Expert: Loren Stevens - 7/19/2004

Question
Since you did such a great job answering my last question, I'll pester you again.  In my book, the Detective on the case is using someone as bait to catch a killer. I know that this is technically not normal procedure, but what are some of the things that I need to have my detective do in order for the situation to be believable? While the story is pure fiction, I want to make it as realistic as possible.
Thanks,
Chantal

Answer
Chantal,
You are not pestering me...glad to help.
There is an OLD saying in police work.."theif-taking", probably came from old England, re: Robert Peel era. It basically means, that it takes a thief to set (catch) a thief.
Lots can be said on what you seek. I'll try to cover some of the stuff. First off, NEVER use a juvenile. Maybe if it is NECESSARY on a capital case, but that gets pretty hairy. Plus, you need a judge to ok it, after the kids folks and prosecutor buys into it. So much can go wrong, that it's not worth it. I did ONCE, and was gulping maalox the whole time.
Essentially, there are 2 kinds of informant. A. passive, and B. directed. The former merely tells you shit, where the latter responds proactively to your direction. Therein lies the challenge.
The officer/agency is responsible for the actions of the directed informant during the course and scope of his/her involvement.
Legally, these informants are an extension of the agency while being "directed."
Example, a passive informant goes into a suspect's apt. to look around on his own initiative. Having been reliable in the past, the cops can qualify his pattern of truthfulness, and use the relevant info to secure a search warrant.
A "directed" informant does the same exact thing, and it can't be used to obtain a search warrant....he was acting as the cops agent...an extension of the agency, ergo, his behavior is subject to the same general standards ie, the 4th and 14th ammendments of the US Constitution ( search and seisures, due process et al)
ALL this stuff is "doable", but it has to go through various protocol and legal hoops.
Also, the cops need to deal with due dilligence in terms of informant safety. They can't just front him out, even if he is a puke, and an otherwise "aggrivated-rectal-fistula" (pain in the ass)
On a capital case, the informant WILL have to testify, so the cops NEED to harvest as much valuable evidence as possible, that will stand in it's own, and embrace elements of corpus delecti.
The defense atty will go after the informant and controll officer BIG TIME in suppression hearings, prelims trials appeals et al.
As a writer, you can suck everybody into a donnybrook in a debate of :"the exclusionary Rule" (fruits of the poisonous tree) Attornys, Judges, prosecutors, Media and citizens have been fighting over this for YEARS, with both sides having legitimate issues.
What do the cops know about the informant? is he an addict? what drug? currently on any meds? past or present mental problems?
Can he read and write the English lang? How far did he get in school? how reliable in the past?
It would probably help your story if the snitch had no history of reliability with these cops, which lends to more officer risk, to the case, and protocol.
Is the informant "working off a case"?, or a paid informant. Big difference in the eyes of the media, and how it lands with the slime factor viewed by the public.
On the other hand, a paid informant generally gets no $ if they don't have anything to sell....the danger, is they will CREATE something to sell, and ultimately, be a principle. This artificial crime was created, and the court takes a dim view of such things.
You need to have an understanding of:" outrageous government conduct", and "entrapment" , as they relate to police operations. It would be easier for you to look them up, than for me to explain.
Then, the cops need to explain why, it was necessary to use an informant. eg, cost effective, he was already accepted into the suspect/group, time restraints, no clean way to intro an undercover cop into the suspect(s), etc.
Has the informant worked with other agencies? cops? what is the record on him for reliable performance? any problems with informant?
Well Chantal, this should fill your dance card for a while.
If you need more, or something specific, don't be afraid to ask. I tend to be blunt, but gentile......having had required "sensitivity' training like all cops.......sigh.
loren  
I should add, that the cops need to be atleast as safety conscience with procedures with the informant, as they would be if it were an undercover cop going out front. Otherwise, if the snitch got killed ( a real poss, if the target is a suspected killer) the informant's family would sue for negligence, wrongful death etc. It does get ugly.
Then, at some juncture, there will be a SEARCH.
This is a big deal in real police work.
Absent the INS, Customs, Border Patrol who can search when ever they so desire....anything or anybody coming into the USA.
The rest of ALL law enforcement, is required to be calibrated with the law.
That said, there are only 4 ways to advance a "lawful" search: search warrant, incident to a lawful arrest, exigent circumstances, and consent.
You can ponder each of those, and see how it would fit into your story.
loren