Police Dilemmas to Overcome: Intelligence Community vs. Law Enforcement Community

Dr. Michael Beshears

“They’re a law enforcement agency. They’re not in the business of fighting terrorism.” (John Edwards)

Something to think about:

The basic dilemma, as White (2004) points out, is a legal dilemma. Law enforcement has for years been accustomed to working within legal constraints, collecting evidence that can be used for prosecution in a criminal court. There is a natural terminus to a criminal investigation. The intelligence community has for years been accustomed to working with few legal constraints, and there is no natural terminus, or end, to an intelligence investigation.

Criminal intelligence is governed by constitutional rules of evidence; national security intelligence is not.

Going to trial in a terrorism investigation often means exposing the intelligence sources for the sake of a criminal conviction. This irony, as well as other twists having to do with military tribunals, has produced some rather strange effects in the war on terrorism — American citizens being detained like prisoners of war and foreigners being treated like citizens in criminal courts.

To be sure, terrorist groups, according to Al Qaeda’s training manual (2003) instruct their captured agents to make a mockery of justice systems – to insist they were tortured or mistreated, to learn the names of their captors and lie about them, and to use religion at every turn to their advantage.

Nonetheless, this is not sufficient reason to proceed in a constitutional vacuum or make up the rules as you go along. There are other factors that dampen the prospects for successful use of law enforcement for intelligence purposes, and White (2004) implied the following:

• Police do not necessarily have the academic credentials or higher order critical thinking skills training to understand the root causes of terrorism, its complexities, or the insight to distinguish between terrorist sympathizers and criminal terrorists

• Police are trained in reasonable suspicion and probable cause to make stops, ask questions, detain, infiltrate, and collect information, but intelligence work requires neither standard in the ongoing collection of vast amounts of non-criminal information

• Police agencies are fiercely autonomous, competitive, turf-conscious, mistrustful, and attuned to local politics with little or no interest in thinking outside their jurisdiction and/or partnering with non-police agencies seen as outsiders

• Police agencies are focused on publicity and getting the word out about their effectiveness at crime-fighting while intelligence work is focused on secrecy and never letting intelligence successes be known

• Police are taught that criminal justice record keeping should be clear and concise, with writing crisp and to the point, while there is no such thing as too much excess or irrelevant information for intelligence work

• Police organizations are bureaucracies where power struggles and personal rivalries abound, combined with a stifling tendency toward stagnation and lack of creativity whereas intelligence work rewards eccentricity and creativity

• Police are prone to negative stereotyping and abuse of power, and any intelligence shared with them may be misused

• Police are prone to leaks and the leaking of information may occur, tipping the terrorists off about an ongoing operation

• Police often act officiously and rudely when enforcing security precautions on ordinary citizens, creating a sense of insecurity and giving the public the impression of a police state

• Police are not psychologically equipped to deal with the kind of massive casualties that weapons of mass destruction can cause

• Police are not prepared to face a terrorist enemy who uses criminal means to obtain military objectives

References

Al Qaeda Training Manual (2003). Homeland Security Digital Library. Air University (U.S.). Air War College. Retrieved from https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=2046

Bush, G. W. (2005). National strategy for homeland security. University of Oregon Libraries; e-Asia Digital Library.

White, J. R. (2004). Defending the homeland: Domestic intelligence, law enforcement, and security. Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

About the Author: Dr. Beshears has an associate degree in general studies and a dual baccalaureate degree in criminal justice and psychology from Drury University. In addition, he has three graduate degrees, one in criminology from Indiana State University and another in health services management from Webster University. Plus, an additional 18 graduate hours in public administration. His Ph.D. is in business with a specialization in criminal justice from Northcentral University. Dr. Beshears after 22 years of honorable service retired from the United States Army in 1998, at the rank of Master Sergeant. While on active duty he was the  Non-commissioned Officer of the Year at 2 different commands and an Army Leadership Academy Honor Graduate. As a civilian, he has worked with the local sheriff’s department, state drug task force and FBI.

Peer-Reviewed Publications Include:

Beshears, M. L. (2017). Effectiveness of Police Social Media Use. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(3), 489-501.

Beshears, M. L., Beshears, M. L., Weiss, D., & Crocker, C. D. (2017). Sex Offender Community Notification Law Reform: A Call for More Active, Consistent, and Detailed Information about High-Risk Offenders. International Journal of Social Science Studies, 5(5), 71-78.

Beshears, M. L. (2015). Network Theory: Effectiveness of Social Media Networks Created by Sheriff Offices (Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University).

Presentations Include:

Presented at the 2018 Convention of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences on February 17, 2018, in New Orleans, Louisiana; entitled, Social Media Use: A Tool for Solving Crimes and Building Community Relations. Co-presenters were criminal justice professors, Dr. Michelle Beshears, and Dr. Mark Bond.

Presented at the 2017 Convention of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences on March 25, 2017, in Kansas City, Missouri, entitled, Narcissism in Policing Organizations: What to Look for and How to Correct it.

Presented at Oxford University, London (video conference). Topic – Black Lives Matter: Social Justice 2.0 September 26, 2017. The lecture was live-streamed to graduate students in the sociology program and their professor. Co-presenters were criminal justice professors, Dr. Michelle Beshears, Dr. Mark Bond, and Nicole Cain (Ph.D. c). 

Beshears, M.L., & Beshears, M.L., (May 7, 2014). Sloan C Discussion. “Briefing of 7th Annual Emerging Technologies for Online Learning International Symposium,” APUS, Adobe Connect – Phone and Online.