Criminal Investigations – Agency Cooperation
It is imperative to understand that inter-agency pertains to two or more security agencies that aim to work together in a partnership. It stems from the recognition of these agencies by themselves or with the help of the policymakers at a much higher level to solve a crime that affects both their areas of jurisdiction. There is often the need to work together as an inter-agency team when they have a common issue or need their cooperation. As is often the case, one agency could not even be aware that another institution is working on the same issue, which inadvertently makes them contribute without prior knowledge of other agencies’ involvement. However, recently, most agencies appreciated the notion that, for instance, an offender under probation and a misuser of drugs attending the clinic are the same individuals. Collaboration, information exchange, and unity between the agencies would bolster their effort and ensure that they work efficaciously. A practical distinction could be made between multi-agency work that could essentially begin with the knowledge that they have a shared interest. They could decide how they could work together, which crucially needs an interagency blending, fusing, or mixing. With this notion in mind, it suffices to maintain that this paper will explore the notion of the importance of agency cooperation and what can transpire if the two do not agree, provide some examples of cooperation and no cooperation between agencies, identify some law enforcement agencies that have collaborated with success, and address ways in which a lack of cooperation can hamper a case before going to trial.
Foremost, the importance of interagency cooperation is that complex problems require various agencies’ expertise and resources. Recently, the intelligence community reconfirmed their postulation that the Russian hackers were primarily responsible for the interference with the 2016 elections in the US and were allowed to do so by senior ranking officers in the Russian government (Agrawal, 2017). However, to come to this firm conclusion, it did not take one agency to complete it. It involved numerous agencies, including the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which Congress developed in retaliation to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack. It is concerned with the coordination of intelligence collection between US intelligence agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Homeland Security—Office of Intelligence and Analysis, among several others, totalling to 17 intelligence groups that worked together to ensure that the findings on the Russian government endorsed hacking were gained faster and the conclusion particular.
Also, another important essence of working together with the agencies is that there is no sense for agencies to duplicate the services and information provided by other specialists and experts (Canton, 2011). In this case, it beats logic for numerous intelligence agencies to work on the same case entirely differently and come up with findings that would inevitably be similar. Besides, it is not feasible to spend plenty of resources and human resources on an investigation with similar results because it would be fiscally inappropriate.
Furthermore, when there is a collective endeavour, the investigation would be more effective and efficient. In this case, when there are skills and input from diverse departments, new approaches can be developed to ease the measures and ensure that the investigation is brought to a speedy closure and solved efficiently.
There have been numerous cases of interagency cooperation that have worked efficiently together. An example of this is the MAPPA (Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements), whose objective is “…helping to reduce the re-offending behaviour of sexual and violent offenders in order to protect the public, including previous victims, from serious harm” (Board, n.d).
It is also imperative to understand when agencies fail to work together, efforts to solve crime would be extensively hampered. It suffices to say that achieving a common goal would be tricky, from which all agencies would win. Besides, various agencies have various specialised skills. They have diverse resources that could be put into one organ to chase a common goal. However, failure to use this methodology would slow down the process of solving crime through harmony and oneness.
However, it is important to note that there are various pertinent reasons why classical intelligence and law enforcement agencies use diverse paths to reach the same goal. Since, in practice, there is a delicate boundary between them. Recent events have reduced the notion of boundaries as various agencies engage in the practices of other agencies and vice versa (Derencinovic & Getos, 2007).
Furthermore, there has been notable cooperation between several agencies in the pursuit of a common goal. In this case, ICE and CPB are part of the Department of Homeland Security, which works together to enforce a specific goal. For instance, CPB enforces laws on customs and immigration close to and at the border. On the other hand, ICE is responsible for enforcing customs and immigration laws in the interior of the US and at the border. By so doing, and given that their job mandate is roughly similar, these agencies have been seen working together. Also, the Secret Service and the FBI have often worked together to curb financial theft. These two agencies are similar because they train their agents rigorously who can work for both agencies. They are both involved in the protection and investigation, but their approaches are diverse. The FBI lays its focus on both the intelligence and investigative missions in the combating of international and domestic terrorism, fraud, and other areas, while the SS is focused on the protective missions that entail ensuring that elected officials, dignitaries, and other foreign diplomats are well protected (Sakuwa, 2021). Besides, these agencies actively recruit special agents who meet specific citizenship, educational, and professional criteria to merit their positions.
Furthermore, it is imperative to understand that there are consequences if there is a lack of cooperation between agencies, which can hamper a case before trial. Before a trial, if several agencies are working on a case without unity, it could imply that they might get information that either party would find helpful and fail to share crucial findings that could help solve the case. When agencies handle a similar case but not in unity, the case becomes more complex and complicated, making it long to prepare for a trial. The more the parties are involved in a case, the more the litigation length.
Also, the billing and competency practices in some agencies could potentially contribute to the delays in litigation. In this case, tampering with evidence and withdrawal of witnesses after being interviewed or interrogated by several agencies would wear key witnesses out fast, and they would prefer to withdraw from the case altogether.
In conclusion, from the discussion above, it is clear that the advantages outweigh the weaknesses. When agencies work together, it is evident that they would pull together diverse resources and skills to ensure that cases are brought to speedy closure. By so doing, cases would prevent taxpayers’ money from being wasted, and even though there are diverse functions, agencies should not find it challenging to work together to pursue a common goal.
References
Agrawal, N. (2017). There’s more than the CIA and FBI: The 17 agencies that make up the US intelligence community. Los Angeles Times, p. 1. https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-17-intelligence-agencies-20170112-story.html.
Board, Y. J. Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA).
Canton, R. (2011). Inter-Agency Cooperation: How Can It Best Enhance Compliance With The Law?
Derencinovic, D., & Getos, AM (2007). Cooperation of law enforcement and intelligence agencies in the prevention and suppression of terrorism. International Review of Criminal Law,
Sakuwa, C. (2021). Secret Service Vs. FBI. Work – Chron.com. https://work.chron.com/secret-service-vs-fbi-23157.html.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
Criminal Investigations – Agency Cooperation
Agency cooperation is key to ensuring that a suspect who has committed crimes in multiple jurisdictions is captured. Not all federal or state agencies are alike. For example, whenever there is dual involvement, one agency will take on the primary role while the other takes the secondary. In cases where it is a federal and state crime, the federal government will get the first crack at the suspect, and the state will follow if double jeopardy is not attached.
In a 1,000–1,200-word essay, discuss the importance of agency cooperation and what can transpire if the two do not agree. Students should be able to provide some examples of cooperation between agencies.
• Identify some law enforcement agencies that have collaborated with success.
• Address ways in which a lack of cooperation can hamper a case before going to trial.
• Cite your sources via APA.