Pertemuan 8

Teknik Pemeriksaan secara Tersembunyi

(Covert Examination)

Habibie Nugroho Wicaksono, S.S.T.Akt., M.Sc.

Pendahuluan
• A covert operation is an investigation technique designed to obtain
evidence by use of agents whose true role is undisclosed to the target.
• There are two major forms of covert operations: undercover operations
and surveillance operations.
• Several distinctions define these two types of covert operations.
• Undercover operations seek to develop evidence directly from people
involved in the offence through the use of disguise and deceit. Rather
than waiting for the information to come by other routes, there is a
conscious decision to seek it out.
• In contrast, surveillance operations use the skills of observation to
determine the activity of individuals. Surveillance operations are designed
to gather information. For example, a surveillance operation might involve
observing a suspect from afar while he meets with a potential co-
conspirator. Alternatively, the investigator might pose as the co-
conspirator’s agent and engage the suspect in conversation in an attempt
to gather information; this would be an example of an undercover
operation.
Pendahuluan

• Covert operations require the highest degree of skill and planning.

• Used in a timely manner with great care, a covert operation can
produce results that cannot be achieved in any other way.
• Used incorrectly or handled badly, covert operations can lead to
embarrassment, serious financial liability, injury, and even death.
Pendahuluan

• Disguise and deceit in undercover operations are well recognised by

the courts as a legitimate function of public and private law
enforcement, provided the undercover operation is based on
sufficient probable cause.
• Covert operations cannot be conducted as “fishing expeditions.”
• Justification for conducting the operation must be legally sound and
defensible and must not violate a person’s reasonable expectation of
privacy.
Pendahuluan

Before conducting a covert operation, it is essential that the basis for the
operation be committed to writing, preferably in a memo (see the
“Report Writing” chapter). The memorandum should clearly state:
• The information upon which the covert operation will be based
• The information that is expected to be gained from the operation
• The identities of suspects, if known
• Operatives under the fraud examiner’s care, custody, or control
Objectives

• According to Paul O’Connell in an article for Security Management,

one of the first steps in initiating an undercover operation is to
identify the investigation’s objectives.
• The objectives must specifically identify what the operation is
designed to discover, such as the identity of the fraudulent worker
responsible for a specific crime.
Objectives

Some of those objectives are:

• To obtain evidence of a past, current, or future crime: This evidence
usually bears on the culpability of individuals. If an operative in a
covert investigation is posing as a thief, for example, actual thieves
might confess their involvement to him, unaware that their
conversations were being recorded.
• To identify those engaged in possible illegal activity: If, for example,
cash is missing, a covert investigation or surveillance might disclose
who is committing the offence. Thereafter, the covert operation might
be discontinued and the evidence gathered by more traditional
means.
Objectives

• To recover illegal gains: If an accounts payable clerk has been stealing

to purchase an automobile, locating the car might permit recovery
through civil litigation.
• To identify co-conspirators: If an employee is in collusion with another
employee, a covert operation might lead to the second individual’s
identity.
• To identify the modus operandi: Again, in the case of missing goods,
the perpetrator’s identity might be known or suspected, but the
internal control deficiencies permitting the theft might be unknown. A
covert operation might discover the missing link.
Problems in Covert Operations
In addition to the legal problems a fraud examiner might encounter, a covert
operation is the most costly and risky work a fraud examiner can undertake. Such
operations consume great amounts of time and human resources. They should be
used only with extreme care and as a last resort. If an investigation can be conducted
in any other way, the fraud examiner should stay away from covert operations.
Entrapment
• Many jurisdictions recognise the legal defence of entrapment. Entrapment occurs
when law enforcement officers or government agents induce a person to commit a
crime that he is not previously disposed to commit. Entrapment also poses a legal
problem in covert operations, particularly in undercover operations, because the
defendant might escape liability if it appears that he was improperly induced to
commit the crime. For example, if the officer received a reliable tip that a suspect
committed fraud, then that could serve as adequate predication. Therefore, it is
imperative that covert operations be properly predicated, and again, covert
operations must not be used for “fishing expeditions.”
Electronic Recordings
• In some countries, it is illegal to audiotape a conversation unless the person
creating the recording has the consent of both parties. What is or is not
permissible will vary by jurisdiction. To ensure that no laws are violated, examiners
must consult with legal counsel before conducting any type of covert or
undercover investigation.
Surveillance
Surveillance

• Surveillance is the planned observation of people, places, or objects. It

is normally concerned with people.
• Places and objects observed are usually incidental to the primary
interest of gathering information about certain people.
• There are two general types of surveillance: mobile and fixed.
• Mobile surveillance is sometimes referred to as “tailing” or
“shadowing,” and fixed surveillance is referred to as a “stakeout” or
“plant.”
• Mobile surveillance can be done on foot or by vehicle and is carried
out when people being observed move from location to location.
• A fixed surveillance is used when a person or activity remains in one
place, although the observers might move from one vantage point to
another in the immediate area.
Surveillance
• Surveillance, whether by foot or vehicle, is predominantly an exercise
in common sense, skill, tact, and ingenuity on the observer’s part.
• Carefully planned and properly executed surveillance can be of
tremendous value in an investigation; conversely, lack of preparation,
poor timing, and unsound surveillance practices can destroy an
otherwise good case.
• Surveillance can be a valuable technique.
• It can be used to locate residences, businesses, or other places of
interest to the investigation, and it can be used to locate places where
criminal activity is conducted.
• It can also produce important evidence concerning the scope and
nature of a person’s activities.
• Surveillance activities, however, must be carefully recorded. Detailed
notes and logs, video (often with special lenses and light sources),
sound recordings, and miniature electronic listening devices must be
used appropriately
Two Methods of Surveillance
• There are two basic methods of surveillance: loose surveillance and close
surveillance.
• Loose surveillance is used when targets do not need to be kept under
constant observation. Loose surveillance should be discontinued if the
person becomes suspicious.
• Close surveillance is used when subjects need to be kept under
continuous observation even if it appears that the subjects have become
suspicious.
• Circumstances might require a fraud examiner to change from loose to
close surveillance.
• It helps to develop a surveillance plan, but the fraud examiner must
observe and interpret the circumstances to decide which tactic to employ.
• If the plan calls for loose surveillance until a specified act is complete,
after which the subject is to be put under close surveillance or
apprehended, the observer must determine when the specific incident
has taken place.
Surveillance – Preparation
• Before conducting surveillance, fraud examiners should develop a surveillance plan.
• The observer’s attire should fit in with the area or group being surveyed.
• Dress should be conservative, unless conservative dress is not appropriate for the area.
• Attire should not be loud or flashy so that if the subject notes the observer, it will be
less likely that he will form any lasting impression.
• Minor changes in outer clothing or hand-carried items might alter the overall impression
and help prevent recognition by the subject.
• Two or more observers working together need complete agreement about the
surveillance techniques and schedule.
• Discreet signals will help each observer understand any given situation.
• Planning is essential, but the observers’ adaptability and ingenuity are vital.
• Observers should be chosen for both aptitude and resourcefulness.
• They must have poise, patience, and endurance.
• Prior to the surveillance, the observer should prepare and document a cover story that
will stand up under scrutiny.
• This cover story should provide the observer with a reasonable excuse for being in the
area and for doing what has to be done there.
Surveillance – Electronic Equipment

• Fraud examiners should consider using electronic surveillance

equipment when conducting surveillance.
• For surveillance on foot, transmitting and receiving devices can easily
be hidden on the person without arousing suspicion.
• Transmitters can be concealed in packages, briefcases, or on the
person.
• Light-gathering binoculars and/or metascope equipment for night
surveillance should be used if necessary/
Surveillance – Basic Precautions
• When conducting surveillance, an observer should refrain from making
abrupt, unnatural moves that could attract attention.
• Observers should also avoid disguises such as false beards, which are
impractical, hard to maintain, and easily detectable.
• The observer should not look directly into the subject’s eyes.
• Inexperienced observers must overcome the tendency to believe that
they have been “made” (identified) because the subject glances at them
several times.
• The geography of the area where surveillance is to take place should be
studied carefully.
• The observer should know the location of culs-de-sac or dead-end streets
or alleys to avoid being trapped or discovered.
• A suspicious subject might suddenly reverse course, enter a dead-end
street, board and suddenly depart from public transportation, or engage
in a variety of other evasive actions.
• The observer can counter these strategies by following approved
surveillance techniques.
Sources and Informants
Sources and Informants
• Sources and informants both serve the same purpose—to provide information to help
develop a case.
• However, there are notable differences between confidential sources and confidential
informants.
• The terms should not be used interchangeably.
• A confidential source furnishes information as a result of occupation or profession and
has no culpability in the alleged offence.
• For example, confidential sources might include barbers, attorneys, accountants, and
law enforcement personnel.
• A confidential informant has a direct or indirect involvement in the matter under
investigation, and he might be culpable.
• The distinction between the two sources is their involvement in the offence.
• Informants can pose treacherous legal issues for the fraud examiner.
• Tom Melsheimer, a former U.S. prosecutor, suggests that secretly photographed or
recorded conversations provided by an informant are the most convincing type of
evidence.
• This information is generally accepted as a “slam dunk” for a criminal prosecutor,
because there is little that a white-collar criminal can dispute when caught in the act of
a fraud.
Types of Informants
In the book Criminal Investigations, authors Paul B. Weston and Kenneth
M. Wells identify several different types of informants: the basic lead,
the participant, the covert, and the accomplice/witness.
Basic Lead Informants
• This type of informant supplies information to the police about illicit
activities that they have encountered.
• The reasons that the informant decides to supply information are
varied; some informants simply want to “do their part” to stop an
unscrupulous activity, while others are interested in harming the
criminals against whom they are informing.
• For instance, many informants in the drug, prostitution, or illegal
gambling areas are involved in those areas as well and intend to
eliminate some of their competition.
• Whatever the reason, these informants’ only role in a covert
investigation is to supply law enforcement with information
Types of Informants

Participant Informants
• The participant informant is directly involved in gathering preliminary
evidence in the investigation.
• The informant in this instance not only supplies an investigation with
information, but the informant is also involved in setting up a “sting”
operation, initiating contact with the criminal for arrest purposes.
• A participant informant is just what the name suggests—a participant
in the investigation of criminal activity.
Types of Informants

Covert Informants
• A covert informant also supplies information on criminal behaviour to
authorities.
• The difference between covert informants and other types of
informants is that a covert informant is one who has been embedded
in a situation or scenario for a number of years and is called upon only
sporadically for tip-offs and leads.
• These types of informants are often referred to as moles because of
the nature of their insulated situation as inside sources.
• Weston and Wells identify two instances in which covert informants
are commonly used: in organised crime and hate-extremist group
investigations, covert informants are often culled to get information
about upcoming criminal activities by such groups.
Types of Informants

Accomplice/Witness Informants
• The accomplice/witness informant is called upon often to provide
information on criminal activity.
• Unlike other types of informants, the accomplice/witness informant
would be prosecuted for an offence if he did not give investigators
information.
• The accomplice informant is often persuaded to “spill the beans” on a
co-conspirator in exchange for a promise of leniency from the
government.
Referensi

Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. (2014). Fraud

Examiners Manual. 2014 International Edition.