In the final analysis however the case agent with

This preview shows page 10 - 12 out of 14 pages.

for quality information; in fact, these techniques are encouraged. In the final analysis, however, the case agent, with guidance from his supervisor, must be the controlling and decision-making authority, not the informant. Failure to control the investigation and keep actions within the agency's scope of authority can result in embarrassment when the case goes to trial. A pitfall that must be meticulously avoided is promising inflated monetary payments or making other deals with an informant that cannot be kept. Advising an informant who anticipates judicial disposition of a charge pending against him or her and indicating that the informant will receive probation or a reduced sentence because of his or her cooperation are examples of commitments that are beyond the authority of an agent to make. In this type of situation, the informant should simply be told that his or her cooperation will be brought to the attention of the Assistant U.S. Attorney handling the case. DO NOT speculate on what the AUSA or court might do. Similarly, promising inflated rewards for Control and Handling of Informants Back to Top Page 10 of 14 Lecture 9/22/2015 ...
cooperation must also be avoided. Informant payments are not within the sole discretion of a case agent, and are contingent upon such factors as supervisory approval, budget, agency guidelines, and so on. Informants may be told that monetary payments are available and may be given general payment guidelines. Inflated promises, payments, or rewards may stimulate an informant one time, but they are not likely to assist in future investigations once a promise has been reneged. Some agencies, particularly those responsible for enforcing and investigating revenue laws, have special reward funds available to informants whose information or services result in the recovery of lost revenues to the government. These funds, often referred to as moiety funds or moiety payments, are paid to an informant based on a percentage of revenues recovered due to the informant's cooperation. In order to maintain proper control of the informant and the direction of the investigation, it is a good policy for the investigator to maintain frequent personal contact. When this is not possible, telephonic contact should be utilized, but not solely relied upon. Personal meetings between the agent and informant are the best atmosphere for debriefing, developing rapport, and issuing instructions. Pre- arranged, secure meeting places should also be established. Utilizing federal buildings, police departments, and other official buildings to meet an informant should be avoided to reduce the risk of exposure. It is generally recommended that a second witnessing agent be present at these meetings.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture