Editor’s Note: This week’s essay comes from PoliceOne Member Joseph L. Giacalone. In PoliceOne “First Person” essays, our Members and Columnists candidly share their own unique view of the world. This is a platform from which individual officers can share their own personal insights on issues confronting cops today, as well as opinions, observations, and advice on living life behind the thin blue line. If you want to share your own perspective with other P1 Members, simply send us an e-mail with your story.
By Joseph L. Giacalone
Police1 Member
OPESEC, short for operational security, is a military term that suggests you keep your secrets, well, secret. Unfortunately, in this 24-hour-news cycle — coupled with law enforcement bending over backwards to garner community support at all costs — law enforcement has become more comfortable with the use of social media. Often, law enforcement is reluctant to try new and innovative things, but this time it has embraced social media with open arms. Maybe their arms are to open.
Social media has changed the way investigations are done. Whether it is the use of the Social Media Canvass or for Tactical and Investigative purposes, law enforcement has had some resounding successes while using social media.
However, this is where the OPSEC accountability comes in. The law enforcement community has recently been too informative when describing their successes using social media. Remember the word “media” exists in social media. We tend to forget that when we use social media we are speaking directly to the public — no more middlemen.
Using it should be no different than using a traditional media outlet. Therefore the same rules should apply.
It’s true that perpetrators will find out how we use these new techniques eventually, but why put it on the five o’clock news or the front page of the daily paper the very first time you have a success? At least make the bad guys work for it. Police executives and their Public Information Officers (PIO) should speak with investigators before releasing certain information to insure that it does not adversely affect future investigations. By not communicating with those that are actually using social media as an investigative tool, is reckless.
For a moment, think of what happened after law enforcement started touting successes in tracking phones. It led to perps buying “throw away” phones with cash so they can’t be tracked. What happened after law enforcement talked about new DNA / forensic techniques, it led to more gloves being worn, condoms in sex assaults, bleached crime scenes and the removal of evidence by perpetrators. For every success touted, you may lose a dozen more.
Law enforcement officials can’t stop talking about what we do how we do it and see how great it is? It only makes detectives jobs more difficult. Here is something to think about. Mention that we tracked burglars through their tweets and they stop tweeting, mention how you tracked gang members through public Facebook pages and they lock them down.
It is blatantly apparent that perps use social media!
You would have thought that by now that the law enforcement community would have learned their lessons on what not to say in the media during an investigation. In one of the most horrific serial murder cases in the United States, the Atlanta child murders, the police made a terrible mistake. Police officials were under a tremendous amount of pressure to solve the case, so anything that would be positive would be released. They made mention of a hair follicle that was found on the latest victim which may belong to the killer. The next body was dumped in the river. Problem solved.
Let’s get back to keeping our secrets secret!
