Throughout more than four decades in policing, homeland security and intelligence, I have witnessed firsthand the extraordinary emotional burdens carried by those who serve in public safety. Patrol officers respond to fatal crashes. Detectives investigate homicides. Dispatchers listen helplessly as tragedy unfolds over the telephone. Crime scene investigators document scenes that most people could never imagine.
Thankfully, over the past decade, our profession has made meaningful progress in recognizing that repeated exposure to trauma has lasting consequences. Wellness programs, peer support teams and access to mental health professionals have become increasingly accepted as essential components of a healthy police organization.
Yet another group of professionals carries an emotional burden that often goes unnoticed because it unfolds behind a computer screen rather than on a city street.
The modern intelligence analyst has become one of the most vital members of any law enforcement organization. Whether assigned to a fusion center, a Real-Time Crime Center, an Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) task force, a digital forensics laboratory, a cybercrime unit or a major investigations bureau, analysts are expected to identify threats before they become tragedies. They connect information from dozens of sources, identify patterns invisible to others and provide the intelligence that allows chiefs, sheriffs and investigators to make informed operational decisions. Their work rarely receives public recognition because success is measured by the crimes prevented, the victims identified and the attacks that never occur.
If there was ever a moment that exposed the hidden psychological burden carried by intelligence professionals, it came in the aftermath of the Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
While the public watched edited news coverage, thousands of analysts, investigators and intelligence professionals around the world spent weeks — and, in many cases, months — reviewing raw body-worn camera footage, intercepted communications, social media posts, crime scene photographs and digital evidence documenting acts of unimaginable brutality. Their responsibility was not simply to understand what had happened. They were tasked with identifying victims, locating perpetrators, uncovering intelligence, recognizing emerging threats and helping prevent additional acts of violence.
For many, that work did not end when the headlines disappeared. Every day brought another video to review, another image to analyze, another online conversation to examine and another horrific piece of evidence demanding objective professional judgment. While society gradually moved on, these professionals continued to immerse themselves in material that most people could not bear to watch for even a few moments.
Oct. 7 reminded us that the psychological impact of trauma is not limited to those standing at the crime scene. It also affects those who must repeatedly examine that crime scene through a computer monitor.
Unfortunately, this reality is not unique to acts of terrorism.
| RELATED: Protecting those who protect children: The hidden toll on investigators
Among the most emotionally demanding assignments in modern policing are investigations involving child sexual abuse material (CSAM). Investigators, forensic examiners and intelligence analysts assigned to these cases spend countless hours reviewing images and videos documenting the abuse and exploitation of children. Every file must be examined carefully. Every frame may contain a clue identifying a child who has not yet been rescued or an offender who has not yet been arrested.
There is no shortcut. There is no way to simply look away.
The work requires extraordinary discipline, attention to detail and emotional resilience because missing a single piece of evidence may mean failing to identify a victim who remains in danger.
Unlike many critical incidents that eventually conclude, CSAM investigations often continue for months or years. Investigators may spend entire careers immersed in the systematic exploitation of children, knowing that tomorrow will bring another case, another victim and another offender. It is difficult to imagine a more psychologically demanding assignment, yet many of these professionals continue their work quietly with little public recognition and, in some agencies, limited organizational attention to the cumulative effects of that exposure.
The same can be said for analysts assigned to violent crime, homicide, gangs, online extremism, school threats, cybercrime and officer safety intelligence. Every day, they examine violent social media posts, extremist propaganda, execution videos, threatening communications, digital evidence and other investigative material that exposes them to humanity at its absolute worst. Unlike the officer who eventually leaves the crime scene, analysts often revisit the same material repeatedly as investigations evolve. They enlarge photographs, replay videos, compare communications and search for subtle details that could make the difference between preventing an attack and missing one. Their trauma is cumulative, repetitive and often invisible.
Research has consistently shown that repeated exposure to traumatic material can produce secondary traumatic stress, compassion fatigue, emotional exhaustion and burnout. These are not signs of weakness. They are predictable occupational hazards associated with prolonged exposure to violence and human suffering.
We have come to understand this reality for patrol officers, homicide detectives and emergency responders. It is time we extend that same understanding to the professionals whose crime scene exists on a computer screen.
A leadership challenge with practical solutions
Fortunately, this is a leadership challenge with practical solutions.
Chiefs and sheriffs should begin by recognizing analysts, digital forensic examiners, cyber investigators, crime analysts and Internet Crimes Against Children investigators as professionals routinely exposed to occupational trauma. They should be fully integrated into agency wellness initiatives rather than viewed separately because they are not responding to calls for service.
Too often, civilian analysts are unintentionally excluded from peer support programs and wellness conversations despite experiencing many of the same cumulative psychological effects as their sworn colleagues.
Leadership training is equally important. Supervisors responsible for analysis sections should understand the warning signs of secondary traumatic stress, including emotional withdrawal, irritability, sleep disruption, declining engagement and compassion fatigue. Regular wellness check-ins should become part of routine supervision rather than something initiated only after a particularly disturbing investigation.
Agencies should also consider rotational assignments for personnel involved in prolonged high-exposure investigations whenever operationally feasible. Even temporary relief from continuous exposure can significantly reduce cumulative stress while improving long-term performance and retention.
Departments should also expand peer support resources to include analysts and civilian professionals while ensuring access to clinicians familiar with secondary traumatic stress and vicarious trauma. The goal should not simply be helping people recover from trauma, but building resilience before that trauma becomes overwhelming.
Creating a culture where asking for help is viewed as professionalism rather than weakness remains one of executive leadership’s most important responsibilities.
Technology can help — but it cannot replace people
Technology also offers reasons for optimism.
Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming intelligence and investigative work, and one of its greatest contributions may be reducing unnecessary exposure to traumatic material. Emerging technologies can automatically identify known child sexual abuse material, detect duplicate files, prioritize investigative leads, categorize enormous volumes of digital evidence and blur graphic images until detailed review becomes necessary.
Similar tools are beginning to assist analysts reviewing extremist propaganda, violent social media content and other disturbing material. Used responsibly, these technologies can dramatically reduce repetitive exposure while allowing investigators to focus their attention where human judgment is indispensable.
But technology is not a substitute for experience.
Artificial intelligence cannot determine whether a threat is truly credible. It cannot understand context, recognize subtle behavioral indicators, identify investigative nuances or make the judgment calls that experienced analysts make every day. It cannot replace the intuition developed through years of investigative work or the compassion that drives investigators searching for exploited children or preventing acts of terrorism.
AI should therefore be viewed not as a replacement for analysts, but as another tool that helps protect them while making them even more effective.
Ultimately, analyst wellness is not simply a wellness issue. It is an operational readiness issue.
When experienced analysts leave because of burnout or cumulative trauma, agencies lose far more than personnel. They lose institutional knowledge, investigative continuity and the judgment that often identifies danger before anyone else sees it. Those losses directly affect public safety.
Throughout my career, I have often said that our greatest asset has never been our technology, our buildings or our equipment. It has always been our people. That principle applies just as much inside a fusion center or forensic laboratory as it does in a patrol car.
For years, intelligence analysts have quietly watched over our officers, our investigations and our communities. They have carried burdens that few outside their profession fully understand, asking for little recognition while giving everything their work demands.
My hope is that this article begins a broader professional conversation.
In the months ahead, I intend to convene a small working group of psychologists, law enforcement executives, intelligence leaders and wellness professionals to examine this issue more closely and develop practical recommendations for agencies whose analysts are routinely exposed to traumatic digital content.
The objective is not simply to raise awareness, but to provide police leaders with realistic, evidence-based approaches that strengthen both their people and their organizations.
Our profession has learned that wellness is not separate from operational readiness; it is part of it. The same principle applies here.
Investing in the well-being of intelligence professionals is an investment in better decision-making, stronger agencies and safer communities. It is time we recognize that the people working behind the screen are just as essential to the future of policing as those serving on the street.
