially belong to KeenWarren, otherwise it was inconclusive. It was never an exact match that the prosecution claimed it to be,” Riemer tells us. Indeed, the hair found in the alleged getaway car was never actually fully proven to be Keen-Warren’s, just that it was a possibility.

Even if it was in fact Keen-Warren’s hair, it wasn’t odd that it would have been found in the car. “She repossessed cars for Bargain Motors, possibly the one in question. Keen-Warren even said herself that would likely be an explanation as to why her hair would be in there. She had nothing to hide,” Riemer says.

Although it was possible that KeenWarren was in the car, it still remained unknown if the hair was left behind in the car before or after the murder. Nor

was it ever fully proven to be her hair. Once again, the defense chalked this up as circumstantial evidence, rather than forensic.

Eyewitness Testimony

In this case, there were three sets of highly influential eyewitnesses: the store clerks who sold the balloons and flowers, the costume shop owners, and of course, Warren’s son.

Riemer’s job was to closely examine each of these witnesses and their testimonies, including anything they said outside of their original statements. Riemer first called attention to the two store clerks. “They described a woman who was very young, tall and extremely skinny, but they never picked anybody out of the lineup or anything.” Although KeenWarren matched the description for someone that was very young and skinny, she was anything but tall. In fact, considering that this store was the only one in the area to sell the type of balloon found at the crime scene,

it seemed odd that they wouldn’t show the store clerks a lineup, but instead only went off the description.

Riemer then took an in-depth look at the two costume shop owners—having quite a bit of an “off-feeling” about them. “I think these ladies might have been in it for the publicity,” Riemer theorizes. He goes on to say that the two women were often on the news, spouting the story of Keen-Warren who came in just before closing to get the costume. Even though they originally said they couldn’t tell if whomever was purchasing the costume was a man or a woman, they remembered they were tall—again, conflicting with Keen-Warren’s actual description.

However, when shown a lineup, the two women both pointed to Keen-Warren, but Riemer says that isn’t as cut and dry as everyone makes it out to be. “Back then, sometimes cops would [put] their thumb on the picture that they want you to point to while they’re holding up a lineup,” Riemer explains. While it isn’t

clear whether or not that happened in this case, Riemer iterates that at this point in time, DNA evidence wasn’t as available and as perfected as what it is today, which is why many cops use this technique to get a case solved. It could be a potential explanation as to why they might have pointed her out.

Finally, Riemer investigated every claim Warren’s son, Joe Ahrens, had made about the killer clown. In Ahrens’ original statement, he said that the clown was about six feet tall, seemed to be a man, and had “man-like” hands. Hardly fitting of Keen-Warren’s description. His girlfriend Jean Platt was also certain that the killer had light blue eyes. In the early days of the murder investigation, “Ahrens was adamant in a radio interview that the killer had blue eyes, not brown,” Riemer tells us. Meaning Ahrens had two conflicting recollections—not making him the most reliable witness.

page 24

Get More Work—Grow Your Business

HOW IT WORKS

READI Rapid Response team provides on-demand private investigator services to auto and trucking accidents, workplace violence, internal investigations, and other major incidents.

In fact, according to the Constitutional Rights Foundation, “Studies have shown that mistaken eyewitness testimony accounts for about half of all wrongful convictions. Researchers at Ohio State University examined hundreds of wrongful convictions and determined that roughly 52 percent of the errors resulted from eyewitness mistakes.” The fact that the prosecution relied so heavily on eyewitness testimony is troublesome and was something Riemer wanted to address in his findings.

The Runaway Mechanic

Most of the public seems to believe that Keen-Warren was the only lead that police had, which is why they pursued her so heavily—however, according to Riemer that isn’t the case. “One section of the [police] report mentions a woman who lives in Hope Sound calling to leave a tip,” explains Riemer, but for some reason detectives never followed up on the lead.

After 27 years, Riemer became the first to investigate this woman’s tip further. Riemer found out the woman lived in an apartment building with her fiancé when the murder happened. A couple of days after Warren’s death, another building tenant (we’ll call her Jane) was frantically moving out. Riemer says the resident who left the tip (the witness) went to look at Jane’s place to see what she was selling. “The witness told me that Jane’s apartment was cluttered with clown memorabilia, figurines, and clown costumes hanging on the wall. However, what was really odd was that Jane had a photograph of Warren on her kitchen counter,” recounts Riemer. By this time, everyone knew the picture of Warren well from news stories, so there was no mistaking who it was.

Upon further investigation, Riemer was able to identify Jane since the witness was able to remember the apartment number of Jane’s unit. “Jane was 17-years-old and she had just gotten her driver’s license.” Riemer details. Not only that, but the witness who offered the tip also reported that Jane was

about six feet tall, had blue eyes, and “dirty, man-like hands”—matching the description of the eyewitness testimony more so than that of Keen-Warren.

Riemer even decided to look into if there was anyone else who lived in the unit, perhaps a possible boyfriend. What he found, was shocking, “Sure enough, a mechanic that worked for Bargain Motors was also living in the apartment with Jane at the time. He fled weeks after the murder took place, leaving the girl high and dry.” Talk about a coincidence! Remember those dirty, man-like hands that were mentioned earlier? A mechanic could easily fit that description as well.

Both “Jane” and the mechanic appear to have been viable suspects that the original detectives overlooked. Why none of the prosecution’s investigators ever followed up on this lead is unclear, however Riemer’s job is not to speculate on such things. With this newfound information, Riemer knew he had more than enough evidence to introduce reasonable doubt to the jury. Now, the prosecution’s argument was looking weaker and weaker.

The Plea Deal

As a result of Riemer’s diligent investigation, the defense team was able to present viable counter-arguments to each piece of evidence the prosecution introduced. The prosecution began to realize they did not have nearly enough forensic nor hard-hitting circumstantial evidence to convince a jury to convict Keen-Warren of murder, let alone secure a death-penalty conviction.

“The case was so weak, that the state attorney came to the defense two weeks before the trial and asked to work out a plea deal,” Riemer recounts. All KeenWarren had to do was plead to second degree murder in exchange for a shorter sentence, including time already served. The prosecution and defense came to an agreement that she would plead guilty and get a 12-year sentence. However, according to Riemer, the prosecution didn’t account for something

called “gain time.”

Gain time is “when you’re a model prisoner with no disciplinary actions ever needed, you can cut your sentence up to 85 percent in this present day,” Riemer informs us. This means that even though initially Keen-Warren was looking at serving about six more years in prison, Keen-Warren would be sentenced under 1990 guidelines since that is when the crime occurred. Gain time in 1990 was day for day or 50%. So she could be out in the next four months. “Ultimately, she chose to take the plea, even though she’s innocent. She’s got a murder conviction, but she doesn’t care. She’s 69 years old, and her friends know she didn’t do it. She’s guaranteed an out rather than gambling with a jury,” Riemer suggests.

Rather than risking a life sentence, Keen-Warren decided to put an end to her suffering by taking the plea deal. She still maintains her innocence, and Riemer and her defense believe it.

Final Thoughts

Without Riemer’s investigation, it is hard to determine whether or not KeenWarren would have been offered the plea deal. This case is a great example of why criminal defense investigators play such a crucial role in our justice system—helping to overturn, avoid or soften wrongful convictions.

Riemer says criminal defense investigations are more than just a lucrative business, “These cases are serious. You could be what is standing between life or death.” Although this case didn’t turn out with an innocent verdict, KeenWarren’s defense team expects her to be released within the next few months— largely thanks to Riemer.

Remember, a criminal defense investigator isn’t meant to prove who committed the crime, but rather provide enough reasonable doubt to exonerate their client. Riemer did just that. Stay safe out there!

Security Consulting: Opportunity to Grow for Investigators

by William F. Blake

“Most of these areas can yield a quick and easy return after a bit of training and time spent getting familiar with the field.”

Private investigation is a reactive tool for solving the problems of the business client, while security consulting is proactive in assisting the business owner in preventing situations that can be financially and personally costly. When this type of matter is first suggested, the private investigator often asks, “What’s in it for me?”

Across the United States, the billable hour rate for the private investigator is approximately 50% of that of the security consultant. A frequently asked ques-

tion is how do I convince clients to work at preventing problems?

What Is In It For the Private Investigator?

Many private investigators will say they do not have the skills to be a security consultant. If the private investigator has the skills to reactively investigate a problem or situation, he has the skills to develop a program to prevent further such situations. A private investigator with a viable networking scheme will know knowledgeable individuals from

whom he can request assistance.

What Is In It For the Business Owner?

The business owner is legally obligated to provide a safe environment for individuals on their property and have reasonable knowledge of the business’s risks and threats. If an individual suffers an injury due to the lack of appropriate safety and security measures, they may make a negligent security claim against the owner under the various premise’s liability laws of the state.

If the business owner is found at fault, the average litigation judgment has averaged about $600,000, not including attorney’s fees and other expenses. This cost does not include the reputational costs to the business as an unsafe business location and the personal damage to the owner’s reputation for having a dangerous business location.

How Should the PI Approach?

The most significant initial action is to assess the internal and external risks and threats to the business. It is the basis for cost-effective, reasonable, and appropriate action to counter threats and risks. In the case of a negligent security claim, the risk assessment is a primary component in defending the claim as it demonstrates that a professional security consultant conducted a comprehensive assessment to identify appropriate countermeasures.

The risk assessment should be conducted by a third-party security consultant. Some security equipment vendors offer risk assessment services as an additional business service but do not have the necessary general experience and knowledge. A comprehensive assessment is best documented with the use of a checklist that records the specific assessment information and actions. The checklist will identify threats and risks to the company. The author uses a 319-item checklist available upon request (billblake2@aol.com) which can be revised to include sections unique to each business, like industry standards.

Additional Advantages Derived from a Risk Assessment

There are additional advantages that can be derived from conducting a comprehensive risk assessment.

• The business owner recognizes and

controls hazards in the workplace.

• It creates awareness among employees and can be used as a training tool.

• It allows business management to set appropriate risk management standards, based on acceptable safe practices and legal requirements.

• The assessment will assist in reducing incidents in the workplace.

• Is saves costs by being proactive instead of reactive.

What are the Components of a Comprehensive Risk Assessment?

A comprehensive risk assessment consists of the following areas:

• Facility information: This section identifies the individual characteristic of the facility to provide a basic understanding of what needs to be protected, as each facility is different.

• Demographic information: The business types and individuals populating the area influence the security precautions and their risks and threats.

• Security operations: Business safety and security operations are the most influential portion of the assessment. There is no one-size-fits-all scheme for protecting a business as each business has different characteristics, risks, and threats.

• Perimeter control: Security protection originates at the outermost edges of the facility property and increases as it moves forward in a series of concentric circles of protection.

• Parking control: The parking lot or parking structure presents a significant security risk for the facility. An additional risk is present when the parking area is shared with individuals not part of the business because of the problems encountered with security issues.

• Building security and access control: Any access control system must be

implemented that meets the needs of staff members, vendors, and visitors. Each access control system must be based on a personal government issued photographic requirement.

• Fire safety: Fire prevention should be a primary concern and preventive and responsive strategies known to all personnel. Fire prevention training should be required of all employees, regardless of position or status.

• Physical asset protection: A vital component of any physical asset program is protecting company property, whether physical assets within the building or assets stored in external areas. Each business should have a physical inventory program identifying property above a minimum replacement dollar value.

• Information security: A formal information security program should be developed by a knowledgeable information security specialist that applies to all components of the company’s information security structure

• Personal safety and security awareness: A formal personal safety and security awareness program should be implemented. Upon initial employment and at periodic intervals, refresher training should be required as the most important company asset is its employees.

Final Thoughts

Private investigators have an easy and incredible opportunity to grow their business—but it still takes work. However, that work is greatly outweighed by the benefits. From saving cost, to preventing accidents, private investigators should heavily consider the benefits of becoming a security consultant.

In today’s tumultuous environment, more business owners are in need of security consultants, and your experience as a private investigator will definitely be considered a plus. Security Consulting is just one of many ways to build a better business.

Learn from the Best + Develop Your Skills

Kelmar Global’s book catalog features 14 books written by Kelly E. Riddle. With more than 40 years of investigative experience, Mr. Riddle shares his strategies and standards that have made his firm one of the most successful PI firms in the world.

Investigator Insurance Exclusions: What You Should Know

by Isaac Peck, Senior Broker at OREP.org

“It is prudent to select an agent that specializes in insuring your profession and can help you find a policy that covers your particular business needs.”

A common question that many private investigators have is: What are all these exclusions in my insurance policy?

It’s a great question. Typically, your insurance policy covers you in a broad capacity for the Professional Services you provide as a private investigator, unless the service or exposure is specifically excluded under your policy.

So let’s talk about common policy exclusions and what they mean for you.

Auto, Building, and Equipment Exclusions

Most private investigators who carry insurance are carrying some form of General Liability or a Business Owner’s Policy (BOP) as the base of the policy. In some cases, Professional Liability (also called E&O) insurance is endorsed onto the policy—I would highly recommend this type of policy because with a “GL only” policy, you have significant professional exposure.

Whether your policy has E&O or not, PI

liability policies are usually written in a way so as to specifically exclude:

1. Your automobile (also aircraft, watercraft, etc.):

While some policies provide ancillary Hired and Non-Owned Auto coverage–the intent of your private investigator policy is to cover your professional operations. You should be relying on a personal or commercial auto policy to protect yourself against this exposure.

2. Your Building, Home, and Real Property: While some PI policies provide coverage for premises rented to you (OREP’s policy includes $100,000 of coverage for your rented premises), the intent of PI liability insurance is not to insure your home or your building. You should carry a separate property insurance policy to cover your home (homeowners) or commercial building (commercial property coverage).

3. Equipment: Unless your policy specifically affords you equipment cov-

erage, the standard General Liability policy is not intended to cover Business Personal Property (equipment). OREP’s policy is unique in this regard as it provides $25,000 of business personal property coverage for PIs.

Professional and Operational Exclusions

This is typically a long list that includes:

1. Employment-Related Practices (EPLI): Your PI liability policy is not intended to cover you for lawsuits from your own employees; for this you’ll need to purchase a separate policy.

2. Drones: Many of the leading PI insurance programs in the United States exclude using drones. If you use drones in your investigation, be careful to seek out a program that includes coverage for them (OREP does not exclude drones!).

3. Breaking the Law: This is a broad category of exclusions that apply broadly. For example, fraud is excluded in your insurance policy (100% of insurance

policies exclude fraud). Most insurance companies do not want to defend insureds for engaging in criminal activity—so they often fashion specific exclusions around possible exposures they see as likely. For example, many PI insurance policies exclude violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), and other privacy or consumer-protection related laws. This is a sticky issue as many plaintiffs often allege fraud or violations of law in their lawsuits, so insurance companies often err on the side of caution and defend their insureds while reserving the right to withdraw if conclusive evidence of criminal activity arises.

4. Assault and Battery: Assault and Battery is a common exclusion found in PI insurance policies because insurance carriers don’t want to provide the kind of broad coverage that a Security Guard policy includes. This can pose a problem for investigators who also do process serving work or otherwise find themselves in sticky situations while on the job. OREP’s policy provides $50,000 of coverage for assault and battery ($100,000 aggregate limit), but if you are engaged in operations that lean more towards security guard services, it might be wise to explore that more expensive policy option.

5. Risky Operations: There is a stark difference between the risk and liability involved in a typical PI’s operations and those of a bounty hunter, bodyguard, repossession agent, or security guard. If you’re involved in those activities, you need a separate insurance policy to cover those exposures (and it’s going to be more expensive).

To help keep PI insurance affordable (less than $1,000), here is a common exclusion that is found in many PI insurance policies (this one is directly from one of OREP’s competitors): Any and all operations at or involving: (1) establishments engaged in the primary

business purpose of serving, dispensing or distributing alcoholic beverages; (2) government owned housing facilities; (3) body guarding of athletes, entertainers or celebrities; (4) screening of passengers or baggage at airports or mass transportation terminals; (5) bouncing and related activities; (6) repossession, foreclosures or collections; (7) bounty hunting or fugitive recovery; (8) security guard or patrol operations performed by, or on behalf of, the named insured; and/or (9) non-detective or investigative operations performed by, or on behalf of, the named insured.

If you are involved in any of these operations, you can still get covered properly, but minimum premiums for this segment start in the $3,500$5,000 range annually (as opposed to the $500 range for regular PI coverage with OREP’s primary policy).

6. Pollution Liability: This is a common exclusion across the professional spectrum—contractors, real estate professionals, and even private investigators often find this exclusion in their policies. Your insurance policy is not intended to cover “pollutants,” which is often defined in insurance policies as “any solid, liquid, gaseous or thermal irritant or contaminant, including smoke, vapor, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, chemicals and waste.” This would include mold, fungi, poisonous gas, environmental hazards, and so on. Unless your work involves the handling or detection of chemicals or other pollutants, this exclusion should not be a cause of great concern.

7. Punitive Damages: Punitive damages are generally awarded in courts as punishment for behavior that is especially harmful, malicious, or reckless. Oftentimes states have consumer protection laws that define the parameters around when these damages are applicable. PI insurance policies will generally exclude coverage for punitive damages as the insurance carriers do not intend to cover above and beyond actual damages because

of an insureds’ bad behavior.

8. Firearms Exclusion: Many PI insurance policies have exclusions for firearms, which is a problem! PIs often carry a firearm on the job for personal protection. If that describes you, select a policy that doesn’t exclude firearms (OREP only excludes firearms in special circumstances).

9. Professional Liability Exclusion: There are a myriad of insurance agencies offering coverage to private investigators. One of the problems is that many of the coverage options provide General Liability coverage only. This leaves investigators exposed to professional liability claims related to the investigator (A) overpromising the outcome of services, (B) failing to report important information in an investigation, (C) reporting incorrect information in an investigation, and/ or (D) performing poorly in an investigation. If a poor, incomplete, or inaccurate investigation causes financial (or emotional) harm to a client or any stakeholder, the PI may have a liability exposure relating to their professional services. This problem is compounded by the fact that many General Liability only policies exclude claims that arise from professional services. For this reason, PIs should select an insurance agent that specializes in PI insurance with an affordable policy option that includes both GL and E&O coverages.

Conclusion

Whew! That’s a lot of exclusions—and of course, this is not a comprehensive list. The reality is that many PI insurance policies are nearly 100 pages of legalese, which is why PIs should select their insurance agent carefully. It is prudent to select an agent that specializes in insuring your profession and can help you find a policy that covers your particular business needs. If you have any questions or want help reviewing your current coverage, feel free to contact me personally at isaac@orep.org. To your success!

Upcoming PI Conferences

Florida Association of Private Investigators

July 27-28, 2023 | Altamonte Springs, FL

The Florida Association of Private Investigator’s Annual Conference is devoted to educating private investigators, law enforcement, attorneys, paralegals, and investigative reporters. Learn how to be a better Investigator, how to improve your finances, and share some laughs with friends.

Learn More: MyFapi.org/2023-Conference

California Association of Licensed Investigators

August 24-26, 2023 | Sonoma Wine Country, CA

With approximately 1,100 members, the California Association of Licensed Investigators (CALI) is the largest private investigator association in the world. The CALI Annual Conference has earned a well-deserved reputation as one of the most exciting and successful events for private investigators worldwide, offering unparalleled educational opportunities, networking, fun programming, and more!

Learn More: CALI-PI.org

Professional Private Investigators

Association of Colorado

Sept. 7-9, 2023 | Thornton, CO

Professional Private Investigators Association of Colorado provides professional investigators with the tools needed for success, including industry related education and training as well as a strong advocate at the legislative level. Our Association strives to help our members meet the highest business, professional, and ethical standards.

Learn More: PPIACmembers.org/widget/event-5272731

Minnesota Association of Private Investigators

Sept. 13-14, 2023 | Walker, MN

The Minnesota Association of Private Investigators and Protective Agents is hosting its Fall Conference—the perfect time to get education from nationally known experts and private investigators that can help you improve how you work.

Learn More: MAPI.org/events.php

Connect with Your Peers

Arizona Association of Licensed Private Investigators

Sept. 16-17, 2023 | Scottsdale, AZ

The Arizona Association of Licensed Private Investigators is made up of professional investigators, process servers, business owners and strategic decision makers. AALPI’s goal is to foster a non-competitive environment where we can learn, share and grow together: informing, inspiring, and empowering the investigations industry through training, mentorship, and guidance.

Learn More: AALPI.com/our-conferenceAALPI.com/our-conference/

Alabama Private Investigators Association

Sept. 18-19, 2023 | Montgomery, AL

The Alabama Private Investigators Association is celebrating its 10th year of becoming a licensed State Association and 10 years of wonderful continuing education conferences. The Association’s Annual Conference will be held in the beautiful city of Montgomery, AL.

Learn More: AALPI.com/our-conference/

Texas Association of Licensed Investigators

October 6-8, 2023 | San Antonio, TX

The Texas Association of Licensed Investigators is dedicated to raising professionalism in the field of private investigations through continuing education, public awareness, advanced certification, networking, and legislative involvement. There is no better place to share ideas, get feedback, and make connections, both professional and personal.

Learn More: TALI.org

North Carolina Association of Private Investigators

Nov. 13-15, 2023 | Cherokee, NC

The North Carolina Association of Private Investigators, Inc. was chartered in 1987, and is the oldest association of Private Investigators in the state and its mission is to promote and encourage social, charitable, and educational activities and opportunities among Private Investigators.

Learn More: NCAPI.membersclick.net

We will see you there! The OREP Insurance and Working PI magazine team will be attending each of these important conferences. Stop by the OREP Booth and learn more about how we’re serving PIs with the latest news and information, plus industry-leading insurance coverage to protect your business.

Learn More: OREP.org/PI and WorkingPIMag.com

Are Databases Created Equal?

by Kelly E. Riddle

“A lot of information is thrown at you in a comprehensive report and having proper analytical skills enables you to cross-reference data to achieve the optimum results. ”

The topic of databases and which ones are the best seems to come up quite regularly among PI’s. This begs the question of whether databases are created equal and what if anything, sets them apart. Having been a beta tester of several of the databases PIs now use, I have some background that is often unknown. First, let me restate that any information obtained online, whether through a database or a government agency of a search engine, is an unconfirmed lead and should be verified.

To understand database differences, you must first know where they get their data. Hank Asher was called the “Father of Data Fusion ” because he was among the very first that compiled

data from various sources into what we now know as a comprehensive background report. One of the most important sources is information from credit bureaus. This is commonly referred to as “credit headers.” This is the nonconfidential top portion of an individual’s credit history. Each time a person uses their social security number to apply for credit (home loan, student loan, cell phone, credit card, rent, etc.) the address associated with each credit application is tracked and becomes a part of the applicant’s address history. The credit bureaus require data providers to ensure the information is used for permissible purposes and require a physical inspection of the PI’s office/home. This was relaxed some -

what due to Covid. The address history, alias names and similar data come from the same credit bureaus that each data provider gleans data. The way they package it is often visually different and the frequency in which they retrieve the data may vary but it is essentially the same data.

Some of the database providers pull criminal records from counties across the nation that are online as well as from the State Department of Corrections, Department of Public Safety, Sex Offender registries and similar sources. This is where there is usually a distinction between databases based on how frequently they import this data (weekly, monthly, quarterly). You should

also look at their information related to how current the data is because they often only have historical data up to a certain date (example: 2015).

The problem with compiling massive amounts of data into one report is you often get more than you need and much of it may not apply to your subject. Some of the often misunderstood information includes:

• Known Associates: Linked because they moved into an apartment where the subject used to rent (2) bought a house or car from the subject (3) took over a phone number the subject used to have.

• Associated Addresses: Linked because the address was a mail-drop (2) common addresses such as a UPS/Private mailbox store (3) common address like an apartment complex (4) address is registered agent/CPAattorney.

• Common Spellings or Miss-spellings

Many of the common databases that PI’s use include:

• TLO

• Tracers

• Delvepoint

• Clear

• Accurin

• IDiCore

• IRB

• Thomson Reuters

Other regional or information specific databases include:

• SkipMax

• CourtLogic

• CoCourts

• Locate Plus

• Denspri

• PACER

• VineLink

• CarFax

• Skipsmashers

• Unicourt

• Microbilt

• Skopenow

• SocialDiscovery

• StealthPartners

• SearchSystems.net

• servicememberscivilreliefact.com

• DRN—Digital Recognition Network

A lot of information is thrown at you in a comprehensive report and having proper analytical skills enables you to cross-reference data to achieve the optimum results. Looking at when a person renewed their driver’s license or vehicle registration will aide in deter-

mining how current the address is associated with the record. Augmenting this with social media or vehicle sighting reports also helps to focus in on the person and their actual location. A good investigator should supplement databases with specific county court, deed records, appraisal district and similar searches.

While on the topic of databases, you should remember that many of the law firms that hire you also have access to some of these same databases. Your fee to them for these searches should take this into consideration. Likewise, many of the databases contractually prohibit you from handing over the entire report to your client.

Unfortunately, one database source seldom gives a PI everything they need and subscribing to multiple databases is a necessity. Understanding where data comes from also enables you to use the data more effectively.

Today’s Nightmare Challenge to Expert Testimony

by James T. Born, CFEI, INCI, MIAAI, PI

Today, those of us that conduct investigations and then present our professional opinions in courts of law are faced with a new legal concern. It is called the “Daubert Challenge”. To most of us, these words are puzzling and foreign. With that understanding, you might want to read this article and take some good notes. I am a Certified National Instructor and curriculum reviewer with the International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and Training (IADLEST). IADLEST is the premiere resource that Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) committees, in 35 states and the U.S. Department of Justice go to for certified law enforcement training, and for accreditation of their police academies. I have been an investigator for just over 54 years, collectively, having served as a city, county, and federal

“My suggestion to each of you is to train as often as you can in your profession, and in any associated disciplines that may interact in some way with your profession.” page 38

law enforcement officer, a licensed private investigator in two states, and as a nationally Certified NAFI Fire and Explosion Investigator. Currently, I am also a U.S. Government NAICS 561611 “Investigative Services” Contractor and a Government NAICS 524291 “Fire Investigator”. This nightmare, as I call it in my title, started in 1993, in a case before the United States Supreme Court entitled Daubert v. Merrell Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated 509 U.S. 579 (1993).

It was originally litigated as a challenge to expert testimony in a pharmaceutical dispute. Since the handing down of this decision by the United States Supreme Court, it has gone through countless referencing, litigation, and minute changes that collectively and significantly changed how we testify

in all matters of opinions and conclusions that we may have, in whatever type of investigation we are testifying about. Gone are the days when you can stand before a judge and a jury and freely give your opinion as to what happened in the case you are about to present expert testimony about. Gone are the days when the courts automatically implied your ability to provide expert testimony, just because of having a law enforcement ranking or title. In today’s world, you now need to prove your abilities before that testimony can happen. Today we carry antacid tablets in our coat pockets, at least I do, praying before and during the trial that we do not hear an opposing attorney shout out the words “Daubert Challenge ”. That is your nightmare.

The Daubert Challenge may come at any time before and during the trial. It may be presented in a separate motion, in a post-trial motion, as part of a summary judgment, as a Motion in Limine, or as an objection made when testimony is given. When you hear the words “Daubert Challenge” your sphincter muscle will undoubtedly feel challenged, and it will be time to pop an antacid. Those words spoken, “Daubert Challenge” have just burdened your day in court. Without much doubt, at this point, you will be in trial longer than you anticipated.

So exactly what is a “Daubert Challenge”? It is a motion that seeks to exclude an expert’s testimony on the basis that the attorney believes it to be unreliable, or not relevant under Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. It is a legal mechanism that opposing council can use to discredit the validity of your testimony, and have it excluded at trial. Such a challenge is generally a deciding factor in whether you win or lose your case. The Daubert Challenge is designed to challenge an expert’s qualifications and an expert’s methods

When the challenge is presented, the judge handling the case must (by law) become “The Gatekeeper”. That judge, whether or not they are knowledgeable about the subject matter, will, most likely, in chambers, with a stenographer present, with the prosecutor present, and with the opposing councils present, ask you to present your qualifications; to encompass your training and experience, relative to what you are going to testify about. If there is acceptance on both sides that you have the training and experience, you will most likely be asked to provide proof to the court’s satisfaction before the trial can resume or begin. Having done so, you will be asked a series of required questions, among them; “how did you reach your conclusions, what methodology was used, what expert testing did you employ, what is your rate of error in testing, were any controls in place, was the data properly interpreted” and other such questions? If you fail to be vetted by

the Gatekeeper, you may still be allowed to testify as to what you did or observed, however, you will be prohibited from offering any opinions or conclusions whatsoever. Therein is that “reasonable doubt” that the opposing council wants the jury to have.

In reality, the Daubert Challenge is a ploy that the opposing council will often use when they are worried about the strength of their defense. By offering up the challenge, it buys them more time. It allows them to be present, as in a sneak preview, to hear exactly what you intend to testify to in advance of the trial. This also allows them to weigh in your qualifications against their own expert’s qualifications, and, if necessary, bring in an expert with more training and experience than you do.

To make matters worse, many judges will put off the case for an extended periodof-time, while deciding if you can testify as an expert. That time is valuable and often asked for by the opposing council because it is valuable in extending their own case preparation. If the opposing council feels that you are unqualified based on your methods and science relied upon, they can motion the court to restrict your testimony. Often this will result in settlement agreements.

The Daubert Challenge favors the opposing attorney because it gives them an advanced preview of the sciences and methodology you used to find your opinions and conclusions. The attorney is most likely mute or ignorant about what you know and about your profession; they are after all, in my opinion, like actors playing a part in a movie being watched by their client and the jury. The challenge gives them that edge to plan further for their rebuttal and crossexaminations, closing arguments and substance for a mistrial or retrial.

Surviving these challenges is relatively easy if you take some damage control steps before going to trial. I recommend putting together a portfolio with your full resume, copies of training certifi-

cates, and diplomas for every course you have taken. Supplement that with letters of recommendation and appreciation and commendation, awards, college transcripts, proof of military service (DD214), a listing of trade and technical schools and their course subject matter, and if possible, news articles or other documents that will support your training and experience. In advance of trial, supplement your case notes with when and where and by whom you were trained or experienced, for each event requiring your testimony. You need to prepare yourself to support your training and experience about everything that you will be testifying to.

My suggestion to each of you is to train as often as you can in your profession, and in any associated disciplines that may interact in some way with your profession. If for example, you are a police detective, and your case involves a wrongful death, though you have been investigating wrongful deaths for five years, you will still be asked for your proof of training in wrongful deaths. Absent that, the opposing attorney, and the court as well, may imply that you were not formally trained in wrongful deaths, that in all those five years of your conducting wrongful death investigations, the possibility could exist that you may have repetitively investigated all or any one of them, including this case before the court, improperly. With that in mind, you may possibly not be able to offer an opinion in your case.

To help overcome what is to come, keep your training records and always bring your current resume to trial. Be prepared. I maintain in my office separate binders, labeled as to what subject matter they contain, i.e., “Fire & Explosion”, “Traffic Collision Training”, “Forensic Training”, “Death Investigation”, and so on. When I complete a course of study, I make a copy of the certificate or diploma, place it in the designated binder, and immediately update my resume with the course completion information. I box up all my training notes, syllabus and supporting documents for

that course. If I attend an in-person course, I ask the instructor for a copy of the class sign-in sheet as further proof of attendance. Each binder has proof of my experience and training in that discipline. I take it to court as my backup when called to testify about that discipline.

Remember, the Gatekeeper will not take anything for granted just because you said you were trained or experienced in a matter before the judge. Your occupation title also is not taken for granted. Many years ago, I testified as a “Forensic Expert”. I was a Sheriff’s Captain and Chief of the Detective Bureau. The courts then looked at my title alone, or the mere testifying in a law enforcement officer’s uniform, as proof of my capability for what I was going to testify to, that it was sufficient evidence of my implied training and experience. That has all changed today.

Here is an example of what to expect if you identify yourself to the “Gatekeeper” as an “Instructor” in your profession, as I once had to go through. You will likely be asked to produce your personal proof of training and experience (Instructor Biography and supporting documents), Instructor Training, Course Lesson Plans, Course Bibliography, Course References, Instructors Guide, Curriculum, Course Handouts, Attendance Records, Pre-Tests, Final Examination Questions, Answer Sheets, Couse Syllabus, Student Course Evaluations, Copy of the Certificate of Training, and class Sign-In-Sheets.

One needs to keep in mind that it is the opposing attorney who will hammer you for such information. They have a responsibility to their client to win their case. If it means making you appear to be less of an expert in your field,

to that end, they will go to almost any extremes necessary to accomplish that goal. Anticipating and being prepared is always a winning combination. When in court, and you hear the words “Daubert Challenge”, say to yourself “Remember they can’t eat you” (the significance of these words expressed in times of stress is another story for another time) then relax your mind, and overcome that which is about to come.

Stay Informed

Opt-In for the Digital News at WorkingPImag.com

The latest news, right to your inbox twice a month.

Professional Marketplace

How does your PI story begin?

A private investigation company that came out to my college when I was 19 and gave a presentation about what a professional Investigator’s job looked like and what the position entailed. After their presentation they gave oneon-one interviews to anybody interested. I jumped at the opportunity to interview and was honest about not having experience. However, I was eager to learn how to execute the position if the PI company gave me the opportunity. Luckily, they offered me the job and that is how I got my start in the profession.

What areas do you focus on?

I currently work as an in-house investigator for the law firm of CaseyGary in San Diego, CA. Most cases I work on are catastrophic personal injury cases extending up to class actions. My investigations entail planning the initial investigations, planning out what needs to be executed, interviewing witnesses, executing scene investigations, taking photographs of the injuries and evidence, as well as handling the chain of custody of evidence. Most recently I have been conducting more and more drone inspections whenever we’re looking at these incidents when they occur out in public areas.

What's something your clients should know?

My network expands globally through The World Association of Detectives (WAD). Aside from being a certified professional investigator, I am also a certified drone pilot, so my bilingual expertise and carrying the additional certifications are unique.

Outside of my work, for several years I’ve committed to par ticipate in a youth ministry at my church here in San Diego. I spend at least two days a week investing my time working with middle school and high school youth. I like to serve others, whether mentoring disadvantaged youth, putting together efforts to gather resources for children in need, or volunteering my time on different platforms to help kids that need it. That is where I find fulfillment.

Is there any advice you would give to a new PI?

Commit to plugging yourself into an association where you can have those opportunities to network and continue learning. Attend state conferences for networking and educational benefits. Most importantly, stay teachable and learn something new every day. Never have a closed mind or attitude when you show up to work.

Reach Jay Paulino by phone at CaseyGarey in San Diego by calling (619) 485-6498.

No one

General Liability

Coverage