Speaking of identity theft (see previous post), long-time friend of Caveat Research, Charlie Pinck (a former Mintz Group alum and currently Senior VP of Investigations for Global Options) recently had a letter published in the magazine of the American Society for Industrial Security. Charlie's letter (from their June issue) takes on some of the prevailing notions about allowing access to sensitive data.

Not only does Charlie do a nice job of provide some much needed explanation regarding the indispensibility of personal (but public) data to the work of investigators, but he also provides a vivid description of how this information is put to work in service to the goal of transparency, accuracy and integrity. While the ASIS publication is not iself available online (the horror), here's a clip:

...access to personal identifying information benefits our society in many ways. Before legislation is passed that severely restricts such access, we should first consider the negative impacts that such laws could have. As a professional investigator, I use this data in many different ways: to track down important witnesses and uncover critical information in complex litigation; to conduct criminal background checks; to find stolen assets; and to investigate white collar crime, fraud, and other forms of criminal activity--including identity theft; and in many other investigations.

One of the most important uses of this information is conducting criminal record searches, an important component in many investigations. Since there is no publicly available national criminal record database (the Justice Department maintains such a database known as NCIC, but provides access only to law enforcement agencies), investigators must first gather an address history for the subject, then conduct searches of each jurisdiction identified.

We need access to Social Security numbers or another form of identifying information. This is typically drawn from the top portion of a credit report (called the credit header)--which contains someone's name, Social Security number, and current and prior addresses--without that, such searches become close to impossible to thoroughly conduct, thereby exposing people to serious potential risks.

For instance, in a recent investigation of a client's household employee, I found a criminal record involving a minor. The offense occurred nearly 10 years earlier in a different state. Without the ability to construct an address history for the employee. I never would have found it, and the client and his family would be in jeopardy.

In another case that occurred some years ago. I was investigating an individual who was being considered for a senior-level position within a Fortune 500 company. Using similar techniques, I not only found a criminal record for assault and battery but discovered that this person attempted to expunge his criminal record within a few days of his interview with our client.

I was also retained to investigate a potential business partner and discovered a multimillion-dollar fraud that he had committed. The complaint listed a number of fraudulent claims that the subject person had made about his background; he had also given my client the same fraudulent claims practically verbatim. Armed with this knowledge, my client decided not to pursue a $ 7 million investment that most surely would have been lost. There are many more examples like these.

If I have learned anything from my 15 years of investigative experience, it is that people lie, especially when they are trying to hide past bad acts. Far too often, potential employers or partners do not ask the right questions (or any questions, for that matter) or check information supplied by business partners and others until it is too late and the damage has been done. Reagan's axiom "trust but verify" applies here as much as it does in arms control.

Another important use of personal identification information is to differentiate between people with common names. Imagine the difficulty in searching for criminal records for someone named John Smith absent any other information unique to this person, such as his Social Security number and date of birth. This is the daunting scenario we would face were current proposals to restrict access to such information enacted.

Identity theft is a real concern and needs to be dealt with in a serious manner. However, limiting access to such information in as draconian a manner as is now under consideration would limit the ability of private citizens to protect themselves against a variety of equally dangerous threats. It may also embolden those who commit crimes, because they will know that investigating them will be more difficult and expensive.

Professional investigators play an important role because law enforcement agencies are not in the business of checking out a person's background to assess the potential risk of hiring them or doing business with them. Thus, people hire professional investigators. In certain circumstances, the information they gather may eventually convince law enforcement to become involved.

For all of these reasons, investigators are needed, and they need access to information to do their jobs. They should not be hampered by the actions of information brokers who failed to check the credentials of new customers and allowed themselves to be victimized in the process.

Thanks Charlie.

-- MDT

Labels: background checks, database, Department of Justice, identity theft