Actionable Intelligence

The field of law enforcement all retain a common purpose: to protect citizens and enforce the laws passed at the local, state and federal level of government. In order to achieve this common goal, law enforcement agencies, regardless of size, must have the capacity to understand the importance of intelligence collection, analysis, and intelligence sharing. Each agency, from the lowest to the highest level, must establish a systematic mechanism to receive and process intelligence as well as to report and share critical information with other law enforcement agencies. In this paper, we will discuss some of the similarities and differences of federal, state and local law enforcement intelligence activities and why these deviations exist, as well as why it is important that law enforcement agencies develop lines of communication at all levels.

If you had that one piece of the puzzle that would have prevented the bombings of the twin towers in New York and the Pentagon on September 11 2001 would you know it? If you saw someone do something weird or suspicious before the attack on September 11 2001, would you have called the police? If someone had walked into a United States Embassy in a foreign country and said that they know someone was going to use a plane to destroy New York in two days, could this have stopped the attack? Intelligence Analysis puts the raw sources of information together, make predictions based on the data, and finally publish the results.

What is intelligence-led policing (ILP)? What strengths and weaknesses have been identified with this model of policing? Support your arguments with examples from police departments/forces using ILP.

Analysis- officers working the well-defined problem seek Intel on the crimes from public and private sources. Not using the Intel that you would find in the system but the officer actually seeking out a more community

Since the September 11, 2001, law enforcement agencies across the nation recognized the need to integrate intelligence into their current community policing approach. When intelligence is available, decision-making is more effective and efficient. Intelligence enables law enforcement agencies to implement policies and procedures necessary to combat the concerns of the community.

My Forum 4 submission will describe the fundamentals of Intelligence-led policing utilized by various law enforcement agencies.

In preparation for my debate on the topics of intelligence-led policing and Compstat policing, I have discovered the many advantages and disadvantages of using intelligence-led policing and Compstat policing. According to Carter & Carter (2009), intelligence-led policing is the collection of and analysis of data relating to crime, used by law enforcement in “developing tactical responses to threats and/or strategic planning related to emerging changing threats” (p. 317). When applied correctly, intelligence-led policing is a tool used for information sharing in identifying threats and developing responses to prevent those threats from reaching fruition (Carter, 2011). One of the advantages of using intelligence-led policing is its incorporation of data analysts. The role of the data analyst in the context of intelligence-led policing allows them to take specially trained analysts to take raw data from information found in reports and translate it into useful information for the officers, allowing the police to deploy resources more effectively and efficiently (Griffiths, 2016). Another advantage is its application through preventative and predictive policing (proactive policing), in which law enforcement take data and identify crucial variables such as terrorism or the emergence of criminal organizations, in hopes of stopping the problem at its roots (Carter, 2011). Terrorism is especially important and emphasized after the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Centers in

Intelligence-led policing is the new standard of information sharing among law enforcement agencies across the country at all levels. Before intelligence-led policing gained popularity most law enforcement agencies did not freely share information amongst each other, which lead to huge gaps in the functioning of law enforcement agencies. Many believe that this laps in sharing is what lead to the 9/11 disaster. All police agencies must form a cohesive approach to a central system of intelligence gathering and information dissemination. By doing so, they may better achieve a common goal for the unified approach to policing. This process of intelligence-led police may seem like a simple concept, but it involve the many departments working together which can cause confusion and angst among them.

Intelligence is a dependable instrument of its own to generate information that establishes the base of National Security in the United States. Intelligence has been used since the beginning of history to provide information on enemy threats and how to prevent a mass disasters. It has been used for wars, national security, military tactics, etc. Intelligence has been available since the revolutionary war and our first president George Washington and other leaders of the world have used intelligence to protect their countries. Intelligence is the dominant and the backbone of homeland Security and it is ceaseless learning about it. National Intelligence agents train tirelessly to fight and create

The United States Intelligence community draws on advanced technology and analytical techniques. An intelligence process that sets objectives, collects, analyzes, and report findings, with feedback loops integrated throughout. Explicitly, the intelligence community advantages technology and tradecraft within a proscribed process. However, estimation of threats and decision-making are outcomes of human thinking. Analysts and policymakers create mental models, or short cuts to manage complex, changing environments. In other words, to make sense of ambiguous or uncertain situations, humans form cognitive biases. Informed because of personal experience, education, and specifically applied to intelligence analysis, Davis

Introduction: Throughout the intelligence cycle there are five different phases of gathering information and making decisions on your analysis. The intelligence cycle contains 5 different phases that being planning, collection, processing exploitation, analysis, and dissemination. In the intelligence cycle we dive deep into articles pulling out every viable piece of information that may be useful in a case and do whatever it takes to get that information “no matter how it is obtained”. In the analysis of the intelligence cycle there are many different procedures that agencies follow for gathering information.

Central to threat assessment is intelligence to help develop our own targets to deter or punish state sponsors.  In this regard, the development of long-term human source intelligence [HUMINT] is often cited as a vital component in building our ability to preempt attacks. Critical to threat assessment is the need to get smarter, not just in protecting against the threat from outsiders, but smarter about the threat posed by people with legitimate access.  This includes acts of carelessness by insiders.  A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.  We need to continue our efforts to enhance our vigilance to minimize any potential threats posed by third country nationals- for example, threats posed by outsiders working at U.S. embassies and military installations overseas.

Intelligence collection and apprehension of criminals have occurred for many years; however, with the exception of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, these actions were performed by different organizations. Nonetheless, roles and responsibilities have changed since the attacks on September 11, 2001. Intelligence-led policing and the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing program were incorporated, and fusion centers were established to help gather intelligence from different levels of the government. Although law enforcement at the local, state, and tribal levels aid in intelligence collection, it is important to ensure that intelligence gathered to protect national security and law enforcement

In most cases these INTs community compete among each other to provide needed intelligence information to policy makers to justify their budgetary allocations (Lowenthal, 2014). However, intelligence collection can be divided into five main categories referred to as “intelligence collection disciplines” or the “INTs”. These include Human Intelligence (HUMINT), Signals Intelligence

Counterintelligence (CI) involves actions aimed at protecting the United States against foreign intelligence operations and espionage from penetration and disruption by hostile nations or their intelligence services (Lowenthal, 2014). Three main components of Counterintelligence include collection, defensive and offensive. The collection is the ability to gather intelligence information about rivalry capabilities against own nation; defensive part of CI involves measures to prevent and thwart other nations ' attempts to penetrate into own nation 's intelligence system; while an offensive aspect deal with running double agents to penetrate, manipulate, exploit, and control targeted adversaries. CI is said to be the most essential aspect of the intelligence disciplines, in the sense that it helps in collecting vast quantities of secret information and produce an excellent analysis of intelligence, although, ineffective counterintelligence measures may diminish confidence in the final results (Van Cleave, 2013).