PART TWO OF A FOUR PART SERIES
INVESTIGATIVE RESPONSE – THE GAPS IN THE FIRST 120 HOURS
INTRODUCTION:
“If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it probably is a duck, but remember probability is not beyond reasonable doubt so be prepared for a maybe because at criminal law probability is not absolute.”
Criticisms, no more criticisms – with over fifty years in policing and investigations, and the last ten years almost solely concentrating on missing persons, I have identified gaps in most cases. However, I am generally not overly critical. Why? Because I understand reality and the limitations and pressures under which police work. I also understand that it is the front-line officer who is usually the target for criticism, which is often double-barreled with the full-choke hit coming from superiors, who ironically set the standards of operational resources and training and are a major contributor in influencing the errors of judgment or investigative gaps highlighted. (I will briefly raise some of the management responsibilities in Part 4 of this series - to come later).
True to the often hectic nature of an emergency call, this is only going to be a brief foray into what is sometimes a journey into a complex, unknown and evolving case, where a person has been reported missing in a bush or wilderness area.
Ordinarily to cover this subject in its entirety, we would have to discuss a whole range of topics including communication, investigative senses and thinking, biases, and the depths of analytical thinking. However, this is a briefing only, and the in-depth narrative on those and other related topics will be left for another day.
Also, in order to put this into a realistic perspective, from the outset I am going to state that the points and considerations raised here are for ‘The Perfect World’ scenario and we all know that there is no such thing as a ‘Perfect World’. However, the points I do raise, are in the main identified gaps from just one high-profile missing person case, though they have similarly been identified in other cases in many jurisdictions, in many countries, over many years.
CAMEO SCENARIO
A family member is at a trailhead car park and is reporting a missing adult lone male family member as an overdue hiker. It is late afternoon. The hiker had set out early morning for a four-hour hike along a wide and navigable trail in a heavily wooded water catchment area. He was extremely well equipped, with GPS, phone, food, and water.
In this case the call-taker took the basic details and dispatched a police unit to attend. (The reporting family member heard a supervisor in the background comment that her husband had got himself lost). Sometime later a uniformed police unit arrived, and a police helicopter was observed overhead.
BRIEFING BY FIRST RESPONSE
As an investigator, the uniform police first-responders of the above scenario have just briefed you. On face value the facts do not suggest anything suspicious at this stage and the search and rescue (SAR) operation is only just beginning. Statistics in relation to lost person behavior reveal that 97% of missing persons in this scenario are found within the first 24 hours and 78% are found uninjured. Only 1% is investigative from a criminality perspective. So, which are you dealing with?
The problem is that you generally won’t know until you dig a little deeper. Alternatively, you can ignore the case and allow it to evolve and wait to see what happens down the track. But by then, the scene will be contaminated, witnesses will have dispersed, evidence will be lost, and you will be open to all manner of criticism for not being on the ball from the outset. So, find out what the uniform first responders have done. You also want to know if family and SAR are still in attendance, and if there is a vehicle used by the missing person at the scene and if it is secure. If not then have it secured by uniform police until your arrival.
ATTENDING THE SCENE
Revisit finding out what the uniform first responders have done and gather the details of their notes. Work out who everyone of authoritative relevance is, and the timelines according to them. Establish who is going to be your contact point and make sure they know that all and every bit of new information they collect comes to you, no matter how insignificant they think it might be.
Visually examine, without contaminating, any vehicle or other item of relevance at the scene. Interview any witnesses and take notes of the conversation, have them adopt your notes, or make an interim statement of the important facts.
Update the SAR coordinator on any details regarding the missing person or other matters, which may have impact on the search operation.
GATHERING THE INFORMATION
The extent of the information relevant to a missing person case is dependent upon each case. However, there are some basics which are the staples of any case. These include an understanding of the physical health of the missing person, which can be obtained from the family and/or any recent medical history. Known medications and mental health, knowing how the person will likely react in certain circumstances are of high importance to both SAR and to your case.
Find out if there are other events occurring in the district or precinct, such as hunting, trail bike riding, other police incidents, logging, anything which may have impacted on your case.
Finally, review everything... all the information you have collected including your own calculations and theories.
TALKING TO FAMILY
Discuss the case with the family and explain your role. Discuss any investigative points that you may need clarifying, such as the health and mental state of the missing person, or evidentiary items in, or appearing to be missing from the vehicle.
Consider the need to explore the possibility of examining the missing person’s computer and also interviewing their friends and associates. There is a definite need to gain a full understanding of the intended travel movements of a missing person from others, which can often come from an unlikely source.
(I once located an adult female safe and well in a ski resort room, who was earlier anonymously and falsely reported as being abducted and raped – the tip in locating her came from her 12-year-old brother who had days earlier been eavesdropping on his older sister’s phone conversations and noted the name of the hotel)
Stepping aside from or winding back an investigation with no result, is a delicate undertaking for anyone. Often this type of missing person case may coincide with the scaling down of the SAR operation, which often occurs after about five days. We all know that the scaling down of an SAR operation is usually done based on a medical assessment of the missing person’s survivability according to the environment and other circumstances. My advice is to have a plan to stay connected with the family beyond the end of the SAR operation.
The family will sometimes be unsure as to who to turn to for answers. On one hand they see it as the SAR operators searching for their loved ones, and yet on the other hand it may be a detective to whom they have been directing their anxious information and questions regarding the case. Who can perhaps best answer their questions in the end?
Generally, it is the SAR coordinator who best understands the impact of the environment on a lost human, and who may have a repertoire of similar cases to draw upon for example purposes. However, we have seen so often that a detective who is called upon by family and who is subject-matter-ignorant, can be unable to explain lost person behavior. This detective may later appear to alienate himself from them and be tagged as uncaring and inept as an investigator. Stay connected, know your subject, the family and stay interested.
MEDIA
Liaise with the uniform supervisors. Find out who (if anyone) is already talking with media, If they are doing a great job, then leave it to that person and feed them the information you want out there. If not, then take it over. Remember, the quality of the information in, is only as good as the quality of the information out, so make sure you tell them what you want known.
Give them a call to action, preferably a Crime Stoppers tips-line or similar if you have one. That way the information is automatically fed into the appropriate analytical centre and then directly to you.
CONCLUSION
The challenge for the investigator is to set aside the mindset of always trying to establish whether or not a crime has been committed. Whilst that is a fundamental role of every police detective, it is problematic in many missing person cases because the probability that there is no crime generally stacks up at first base. It is usually not until a little later on that the suspicions start to appear, and by then a lot of time, ground and evidence has been lost.
Crime or no crime, the bigger issue is in the fundamental thinking in the first place. The risk and issues in most of these cases is primarily one of loss of life, which takes a front row seat in any investigation. Yet in many missing person cases the responsibility of investigation is relegated to uniform police officers with little or no investigative experience. (This will be visited in more detail in Part 4: Management responsibilities.
PART 3: NEXT FORTNIGHT – Victimology and Witness handling
Note: For presentation options on this series please contact the writer on our website at www.footprintsinthewilderness.com.au
Written by Valentine Smith APM (Co-founder of Footprints in the Wilderness)
Footprintsinthewilderness.com.au – September 2024
Comments