Hellicar-Bowman: Constructing and Reconstructing a Compliance Investigation. What AML training and certifications diplomas don't teach you
Have you heard of framing in criminal investigation - How police officers (re)construct a crime? Six questions to ask when conducting an investigation.
(1) How does your team come to the belief that certain persons are the likely suspects and what their motives were for committing the crime?
(2) How do your investigation teams search in those directions?
(3) What factors contribute to a situation where the investigators strongly believe in their (re)construction, even if the empirical basis is rather weak?
(4) How does your team deal with contradictory information or with members of the team who do not share the same belief?
(5) How does their (re)construction change?
(6) How do teams (re)construct what happened in a criminal act?
In a paper titled "Framing in Criminal Investigations" (2017, The Police Journal) Renze Salet of Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands examined failures in criminal investigations and how investigations. Using the word "framed" (which has other connotations in English criminal argot) he explains how reconstructing the conduct can provide a much more effective investigative framework than working from a template.
The paper is available in the US from a US government website. Access to the original might be restricted.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5633035/pdf/10.1177_0032258X16…
Education is perhaps the most important thing about financial crime risk and compliance. It's a field that is laden with misleading buzzwords and acronyms, with fluid terminology and, sadly, with much information that is at least inaccurate and often fundamentally wrong. Content in this section is carefully moderated to avoid these pitfalls with a view to creating a vital resource for everyone with an interest in this area of endeavour. To contribute to this section, please complete and submit the Contact form.
