Steve's thoughts

I hope you found that exercise interesting. It may not be what you were expecting but that is a typical operational decision that senior detectives find themselves in.

In fact, I found myself in exactly this position, as this is based on an investigation from my career.

I was case officer on a murder investigation where information came in where one of our witnesses was seeking revenge for his friend who had been shot and killed in the car they were travelling in together.

So, when I now talk through my thoughts on this scenario, they will mirror what happened in real-life.

Where would I start?

In any situation I found myself in like this, be that at a crime scene, a situational issue or a significant operational decision, there would be three stages I would follow.

Understand the situation – Be clear on the outcome I want to achieve – Identify my options for getting there

Only after I’d been through these steps would I decide on the course of action.

So, let’s apply that thinking to this scenario.

Understand the Situation

The first thing I needed was a clear understanding of the situation I was facing.

And that would always start with three simple questions:

1. What is the current situation?

2. What actions have already been taken?

3. What are the immediate risks?

Once I know the answers to those questions, I would consider what it is we are looking to achieve.

Only then would I start to consider the options open to me to achieve those goals.

If we apply those questions to this scenario.

1. What is the current situation?

To answer this, I would split information into three;

• What I know
• What I’m assuming.
• What I don’t know

What I know:

• A murder took place on 24th October (a week ago)
• Freddie Davidson was present
• He has a criminal history of using violence
• There is no history of firearms on his criminal history or intelligence
• Davidson was released from prison on 2nd October 2024
• He is on licence until October 2027
• If arrested he could be considered for recall back to prison
• The surveillance unit is currently being used on Op Ravelin
• There is armed support if needed

What I’m assuming:

• Freddie Davidson wants to carry out this revenge
• Various pieces of intel say he is selling drugs – this is intelligence at this stage and unconfirmed
• The drugs are still being stored in his shed

What I don’t know:

• Who the specific target is
• Whether he has access to firearms
• Whether he has already sourced the firearm
• Where the intelligence has come from
• If this is from an informant, how close that source is to Davidson
• How many people in Davidson’s circle know of his intentions
• Where Davidson is likely to be at any given point

2. What actions have already been taken?

Not a lot has been done so far. An intel profile was produced but no operational steps have been put in place.

3. What are the immediate risks?

I see that the information that Davidson is sourcing a firearm identifies three risks:

1. Harm to the intended target
2. Members of the public who could be caught up in any attack
3. Risk to police officers used in any operation against Davidson

Being clear on this is important. For me it helps focus the mind on the real dangers and identifies what we need to address as a priority.

In this instance we’re talking about the potential for serious harm or death.

Be clear on the outcome I want to achieve

So, what is it we want/need to achieve? We need to be clear on this.

For me it’s quite simple, it’s:

To prevent harm to any intended victim by disrupting Davidson’s ability to carry out this threat.

That goal is what dictates the actions we take and is used to assess the options open to us.

Identify my options for getting there

Once you’re clear what you’re dealing with, then what you want to achieve, it’s then time to think about what your options are for getting there.

To choose the right one, you need to consider the pros and cons for each.

But, as a detective, you need to be careful of confirmation bias. That’s where you make your mind up and then start looking for information to prove yourself right.

A way to help avoid that is to consider what’s wrong with an option before you consider what’s right. It’s like a mental check on yourself, to make sure you’re not falling into that trap.

Let’s go through that process.

So, what are our options?

Firstly, the information we have doesn’t give us the grounds to arrest him. If he were planning this with someone else, there may be an offence of conspiracy. But, as it stands, the intelligence we hold is not enough. We need to come up with another plan.

So, we’ll go through the obvious options open to us first, including the cons and pros for each.

1. Serve the disruption notice.

This is something police will do in some cases where they are aware of a threat against a person’s life. The idea is they physically serve this notice on the person who may be planning something, and the knowledge that police are aware may put them off. There is also a separate notice that can be served on the intended target to inform them police hold information their life may be in danger.

Cons:

• The notice could be ignored, especially when dealing with the types of people who have a disregard for the law.
• We don’t know how many people in Davidson’s circle know of his intentions. If we reveal to him that we know what he’s planning, it could make him look at those who do know and place them in danger.

Pros:

• This can be served quickly, meaning Davidson may be disrupted early on before things are put into motion.
• Serving it takes minimal resources, so it wouldn’t take officers away from other commitments, especially Op Ravelin.

2. Place Davidson under surveillance

Cons:

• It would involve taking surveillance officers away from Op Ravelin. That could result in that offender committing further attacks. This places members of the public at potential risk.
• Carrying out a surveillance operation takes a lot of resources and costs money. That shouldn’t be a factor when it comes to police, but it is in reality.
• We have no established start point for the surveillance
• We have no timescales for when Davidson plans to obtain the firearm or carry out the attack. That could mean surveillance running for an extended period of time, adding to the amount of resources it would take and the cost.
• Surveillance teams can lose subjects they follow so it isn’t guaranteed that following him will prevent the plan being carried out.
• There is a risk to surveillance officers if he is armed and they have to intervene or are spotted by him.

Pros:

• If Davidson is caught obtaining the firearm, it would make him arrestable for that offence and remove the immediate risk he poses.
• This could lead to the supply of the firearm being identified and arrested.

Those are the two obvious courses of action from the information we hold. One option that is always available is to do nothing, which is a decision in itself.

3. Do nothing

Cons:

• If Davidson is planning to go through with this, then doing nothing could result in serious injury or loss of life for his intended target or others close to them.
• If we don’t act on this and someone is harmed, there is a risk of reputational damage and an effect on public confidence if it becomes known we had the information and didn’t act.

Pros:

• No resources will be taken from other priorities.
• No financial implications.

In the briefing I said that some options may not always be immediately obvious. In this instance, there is one line we could go to that may remove the threat Davidson poses.

4. Execute a search warrant for drugs at Davidson’s home

Cons:

• If drugs or anything else illegal isn’t found, we are no further forward in disrupting Davidson.
• Police attention may make him believe someone close to him is passing information, posing a potential risk to them
• If Davidson has already obtained the firearm, he may pose a risk to officers when executing the warrant.

Pros

• If we find evidence of drug dealing or any other criminality, we can arrest him. That in turn will open up the potential for him to be recalled on his licence from prison. If he is inside, he can’t carry out his intended plan.
• This would take minimal resources and won’t distract from other priorities.
• We can do this quickly, increasing the chances of preventing harm.

The least-worst option

So, there we have the most reasonable options as I see it.

None of them are perfect.

And that’s nearly always the case when it comes to police work.

What you become accustomed to identifying is the least-worst option. The one where, having weighed up what could go wrong and the potential benefits, it gives you the possibility of achieving your goal with the downsides you’re most comfortable living with.

And if I apply that mindset to these options, I land at one:

Execute a search warrant for drugs at Davidson’s home.

We would need to consider that the information we have is enough to apply to the court for a search warrant. Given his previous convictions and the recent intelligence, I would be comfortable authorising this warrant to be applied for. If not granted by the magistrate, we would need to consider another option.

If we are granted a warrant and go on to find drugs, he immediately becomes arrestable and may potentially be recalled back to prison. That would significantly reduce his ability to carry out his plans. There may be a chance he could organise something from prison, but that’s much more difficult and there are measures we can put in place to make it even more difficult.

If we don’t find drugs, well we’re essentially where we were in terms of disrupting him. We could then consider other options such as the surveillance or disruption notice.

In terms of the risk he may pose if he has already acquired the firearm, there are ways to mitigate risks, for instance using armed officers.

With those factors considered, this would be my preferred choice of action.

That’s not to say this is the only option. Others in my position may serve the notice or use surveillance.

At this stage there is no definitive right or wrong answer. It’s often only in hindsight that it’s possible to know that. I would look at it more as a decision you would be most comfortable later defending.

That said, one option I wouldn’t recommend is doing nothing. That leaves it open for Davidson to carry out his plan unchecked.

Early on I said this was based on a murder I investigated.

In that case this was the option we chose.

We found drugs, he was arrested, recalled back to prison, and the revenge attack never happened.

Although, he did become a hostile witness at court, so it wasn’t all perfect.