HLSS3

Role of Police in the Intelligence Community

State and local en��es are on the front lines of the counterterrorism efforts. One of the primary reasons insurgencies and terrorist groups fail is state, county, and city law enforcement agencies. It is not, as most people think, primarily military ac�on. In one respect, this has to do with intelligence – local law enforcement knows the community and can establish rela�onships with local residents via Community Policing efforts, which will assist in gathering intelligence that ul�mately leads to the downfall of any poten�al insurgency or terrorist group. This also extends to preven�ng a terrorist a�ack. Human intelligence informa�on (HUMINT), in this context, is gained from a proac�ve rela�onship with the community by local law enforcement.

It is local law enforcement, more than anybody else, who gets out in the local community and knows what's going on in that local community. The two key ingredients in Community Policing are problem-solving and community partnerships. Thus, local law enforcement, to a large extent, must depend on the public to supply terrorist-related informa�on to effec�vely thwart local terrorist plots. Every terrorist has to live someplace and that someplace is always some neighborhood that is local to those residents. What the bad guys try to do is blend in with the popula�on so it becomes impera�ve for the ci�zens to become aware of suspicious persons and ac�vity before law enforcement does, and report it to them. This concept has been somewhat famously ar�culated as, “See Something, Say Something.”

The na�on’s first line of defense against terrorism and other illegal ac�vi�es is that we have approximately 330,149,796 ci�zens in this country. That line of defense is already in place. It cost nothing to put it in place. It costs nothing to maintain it. It only needs to be trained to look for, and report, suspicious persons and behavior to the proper authori�es in the local area. Law enforcement officers across the country are now working more closely with ci�zens and communi�es because they have become aware of exactly how important and how inexpensive this first line of defense is to u�lize and maintain. This is called "Intelligence-Led Policing” and this week’s readings have ar�cles on this concept, from both posi�ve and nega�ve perspec�ves.

One of the big problems in a�aining this coopera�on from local residents is if local law enforcement does not have good diversity prac�ces that allow for open communica�on with all the cons�tuents in their community. This can breed distrust, and distrust can breed a lack of coopera�on. The flow of intelligence informa�on comes to a stop. To overcome this problem, most law enforcement agencies appoint a community liaison officer to help reduce the distrust. That liaison officer actually becomes the advocate for the community and, as an advocate, the liaison officer

can work closely with community groups, generate support, and iden�fy problems that otherwise may not have been recognized. In addi�on, the liaison officer can actually help in recrui�ng individuals of different cultures for the law enforcement agency and other governmental posi�ons to assist in building a diverse workforce.

If you compare a local law enforcement agency with a federal agency, such as the FBI, you'll find that the federal agencies perform what is called top-down style inves�ga�ons, while the local law enforcement agencies conduct bo�om-up inves�ga�ons. Regardless of who collects the intelligence, you should consider intelligence as actually being a process composed of four steps: (1) collect the informa�on; (2) collate and analyze it; (3) disseminate it; and (4) use it. This may sound simplis�c; however, it provides a perfect blueprint for not only any specific en�ty, but also how that en�ty should interact with other government organiza�ons.