Before starting the investigation itself, it is necessary to analyze several important factors, from resource management, through obstruction of operational activities to the protection of the reputation of the parties involved.
In a business context, there is no reason to launch an investigation unless something has not already happened or is happening. Few organizations have the luxury of initiating investigations in the absence of some strong clues to serious crime. Before starting the investigation itself, it is necessary to analyze several important factors, from resource management, through obstruction of operational activities to the protection of the reputation of the parties involved.
It can be said that it is not advisable to launch an investigation without a proper analysis of whether an illegal act has been committed at all. The most important questions regarding the initiation of investigations are "who, when, why, how and what" and, at the very beginning, only the last question can be answered with certain certainty. A more or less clear picture of the nature of the act committed is formed, for example, by the discovery of lost money or property. The task of the investigation is to make that picture as clear as possible, and in the process, the above five questions can be answered.
The question of "how" in the context of the investigation
Two primary sub-questions are related to answering the question “how” in the context of the investigation: how the crime was committed and how the said case can be resolved while bringing the perpetrator to justice. Both questions concern the strategy, that is, the strategy that the criminal applied when committing the crime, and the strategy that the investigator applies in order to expose him. The latter to some extent often depends on the strategy according to which the act was committed, ie a person who, for example, commits embezzlement can hardly be brought to justice by an investigator if he does not know how he manipulates financial resources. This does not mean that knowing the manner in which the crime was committed automatically entails resolving the case. The crime and its disclosure are two different spheres and must be treated as such.
Case resolution strategy
In many cases, the strategy used to commit the act corresponds to that used to expose it. In this context, it is important to determine the perpetrator's modus operandi, ie the manner in which a certain criminal offence is repeated in the form of a form. In this way, in the case of the perpetrator, consistency in approach is established, which can also lead to the indication of a case resolution strategy. If, for example, an employee steals funds by falsifying refund documents and complaints, the investigator can expect the said employee to use the same methods of committing the crime as long as he or she has the impression that they are being paid. If a burglar prefers to break into apartments during the day, the investigator will not find him in night attacks on business premises. The criminal assesses the value of his methods solely on the basis of successfully performed ventures. After achieving several minor successes, he will be reluctant to change his operational approach, primarily due to a lack of imagination, inertia, and superstition. In this way, the modus operandi can be defined as a set of habits, techniques and specifics in the behaviour of the perpetrator.
Private Investigator Switzerland
Schaffhauserstrasse 550., Postfach,