investigators | business fraud | criminal defensecriminal records
Throwing the bolt: When due diligence is too late
Feb.24.2022
What industry is most ignorant about background checks, even for high level hires? For me, it continues to be boutique merchants & restaurants. They love to rely on "insider industry knowledge" when hiring. Even when hiring top level manager, executive chefs, CFOs, they refuse to do a basic background check and look at criminal record, civil litigation, agency hearings, or license violations.
We usually see these kinds of clients paying for post-facto due diligence— defending a lawsuit, sexual harassment cases, fraud, vendor theft, etc. It is like a rancher throwing the bolt on the barn door the morning after a prized horse ran off.
As a business owner, you should consider what signals you are sending to a new employee by not doing background checks. No, it is not "making things easy" for a new hire, even during an economic times where employees are in great demand. You are signaling that taking shortcuts is acceptable in your business. That you accept less than someone's best efforts. Employees accustomed to more professional employers will notice that you are not doing those things. Is that the impression you want to make on your employees?
Protect yourself and show your business.
We usually see these kinds of clients paying for post-facto due diligence— defending a lawsuit, sexual harassment cases, fraud, vendor theft, etc. It is like a rancher throwing the bolt on the barn door the morning after a prized horse ran off.
As a business owner, you should consider what signals you are sending to a new employee by not doing background checks. No, it is not "making things easy" for a new hire, even during an economic times where employees are in great demand. You are signaling that taking shortcuts is acceptable in your business. That you accept less than someone's best efforts. Employees accustomed to more professional employers will notice that you are not doing those things. Is that the impression you want to make on your employees?
Protect yourself and show your business.
Fantastic Beasts of the Background Check World: the "national criminal search"
Feb.21.2020
Every investigator gets phone calls like this. The tone excited, the tenor demanding. How can you, sir, charge so much money for a background check when other firms offer "national criminal record checks" for $24.95?
Our response is: Do you want to buy a griffin? A hippogriff (half-horse, half-eagle, 100% fantasy)? Time to review Fantastic Beasts of the background check world.
The national criminal check is a myth. What constitutes a “national criminal check” or “nationwide employment criminal background” as the product is often described? Usually, the firm offering this search is checking a compilation of conviction data--people who actually were sentenced to prison. However, only a very small percentage of people charged with crimes ever do any prison time. National offender databases are misleading: they miss charges that have been pled out, dismissed, not prosecuted (nolle prosequi, the legal term of art meaning the prosecutor is unwilling for some reason to pursue the case).
How do you actually check for Criminal Records?
Everyone is familiar with scenes from movies where a law enforcement agent runs a quick database check and gets an entire criminal history in seconds. In real life, things tend to be a bit more convoluted.
One database used by law enforcement is the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and it is typically limited only to law enforcement. While the closest thing to a national criminal records database, even NCIC data is riddled with gaps, with as many as 50% of all criminal cases failing to hit the database. So how do you proceed to check a person for crimes committed across 50 states in the USA?
Convictions data is a start but we always go back to the primary sources of criminal records: the state court system. On the state side, this means searching a higher court (Superior Court) that handles major crimes in a particular county, as well as lower courts with more limited jurisdiction. These courts are called district courts or municipal courts. Don’t make the mistake of skipping this step as district courts can hear cases involving serious criminal matters; for example in Massachusetts, some felony cases are found in district court. And access to the dockets still remains mixed: Massachusetts still keeps criminal records off the internet; you need to look at the index in the court.
And on the federal side, you will be checking for criminal cases in the national PACER system.
So just beware when you are conducting a criminal background check for employment or any other purpose: to do it right, the investigator may need to leave the office and review records ((paper or database) at the courthouse. Be certain that you are buying more than the fantastic beast of a "national criminal check" which is usually just convictions data.
The national criminal check is a myth. What constitutes a “national criminal check” or “nationwide employment criminal background” as the product is often described? Usually, the firm offering this search is checking a compilation of conviction data--people who actually were sentenced to prison. However, only a very small percentage of people charged with crimes ever do any prison time. National offender databases are misleading: they miss charges that have been pled out, dismissed, not prosecuted (nolle prosequi, the legal term of art meaning the prosecutor is unwilling for some reason to pursue the case).
How do you actually check for Criminal Records?
Everyone is familiar with scenes from movies where a law enforcement agent runs a quick database check and gets an entire criminal history in seconds. In real life, things tend to be a bit more convoluted.
One database used by law enforcement is the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and it is typically limited only to law enforcement. While the closest thing to a national criminal records database, even NCIC data is riddled with gaps, with as many as 50% of all criminal cases failing to hit the database. So how do you proceed to check a person for crimes committed across 50 states in the USA?
Convictions data is a start but we always go back to the primary sources of criminal records: the state court system. On the state side, this means searching a higher court (Superior Court) that handles major crimes in a particular county, as well as lower courts with more limited jurisdiction. These courts are called district courts or municipal courts. Don’t make the mistake of skipping this step as district courts can hear cases involving serious criminal matters; for example in Massachusetts, some felony cases are found in district court. And access to the dockets still remains mixed: Massachusetts still keeps criminal records off the internet; you need to look at the index in the court.
And on the federal side, you will be checking for criminal cases in the national PACER system.
So just beware when you are conducting a criminal background check for employment or any other purpose: to do it right, the investigator may need to leave the office and review records ((paper or database) at the courthouse. Be certain that you are buying more than the fantastic beast of a "national criminal check" which is usually just convictions data.
Background Check Myths - The National Criminal Check
Feb.09.2016
Every investigator gets phone calls from this person. The tone excited, the tenor demanding. How can you, dear sir, charge so much when other firms offer "national criminal record checks" for $24.95?
Time to review Fantastic Beasts of Background Myths: what constitutes a “national criminal check” or “nationwide criminal background check” as the product is often described.
The national criminal check is the hippogriff of the industry, a complete myth. Usually, the firm offering this search is checking a compilation of conviction data--people who actually were sentenced to prison. However, only a very small percentage of people charged with crimes ever do any prison time. National offender databases are misleading: they miss charges that have been pled out, dismissed, not prosecuted (Nolle prosequ, the legal term of art meaning the prosecutor is unwilling to pursue the case).
Everyone is familiar with scenes from movies where a law enforcement agent runs a quick database check and gets an entire criminal history in seconds. In real life, things tend to be a bit more convoluted.
One database used by law enforcement is the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and it is typically limited only to law enforcement. And even NCIC data is riddled with gaps, with as many as 50% of all criminal cases failing to hit the database. So how do you proceed to check a person for crimes committed across 50 states in the USA?
Convictions data is a start but we always go back to the primary sources of criminal records: the state court system. On the state side, this means searching a higher court (Superior Court) that handles major crimes in a particular county, as well as lower courts with more limited jurisdiction. These courts are called district courts or municipal courts. Don’t make the mistake of skipping this step as district courts can hear cases involving serious criminal matters; for example in Massachusetts, some felony cases are found in district court.
And on the federal side, you will be checking for criminal cases in the national PACER system.
So just beware when you are scanning someone for a criminal history: to do it right, the investigator will probably need to leave the office and pull some paper records. A thorough investigation will take more than just a database search.
Time to review Fantastic Beasts of Background Myths: what constitutes a “national criminal check” or “nationwide criminal background check” as the product is often described.
The national criminal check is the hippogriff of the industry, a complete myth. Usually, the firm offering this search is checking a compilation of conviction data--people who actually were sentenced to prison. However, only a very small percentage of people charged with crimes ever do any prison time. National offender databases are misleading: they miss charges that have been pled out, dismissed, not prosecuted (Nolle prosequ, the legal term of art meaning the prosecutor is unwilling to pursue the case).
Everyone is familiar with scenes from movies where a law enforcement agent runs a quick database check and gets an entire criminal history in seconds. In real life, things tend to be a bit more convoluted.
One database used by law enforcement is the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and it is typically limited only to law enforcement. And even NCIC data is riddled with gaps, with as many as 50% of all criminal cases failing to hit the database. So how do you proceed to check a person for crimes committed across 50 states in the USA?
Convictions data is a start but we always go back to the primary sources of criminal records: the state court system. On the state side, this means searching a higher court (Superior Court) that handles major crimes in a particular county, as well as lower courts with more limited jurisdiction. These courts are called district courts or municipal courts. Don’t make the mistake of skipping this step as district courts can hear cases involving serious criminal matters; for example in Massachusetts, some felony cases are found in district court.
And on the federal side, you will be checking for criminal cases in the national PACER system.
So just beware when you are scanning someone for a criminal history: to do it right, the investigator will probably need to leave the office and pull some paper records. A thorough investigation will take more than just a database search.
Misguided CORI reform
May.07.2012
Massachusetts today unveiled its new iCORI system for criminal background data. According to the Boston Globe, some community groups want to cut off access to this data, citing problems with investigators who go to courthouses and obtain original records with additional information about the crimes.
These groups are attacking the very procedures recommended under federal law and by industry experts to avoid mistakes in background checks. In effect they want to ban users of iCORi who search out original documents. In effect, they want to forced employers to act on a dry sparse records for fear that, say details about, say a habitual offender who seems to prey on women, should come to light.
These groups are attacking the very procedures recommended under federal law and by industry experts to avoid mistakes in background checks. In effect they want to ban users of iCORi who search out original documents. In effect, they want to forced employers to act on a dry sparse records for fear that, say details about, say a habitual offender who seems to prey on women, should come to light.
Governor Patrick signs CORI Reform
Aug.06.2010
The new Criminal Offender Record Information law (CORI) prohibits employers from asking on an “initial written application form” about an applicant’s “criminal offender record information,” which includes information about criminal charges, arrests, and incarcerations. The term “initial written application" in the new text may allow employers to continue to question applicants about felony and certain misdemeanor convictions later in the process. Moreover, the law does not address classic court docket research conducted by investigators.
Real CORI reform
May.21.2010
The movement to "reform" CORI by making record sealing easier and restricting public access sounds wonderful. But it ignores the fundamental problem with the database. Those who know public records in Massachusetts understand that CORI--which has never been accessible in full by the public except to those who order their own report--has always been a misleading source of criminal record data. CORI can be difficult to understand and does not contain any case background information. Moreover, it is based on records that have been considered public for decades. A federal judge came close in one case to overturning the CORI law by deeming the information to be essentially computerized records of court dockets, which have traditionally been open public records.
Instead of telling businesses how to hire, we should allow businesses to gather as much information as they deem necessary--many of them routinely make better judgments than elected officials. More to the point: businesses will continue to hire investigators to check public court documents to gather the information they need to run their businesses.
Instead of telling businesses how to hire, we should allow businesses to gather as much information as they deem necessary--many of them routinely make better judgments than elected officials. More to the point: businesses will continue to hire investigators to check public court documents to gather the information they need to run their businesses.