Angry Employees

Services Private Investigators Can Provide When Employees Pose a Threat

Cornered and Scared

Employees can get backed into a corner when their perception (true or false) is that they are going to lose their job or are going to be disciplined from an employer.  People react differently to adversity.  Some do well and handle tough news appropriately.  Others yell and argue but it is really just barking without the bite.  And then there are others who perceive a great injustice befell them through no fault of their own.  These may be the employees who pose a threat to the company and their co-workers.

Who are these people? 

http://menalive.com/

Socially, these people may be perfectly functional.  They are able to get along with others and may even be leaders.  But just below the surface lies a crippling character flaw.  This flaw leaves them fragile as a result of rejection of one sort or another.  They basically cannot handle what life throws at them.  This trait was recently on display in California where a troubled young man evolved into a mass murder.  By his own admission, his ego could not handle being rejected by females and as a result, he could not cope with it.  This is certainly one of many factors of his personality but probably contributed to his actions.

The big clue

Of course this is an extreme case of violent reaction and there is no doubt about this person’s historical mental trouble.  However, there is something to learn from active shooter behavior which could benefit business leaders when trying to discern dangerous employees.  While there is a continuum of fragility and a person’s capacity to act out, one key to look for is an enduring and consuming grievance they are dealing with.  This trait is manifested in an escalation of behavior which can be detected if you are tuned in.  Suffice to say, the biggest clue is that these people often broadcast their intentions prior to causing problems.

Semper Paratus (Always Ready)

While it can be scary to think that you may have someone capable of murder lurking within your ranks, it should be pointed out that the probability of workplace shooters remains low.  While you should always consider this possibility, know there are more frequently occurring types of violent behaviors which work place managers must contend with.  These risks need to be addressed as both a probability and a reality.  Training, preparation and consulting with professional help when developing plans of action are always recommended.

Help is available

Here are come common services provided by professional investigators to companies that suspect potential employee violence or disruption when termination or discipline is dispensed.

• Background research – This passive option is used to find out what may be lurking in public records or in social media that may provide insights into motives and potential behavior.  
• Investigation – This active option is often overlooked. Talking with the subject, his co-workers, family and neighbors may best be handled by someone representing the interests of the company.  
• Security presence – Having security on-site at critical junctures, either overtly or covertly can provide peace of mind and confidence for those company officials carrying out the necessary actions.  And if something does go awry, the protection is there, just steps away.  
• Surveillance – Often, after an employee is let go, his actions are observed for a few days to make sure he is not planning on coming back to cause chaos.  
• Executive Protection – This goes beyond the protection of company executives but may may also be extended to their family members if the situation is deemed serious enough.  
• Police Liaison – Coordination with local law enforcement is enhanced by professionals who know how to communicate in the language police speak.  It also frees the company to concentrate on the business side of things while receiving concise updates of police activity or requests through the investigator.    

Threat Assessment

Schools need mechanism to capture what is obvious and what is obscure to be safe

Another name added to the list

John David LaDue of Waseca, Minnesota was recently added to the list of infamous names associated with school massacres.  Fortunately, LaDue did not kill anyone and did not even fire a shot but alas was charged with attempted murder in the first degree.  And had it not been for the watchful eye of a suspicious adult, the teen likely would have progressed a lot further in his detailed plot to commit horrible crimes.

Mixed Traits – Mixed Signals

Several accounts cited information about LaDue that suggested he fit the profile of someone who may be at risk for destructive behavior.  Those attributes includes an affinity for guns, a fan of violent movies and authors of dark subjects.  He was also routinely seen practicing hatchet throwing at a tree in his front yard.  But on the flip side, this 17 year old was a high school honor student, held a job, had friends and was allegedly close with his older sister.

Suspect memorialized his intentions

http://www.startribune.com/

Facts obtained from the police investigation revealed a very dark and dangerous person who appeared to be intent on pulling off another Columbine style attack.  He had guns and bombs in his room and more bombs and materiel in a storage facility.  Most damming was a 180 page diary that not only detailed his intentions which included killing his family and creating a fire as a diversion but also showed an affinity for the Columbine killers and even planned to strike on the same date (April 20th) as they did.  

Did the adults miss the signals?  

LaDue’s father who was interviewed in a local paper indicated he was dumbstruck by his son’s dark side.  He was very open about his parenting of his son and by his account, acted reasonably in his upbringing.  LaDue was a good student and did not get into trouble which led the elder LaDue to provide his son with some latitude.  He did claim to check his internet browsing but stopped short of searching his room. That being said, the school superintendent indicated that LaDue was not unknown to them and that people made lots of contact with him and they tried everything possible to build relationships with him.  This is sort of a cryptic comment and the context in which it was said was not exactly known but it does raise the specter that LaDue was known to administrators for nefarious reasons.

The Missing Piece

But for some incredible luck and a citizen willing to make the effort to report suspicious behavior, the ending of this story may have been tragically different.  Clearly, luck is not going to win the day all the time.  There needs to be something beyond metal detectors and locked doors for real school security to be comprehensive.  A critical piece of the solution may lie in the creation of well trained Threat Assessment teams.

A serious commitment to safety and security

A Threat Assessment team is designed to be that place where intelligence is gathered, plans are formulated and actions are initiated.  All of its efforts are designed to intercept violent actors and prevent them from carrying out plans of destruction and mayhem before they happen.  They are also there for providing the help that students and families need to overcome these tendencies.  Threat Assessment teams are different from Student Assistance Programs but share a similar structure in that they require a school district to buy into the concept, make teachers and staff available to participate, allow time for training and meetings and to ensure that they are a visible and active part of school functioning.

Not an impossible mission

A very big lesson learned from tragedies in the past was that there was a connectivity gap between adults, both at home and at the school, and their students.  The creation of an inclusive environment is a necessary element for safe schools and establishing connections is a critical component of that concept.  In addition to the ability to investigate and formulate action plans, the Threat Assessment team would need to ensure the link between adults and students so that signals and threats are captured, quantified and acted upon.

Bent Minds

A criminal psychologist identifies traits of psychopathy and asserts some characteristics may be useful

Secret Looking Glass

One of the best skills an investigator can have is an innate ability to read people.  And what reading a person is exactly may be debatable.  Suffice to say, this ability affords some with being able to see through disguises or to unconsciously detect unseen clues about the true nature and motivations of people. Sure, some skills related to understanding the behaviors and intentions of people can be taught but when it comes to this so called sixth sense, it is truly a gift.

Advantage for the good

The investigator who can capture some hidden essence about a subject, whether it be a client, witness or suspect, gains an invaluable upper hand. With this feeling or intuition, the investigator realizes a great vision which allows for maneuverability when aptly applied.  The investigator is able to avoid pitfalls and dead ends and it may help with quickly finding the truth.

Advantage for the not-so-good

Interestingly, persons diagnosed with psychopathic tendencies may also possess the characteristics of someone who can effectually read people.  In a recent article about the work of Professor Robert Hare who is a criminal psychologist, he identifies a set of attributes psychopaths typically possess. One of which was the ability to be cunning and manipulative.

Tables turned

Dr Hare’s research indicates psychopaths somehow know what you’re feeling, but are unable to feel it themselves.  And because of this, psychopaths can understand what you’re thinking and can use you against yourself because they don’t care.  This begs the question: What does the investigator do when confronted with someone who is more cunning and manipulative than you?

Test yourself

According you Dr. Hare, you or someone you know could fall on the psychopathy spectrum.  The characteristics of a psychopath, as identified by Dr. Hare are listed below.  Score it 0 if it does not apply, 1 if it partially applies or 2 if it fully applies.

1. Glibness and superficial charm  

   

   http://jurisprudenceinquiry.blogspot.com/

2. Grandiose sense of self-worth 
3. Pathological lying
4. Cunning/manipulative 
5. Lack of remorse 
6. Emotional shallowness 
7. Callousness and lack of empathy 
8. Unwillingness to accept responsibility for actions 
9. A tendency to boredom 
10. A parasitic lifestyle 
11. A lack of realistic long-term goals 
12. Impulsivity 
13. Irresponsibility 
14. Lack of behavioral control 
15. Behavioral problems in early life 
16. Juvenile delinquency 
17. Criminal versatility 
18. A history of “revocation of conditional release” (i.e. broken parole)
19. Multiple marriages 
20. Promiscuous sexual behavior

According to Dr. Hare a “pure, prototypical psychopath would score 40. A score of 30 or more qualifies for a diagnosis of psychopath.”

Use it to your advantage

Dr. Hare goes on to assert that some psychopathic traits can be beneficial.   For example, being cunning and manipulative can certainly a desirable attribute, especially if you are a professional investigator.  But is being cunning and manipulative the same as having the ability to read people. From an intent perspective, both afford the ability to gain the upper hand. The difference lies in how the person being read suffers from the encounter.

Match of wits

Not every interviewee will be a game of high stakes chess like Clarice versus Hannibal in the Silence of the Lambs.  But, if Dr. Hare’s assertion is true and there is a spectrum of psycohpathy, then it would be incumbent upon the investigator to seek out these signs in the people they encounter.  While only a professional can label someone a psychopath, the astute person can certainly read the tea leaves and leverage that information to their advantage.  Is that psychotic or what?

The Crime-Business Balance

Is it responsible to ignore crime if you think you have a just reason?  

The Cost

http://www.standard.co.uk/

Business operators look at risks and decide how much of it to tolerate. Part of tolerating a certain amount of risk can also mean revealing a willingness to take losses for the sake of generating sales and absorbing market share. This balance is famously summed up as "the cost of doing business." This cost is typically measured in dollars but to gain those dollars, you have to give something up.  What that something is may not be quantifiable but it is real.  Such is the nature of risk taking.

Fight or Flee

A trade-off lumped into "the cost of doing business" is tolerating a certain amount of crime.  We commonly hear of employee theft or shrinkage.  We hear of malingering and filing false worker's compensation claims.  Not every loss due to crime can be stopped but for the most part, they are confronted and mitigated everyday by professionals who work hard to protect their business from this financial erosion.  These issues exist as a result of criminal behaviors of individuals and to ignore these issues, would be ruinous. Anything less than a total concerted effort stop this behavior is not the norm. Unless, however, that effort to stop the behavior impacts market share. Take for example, the interesting decision by Microsoft to cease internal investigations related to theft for the sake of market share.

Investigation Compromised Business

Not long ago, Microsoft uncovered the theft of a source code for one of their products.  They were able to track down the source of the leak through an internal investigation.  The Microsoft investigators "cracked" the case by legally accessing a Hotmail account of someone involved in the scheme.  An ex-Microsoft employee was subsequently charged in Federal court for this theft of a trade secret.  Despite the investigative success, the case revealed Microsoft's access to and review of their customer's Hotmail account.  Despite this practice being the legal right of Microsoft, the appearance of backlash over the perceived privacy violation resulted in a policy change at Microsoft. So, instead of conducting their own internal investigations involving stolen property (intellectual or physical) the company "will refer the matter to Law Enforcement if further action is required."

Law Enforcement to the Rescue

By passing investigations along to law enforcement, Microsoft is banking the invasion of their customer's Hotmail accounts via search warrant will deflect any ill will toward the company as they would have to be compliant with the law.  This makes it sound better to the privacy concerned customer and Microsoft sees itself as being on the moral high ground of the privacy issue.  It really reveals how much Microsoft perceives privacy to be a critical market share driver.  This is where the trade-off for this policy change gets dangerous. Regardless of their motivation for the change Microsoft is also gambling that the public servants in Law Enforcement can adequately protect their intellectual secrets.  This is a tremendous vote of confidence for local law enforcement and hopefully, for Microsoft's sake, they have the talent and resources to do the job.

One Risk for Others

Even if law enforcement is up to the task, this shift in policy still leaves gaps. For one, Microsoft is potentially giving up critical time by passing this along. Law enforcement, no matter how much access they have, will still not be as quick to respond as company investigators.  Another issue would be this knowledge is now known to criminals. They know where the weakness lies and have gained valuable time to move information out of the company. Finally, and most importantly, what if a criminal act impacts the stability of a platform?  Microsoft may have the ability to stop this issue but because of an internal policy, they pass it to an outside source.  In the mean time, a critical event occurs and a system is compromised.  Hopefully, Microsoft built protections into their policies and procedures to prevent this from happening.

Win - Win?

In the end, "the cost of doing business" is a slippery slope especially when it comes to finding a balance between market share and tolerated losses.  It is revealing how privacy issues in the marketplace have altered this equation. What may be lost are the voices of those customers who would rather lose a certain level of privacy to ensure a stable service from a company that does not yield to criminals for the sake of market share.

Seeking an elusive truth

Flaws in criminal justice system can lead to errant convictions

We the people, in prison

The prisoner population in the US is large.  Roughly 1.6 million citizens were imprisoned in 2010 and another 1.4 were under supervision of parole and probation officers.  The US also imprisons more people per capita than any other comparable nation; about 500 people out of every 100,000 people. Only recently has the prison population seen a decrease but even then, it is a minimal drop.  The decrease has been attributed to everything from new thinking in rehabilitation methods to correctional budget cuts.  None-the-less, given the size of the prison population, mistakes pertaining to the guilt or innocence of defendants will be made.

The dream of unbiased justice

The expectation for excellence in the criminal justice system is very high when it comes to investigating and prosecuting crime.  On one hand society demands law and order and for the right of victims to attain justice.  At the same time, we require the standard of reasonable doubt to balance our thinking.  If not, many innocent people might end up being wrongfully imprisoned. Famous for this sentiment is English jurist Sir William Blackstone who commented “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”; words taken to heart by the founding fathers.  However, because the justice system is made up of people, it will generate its fair share of errors, oversights and even malicious intents and invariably, innocent people are sentenced to prison or even death.  

Technology won’t solve all inequities

The advent of DNA technology has changed the way cases are investigated and adjudicated.  DNA has also exonerated hundreds of wrongfully imprisoned citizens.  Groups like the Innocence Project have dedicated themselves to bringing this technology to bear in cases where the potential for error is great.  But DNA is not always a component of decisions that wrongfully land defendants in jail.  Academics have identified several other factors that cause errors in cases that can lead to errant convictions.

Human imperfections

Identifying the truth can be challenging when you realize the outcome of these critical factors hinge upon the integrity, professionalism and unseen motives of the people involved.

1. Eyewitness misidentification. Research shows that human recall is not infallible.
2. Faulty Forensic Science.  The science and the scientist are not always credible. 
3. Bogus confessions/admissions.  Defendants ignorantly self-incriminate or are coerced to hide the truth.  
4. Government Misconduct.  Measurements of success (convictions) can cloud the judgment of the people who make up the system. 
5. Informants.  The motivation and truthfulness of informants is not always known.  
6. System stress.  Overworked and underfunded defense council perpetuates bad outcomes.  

www.theguardian.com

Moving toward a better system

Making justice accessible to all in need is a noble endeavor and efforts to form a more perfect justice system are underway.  Contributing to this goal, professional investigative firms like CSI can act on behalf of the defense before the case goes to trial.  Validating or deconstructing the facts as gathered by law enforcement can make or break the outcome of the case. Investigation of cases post-conviction can also validate the legitimacy and integrity of suspect decisions.  In the long view, this fact checking can challenge the status quo of the criminal justice system and raise its standard of excellence.  It may also prevent or reverse undesirable outcomes along the way.