Specialist Police Officers
Use specialised operational tactics and technology to undertake serious crimes investigations, analyse evidence, resolve high-risk situations and run specialist police operations.
A week on a fraud investigation
You are a detective in a specialist unit, working on a case in which several elderly people lost money to a false investment scheme. It is Monday morning. You have a pile of bank records, three upset victims and a lead from a colleague. The investigation is already four weeks old, and your supervisor wants progress.
Choose what you would do. Then see what happens. There are often good reasons for each choice.
I've told this story to three different people already, and nothing seems to happen. My husband and I saved for years. I just want to know whether anyone is actually doing anything about it.
Tell her the case is complicated and that she should be patient, then end the call to get on with the file
It is true, but she hangs up feeling ignored and may stop cooperating. A victim who feels unheard gives less help.
Tell her you are confident of finding the person, and that she and her husband will see their money again soon
She is relieved for a day. But you do not know it will happen, and when time passes she feels let down and angry. A promise you cannot keep costs you the trust of the people you need most.
Thank her, explain what you are doing and what you cannot yet say, and give her a day for an update
She feels respected and offers one more detail that turns out to be useful. Treating victims as partners in the work is part of good investigation.
I've found a way to get access to the suspect's phone records quickly. It isn't strictly the official process, but it would save us two weeks. Nobody would know. Should we do it?
Use the quick way, because the victims are waiting and the result is what matters
The records turn up, but a defence lawyer would argue they were obtained improperly. The evidence could be thrown out and the case could fall apart. A shortcut can cost a conviction.
Decline, follow the proper process and plan how to use the two weeks well
The wait is frustrating, but you use the time to chase other leads. When the records arrive, they are rock solid. Doing it properly is slower and gets a result that holds.
Tell Reuben to wait, and ask your supervisor whether the quick way is acceptable
Your supervisor says it is not, which you suspected. Asking is sensible, but you could have given Reuben a clearer answer yourself.
I've heard there's a big investment scam targeting older people in the area. Can you tell me anything? A name, a number of victims, whatever you can give me. People need to be warned.
Give her a few details about the suspect, so that the public is warned in time
The suspect hears about it and moves their money. You have damaged your own case, and may have named an innocent person. Details of an active investigation are not yours to give.
Refer her to the police media unit for a general public warning
The media unit puts out a careful warning that helps the public without revealing the case. The investigation remains safe, and the public gets useful advice.
Say you cannot comment on an active investigation and end the call there
You protect the case, but you have missed a chance to warn people who might be at risk. A short, careful referral would have done both.
How it went
The week ends with a solid lead and a case that will stand up in court. Specialist police officers spend a great deal of time reading, checking and waiting, and their work depends on patience, honesty and doing things the right way. Could you stay patient when a case takes months?
This is a simplified, fictional situation to help you explore. It is not professional instruction or a test of your ability.
Case study: The pattern in the small thefts
A fictional case set in a specialist investigations unit of a fictional state police force, working on property and financial crime.
The situation
Detective Sergeant Amara Okonkwo worked in a specialist unit that looked at property crime. Over three months, a dozen farms in the same region had reported missing equipment, each time a small loss, each handled by a different local officer. No single report looked serious. Amara noticed that the farms had all used the same machinery supplier. Her team had other investigations, and her superintendent asked whether this was worth the time.
What they did
Amara asked for a week to check. She went through the reports side by side, mapped where each farm was and worked out when each loss had happened. She found the timing matched the supplier's service visits. She did not accuse anyone. She checked records, asked the supplier for help with a polite request, and sought advice from the prosecutors before taking any further step.
How it turned out
The records pointed to one person with access to the farms' addresses and schedules. The case took many more months of careful work and went to court in the end. Amara thought most about the farmers who had each felt their small loss was not worth reporting, and who now saw it was part of something larger.
What would you do?
- How would you decide whether a pattern is real or just a coincidence?
- What is the value of patience when working on a case for months?
- Why might a detective ask for advice from lawyers before taking the next step?