Sniper Case: Things That Complicated Investigations

The Sniper case investigations was characterized by a number of factors that complicated the process. Firstly, the investigative agents that comprised of a diverse group of local, state, and federal agents had to conduct investigations, protect the people from the likely attacks, and also respond to emerging cases. Moreover, the state agencies also had to ensure that they responded to other duties and responsibilities associated with each individual agency and unrelated to the shooting incidents (Murphy et al., 2004). Hence, the case required the investigation agents to demonstrate some flexibility that majority of the investigative parties lacked, which limited their effectiveness in some of their usual daily operations. Another factor that complicated the case is the nature of homicide activities and shooting activities that took place during the sniper shootings. The security agents had experience dealing with homicide cases and shootings in major Metropolitan areas in the United States. However, the rate of prevalence was significantly low. In this case, the shootings were more random and the individuals concealed themselves before executing the attacks at a longer distance of about 100 yards. Additionally, at least six people lost their lives in every 24-hour. Consequently, the rarity in this case complicated the investigations. The investigations involved multiagency enforcement officers to unearth and capture the individuals responsible for the shootings. Multiple local agencies participated in the investigation given that majority of local jurisdictions had recorded cases of shootings and had to partake in collection of information that would help capture the offenders (Paisner, 2002). Furthermore, each of the agency that took part in investigating the case had adequate resources to conduct everything by themselves. Nonetheless, the involvement of several investigative agencies was by itself a constraint due to the overlap on the manner in which each body conducts its operations. It is essential to acknowledge that the security agents were under immense pressure to bring the shootings to an end and give the members of society some sense of security. The lessons learned from the investigations serves as a significant cornerstone in deriving the successful completion of the project. Firstly, the investigation demonstrates the importance of careful planning and preparation help to mobilize resources when needed in completing a project. For instance, it was possible for the local agents to refer to the response of other nearby local authorities aimed at reaching the same goal. For example, police and sheriffs in Richmond Area, Central Virginia observed the response that other local government agents used to respond to the shootings in their local areas. Consequently, the information acquired enabled the Virginia state government to plan for operation activities, review staffing requirement, and coordinate tactical operations. Therefore, when two shooting incidents were reported within the state, the security agencies were able to engage in investigations immediately. The effectiveness of the response demonstrates the importance of security agents to have a plan and policies in place before an incident occurs. Similarly, another lesson derived from the investigations demonstrate the importance of effective communication during similar operations. The nature of the operations demonstrate a complex situation where the engagement between the involved parties on strategic and tactics used in pursuing the enemy. Furthermore, it was essential for the agents involved in this operation shared information continuously amongst themselves and other members of society. The measure was effective because it helped to determine the level of efficient for the agents involved in enhancing good coordination and eliminate fears among members of society. Communication also helped to engage members of the public by warning on what activities they should refrain from undertaking. Consequently, such measures helped members of society to be more sensitive about their engagements and refrain from activities that would put them at the risk of the snipers. Hence, it is essential that security agencies learns about the importance of communication when handling emergencies when the security of a country or a local area is threatened. A wide range of resources were used as sources of information when addressing the issue of sniper shootings within the country. The database used depended significantly on the investigative body conducting research concerning the well-being of the people. For instance, multiple federal agents participated in the investigation, each of which availed some information concerning the case. Examples of websites where the information was availed include The U.S Park Police, the U.S Secret Service, Postal Inspectors, Customs Service, Capitol Police, FBI, and FPS (Murphy et al., 2004). Hence, members of the community and other government agencies would access information concerning the operation from any of the above named agencies database. The inclusion of the different agencies was essential because it helped to unravel varying details concerning the incident aimed at achieving the intended results. Other organizations that were involved in this research include rapid logistics deployment unit, crisis management unit, and crisis negotiation unit. Each of these organization had a unique issue that it had to address, which increased the resources that availed information to the public. There was a variety of considerations made by the government in enhancing investigation activities concerning the ongoing shootings within the country. The available of such databases was essential because it helped in availing external sources with credible information about the investigations and emerging occurrences. Nevertheless, it was a challenge to regulate dismissal of information from these agencies to external parties and some investigators only learned about some details from the media. The communication retained as the multiagency conducted their investigations concerning the snipers that were shooting to kill Americans in various jurisdictions within the country. Various leaders involved in the operation ensured that there is an existing mechanism that allowed daily briefings on what was happening in the investigation. Subsequently, it became possible to eliminate a chance for rumors to prevail and spread more fear among the citizens. Even though communication helped to ensure that strategies and tactics used in the operation were common, it is also essential to note that the people complained that the communication was not effective. For instance, the patrol officers felt as though the enforcement officers concealed some information from them, which made them feel as though their contribution was inconsequential in the outcome of the investigations made. The media made a report about the misconception, which made it extremely difficult for the leaders within the government to rectify the misunderstanding. Moreover, there seemed to be a gap on the provision of information to external sources such as the media that showed their interest in deriving substantive results concerning the current issue. Hence, even though some efforts were made to enhance communication between the involved parties, it is also evident that the established structure had some weaknesses that need to be addressed for future operations. The investigations involved several agencies that came up with different kinds of information pieces that would help to capture the offenders. However, it is not all such information collected is permissible for use as evidence in a court of law. Thus, it becomes essential to determine what information collected would help in facilitating the case until its determination, especially if collected without issuance of a court order. Identification of such evidence is essential because the law requires that a court order should be issued for arrest and prosecution of the offender. The kind of evidence permissible in this case include any piece of information that is relevant to the proceedings. In this case, a witness statement is available and can be easily admitted in a court of law (JUSTIA, 2019). Whitney Donahue was the first person who spotted Caprice, which was the car used by both Maryland and Fredrick as they executed the crimes. Moreover, Whitney resulted to sharing the information to security agencies leading to the arrest of the two offenders (Murphy et al., 2004). Hence, her written statement concerning what she witnessed is permissible in a court of law without a need for a court order.

Additionally, physical objects are also permissible as pieces of evidence in a court of law without the need of a court order (JUSTIA, 2019). In the current case, the security agents managed to recover a Bushmaster rifle in the Caprice car being used by both Maryland and Fredrick. Hence, it became possible to match the bullets of the rifle with what the victims of the shootings were attacked with to verify similarity. Consequently, being in possession of the rifle was enough evidence to have the two suspects face charges in a court of law. Moreover, it was also possible to search on the communication gadget that the suspects were using to communicate with authorities and give their threats. It is essential to have adequate and strong evidence while executing operations in a court of law because it helps to determine the outcome of the court proceedings. In this case, it was essential to make the perpetrators of the shooting accountable for their mistake as a way of getting justice to the victims, bereaved families, and also reduce the amount of fear among members of the public. Moreover, the available evidence would help in punishing the perpetrators and send some warning to other criminals that might be planning such activities.

References 

JUSTIA. (2019). Rules Regarding the Admissibility of Evidence in a Criminal Trial | Justia . Justia.com. https://www.justia.com/criminal/procedure/admissibility-evidence/ 

Murphy, G. R., Wexler, C., & Police Executive Research Forum (Perf) 1120 Connecticut Avenue Nw Suite 930 Washington Dc 20036. (2004). Managing a Multijurisdictional Case: Identifying the Lessons Learned From the Sniper Investigation . United States. 

Paisner, S. R. (2002, November 24). The Sniper Investigation? Hold the Applause . Washington Post; The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2002/11/24/the-sniper-investigation-hold-the-applause/ce3b2c06-58a2-4ba0-b951-7621529d8ee3/