Working with Informants Is Ronald Cummings one?

Informants can provide valuable information, but if not handled appropriately, they can create problems for agencies that use them. A properly implemented program can guide officers while holding them, and the informants, accountable for their actions. [1]

Once law enforcement agencies have set in place the necessary rules and regulations to govern the actions of informants, how do they actually operate them in a meaningful and productive manner? Because using informants poses certain risks, police administrators must ensure that certain safeguards exist and that officers always exhibit professional conduct when dealing with informants and their information.
No agency can predict the fallout that may result from unprofessional or inattentive conduct by police officers when dealing with informant sources. Reputations, for both the officer and the department, can suffer irreparable damage. Agencies that use informants will always remain susceptible to litigation; however, through continued training and a high degree of professionalism, police agencies can help reduce problems for their department.

MAINTAINING THE RELATIONSHIP

When working with informants, officers must maintain a strictly professional relationship at all times. Officers always must treat informants with dignity and respect, including keeping promises, telling informants the truth, and safeguarding their confidentiality.

Keeping Promises

Officers must keep the promises they make to informants. Law enforcement has a reputation to uphold, even among those informants who are known or suspected criminals. Police officers who break promises will find it difficult to gain the cooperation of future sources. Officers should exercise great care when making any promises to an informant, whether they concern money, protection, relocation, or other benefits. In situations where the informant will testify, officers should consult the prosecutor prior to discussing promises or offers of assistance of any type with the informant.

Telling the Truth

Officers always should tell the truth to informants unless it becomes necessary to protect the integrity of a case or to safeguard the confidentiality of others involved. Officers should not underestimate the informant's ability to detect deception, no matter how well disguised. If it becomes necessary to withhold information from informants, officers should explain that they simply do not have a need for the information. The informants already may know the information and may have inquired just to test the officer's truthfulness. If informants cannot trust officers on simple matters, then they may find it difficult to trust an officer's word on matters directly related to more important issues (e.g., their safety). Once informants decide that they cannot trust an officer, they may stop or slow the amount of significant information they give that officer.

Safeguarding Confidentiality

The confidential relationship of an informant with the law enforcement agency remains essential to the informant's long-term and continued use, especially with a very productive informant with unique access to information. The agency must ensure that it does not disclose the relationship. Officers should refrain from needlessly commenting around other individuals about the identity of the informant, the informant's activity, or the nature of the information provided by the informant. Also, because subjects of investigations may have the resources to access an informant's telephone records, departments should use a "hello phone," which may further serve to protect the confidentiality of the informant. [2] Informants who get injured, either personally or professionally, due to an unauthorized disclosure of their identities or of the information they provided, may sue the department and create further unnecessary problems.

At the same time, officers should encourage informants to keep the relationship confidential Police officers, of course, cannot force informants to do so, but if the informant's identity and cooperation become known, it remains essential that the information did not come from the officer or the agency. Although a disclosure may hamper the investigation, in all likelihood, the agency will not be held responsible for the inevitable problems such a disclosure will create.

AVOIDING RELATIONSHIP PROBLEMS

Officers must avoid certain circumstances that may jeopardize the officer-informant relationship These include forming business partnerships accepting gifts or loans, making unprofessional comments and meeting informants in inappropriate places.

Forming Business Relationships

Officers never must use the specialized knowledge or expertise of the informant for personal profit By entering into a business relationship with informants, police officers place both themselves and their agencies in an untenable situation. While some informants may offer such information to gain favor with the officer, others may do so in an effort to compromise the officer and gain control of the relationship Whatever the reason, officers always must remember that the details of the relationship with an informant eventually will become public knowledge and that the department's professional reputation may suffer if officers must defend their actions either in a criminal prosecution or an internal affairs investigation.

There is more here


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2194/is_5_69/ai_63016003/

Well see if Ron is convicted and sent to prison. If he's an informant, maybe he'll "escape" from jail and be sent to a sunny island under the witness protection program. Pina Coladas, island girls and white sand forever.

BJ in OR wrote:Well see if Ron is convicted and sent to prison. If he's an informant, maybe he'll "escape" from jail and be sent to a sunny island under the witness protection program. Pina Coladas, island girls and white sand forever.

Then we will know for sure. :lol!:
It sure would explain that smirk on Ron's face in his mug shot.

I personally do NOT think he is an informant. I think back when he was arrested for possession of Heroin, GHB and Meth..he got out of jail because he ratted on where he got the drugs from. But I don't think he has ever been a paid or unpaid informant.

BJ, you are too funny!!!

Okay he is a "rat". But how much of a "rat" remains to be seen. I don't think he was a paid informant at all. I think he did it to get out of jail and that is how this bust was started. With all kinds of help by Ronald who was not smart enough to pull it off. We will see what kind of sentence he gets before I change my mind.