LAW ENFORCEMENT DATABASES, MOONLIGHTING, AND OFFICER MISCONDUCT - EPISODE 008 -
TRANSCRIPT:
This week on the Writer's Detective Bureau: Law Enforcement Databases, Moonlighting, and Officer Misconduct. I'm Adam Richardson, and this is the Writer's Detective Bureau. Welcome to episode number eight of the Writer's Detective Bureau, the podcast dedicated to helping authors and screenwriters write professional quality crime-related fiction.
Each week I mention that listeners help me with covering the cost of this podcast by supporting me for as little as $2 per month through Patreon*. In addition to my first supports, Joan Raymond and Guy Alton, I have to thank authors Natasha Bajema, Natalie Barelli, Joe Trent, Siobhan Pope, and Leah Cutter for their support of this podcast. As of this week, these Patreon patrons are actually covering the monthly podcast hosting fees I incur, which is so awesome! Many of them have author websites, which you can find in the show notes by going to writersdetective.com/8. Thank you all for your support. It really means a lot.
In particular, I want to thank Natasha Bajema for the post in the Writer's Detective Facebook group that prompted so many of you to consider using Patreon to support this project. Natasha noticed that when we get to 500 Patreon patrons, I'll be able to drop episodes twice a week. That was her motivation for making that post. That's a long way off still, but I'm looking forward to it because I'm really enjoying putting these episodes together. Before I forget, be sure to join our Writer's Detective group on Facebook. Everyone in there is super supportive, and I have a strict no a-hole policy, but I digress. You're probably listening to this podcast because you are a creator of some sort. Give you tribe of fans the chance to support you and your creations by using Patreon. Learn how to set up your own Patreon* page by visiting: writersdetective.com/patreon
Each week I mention that listeners help me with covering the cost of this podcast by supporting me for as little as $2 per month through Patreon*. In addition to my first supports, Joan Raymond and Guy Alton, I have to thank authors Natasha Bajema, Natalie Barelli, Joe Trent, Siobhan Pope, and Leah Cutter for their support of this podcast. As of this week, these Patreon patrons are actually covering the monthly podcast hosting fees I incur, which is so awesome! Many of them have author websites, which you can find in the show notes by going to writersdetective.com/8. Thank you all for your support. It really means a lot.
In particular, I want to thank Natasha Bajema for the post in the Writer's Detective Facebook group that prompted so many of you to consider using Patreon to support this project. Natasha noticed that when we get to 500 Patreon patrons, I'll be able to drop episodes twice a week. That was her motivation for making that post. That's a long way off still, but I'm looking forward to it because I'm really enjoying putting these episodes together. Before I forget, be sure to join our Writer's Detective group on Facebook. Everyone in there is super supportive, and I have a strict no a-hole policy, but I digress. You're probably listening to this podcast because you are a creator of some sort. Give you tribe of fans the chance to support you and your creations by using Patreon. Learn how to set up your own Patreon* page by visiting: writersdetective.com/patreon
Before I get started with the first question this week, I have a correction to make. Last week I talked about kidnapping. When I cited the U.S. code the covers kidnapping, I cited the wrong section. The correct section is Title 18 Section 1201, not 1034. I got the number wrong because I was looking at the U.S. Attorney's Criminal Resource Manual, which you can now find in the show notes of this episode. 1034 was the section of the U.S. Attorney's Criminal Resource Manual, not the actual crime section. All of that said, none of you should be concerned with the number because that kind of minutia will bore the crap out of your reader to the point of putting down your book or script. I only mention this stuff in the name of you being able to find it for research.
Caro asks, "Could you summarize various databases that U.S. police officers would have access to and the kind of information contained in each? For example, a patrol officer can probably access some databases from his car computer, but I suspect a patrol officer wouldn't be able to access the same databases that detectives would have access to." Caro also asked, "It is true that ViCAP doesn't include a large portion of crimes? In 2018, can a detective access police databases from a mobile device, or do they have to return to the station and use a specific computer to access certain databases due to security concerns?"
I'm going to take these questions in stages. First is the understanding of what is immediately available to a patrol officer. Now, if the patrol officer does have a computer in the car, that could be called an MDT or MDC for various different abbreviations for the idea of a mobile data console, mobile data terminal, mobile data computer, whatever they want to abbreviate it as. Those generally have a connection to the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, which is abbreviated as NLETS or N-L-E-T-S, but NLETS is how we call it. NLETS is broken down by state. Here in California, we have access to the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, which is called CLETS. CLETS is our gateway if you will to NLETS. CLETS includes access to several different databases such as the DMV for running a license plate or driver's license.
Normally when a search is done for a person or a vehicle, it's done on a single query page on that computer screen, but that search actually goes across a dozen or more databases. It will check against the Stolen Vehicle System if we're talking about a license plate. It will check against wanted persons where there's a license plate associated with a wanted person. It will check against the Terrorist Screening Center. The same thing for names. If I run a person's name and date of birth, it will check for a driver's license, but it will also check for warrants. It will also show if the person is on formal probation or on parole. Now, a quick aside. Parole means that the person has been released early from prison, whereas probation usually means that they have averted going to jail and are simply being monitored by a probation officer.
California is a bit different. After our big realignment that happened in the state where a lot of the community supervision, which is the overall term for parole or probation, has been shifted to the probation departments across the state, so they're now handling cases that used to be handled by handled by parole, so it's all screwed up now. The point is that there's a difference between probation and parole, but either one of those databases will pop up in that search. It will check for restraining orders, whether that person is a narcotic registrant, an arson registrant, a sex registrant, whether that person has a restraining order against them, or if they're a protected person with a restraining order, whether their name is on the Terrorists Screening Center's watch list. Whether that person has dealer records of sale for firearms indicating that this person may have a gun.
Those are the kind of databases that will not only be checked if the officer makes those queries on the computer that's in the car, but also and more traditionally when they radio in that information to their dispatch center, the dispatcher is the one who runs that database check. It depends on the agency, but from an officer safety standpoint, it's far safer for me to read off a name and date of birth into my radio and let the dispatcher do the computer work than it is for me to be fighting with a computer screen when that means I'm not watching what that person is doing, assuming I'm on a traffic stop. Some larger agencies that are much busier will require the officers to do that on their own, but a lot of times those are the same cities that will have two officer cars.
Now, as Caro alluded to with the mention of ViCAP, there are some databases that detectives may have access to that your typical patrol officers will not. ViCAP, V-I-C-A-P, is the acronym for the FBI's Violent Criminal Apprehension Program. Ironically, I actually see more about ViCAP when I'm talking with writers than I did when I was working in our Detective Bureau. (Link to an article in The Atlantic about ViCAP's actual usage by local law enforcement.) The Wiki page for ViCAP says that the Violent Crime Apprehension Program is a unit of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation, responsible for the analysis of serial, violent, and sexual crimes, and then it goes on to say where it's located. With Caro's original question of, "Are there a lot of crimes that are not included in ViCAP?" The answer is yes. While that might sound surprising, I think it's key to understand what ViCAP was actually created for.
ViCAP was originally designed as a database to primarily do two things. One, try to do some sort of analysis between crime scenes or MOs of violent crime. More gruesomely, and this is probably the reason why I always click explicit for content on my podcast, is because this was the first database and probably the only database for us to identify body parts that were located that didn't have the rest of the body. ViCAP was the way where if an arm or a leg or a head turned up in my jurisdiction, I could put that into ViCAP and another agency might have put in something about a torso or that missing leg. It's kind of a lost and found of body parts, which sounds pretty gruesome, between the Jane Does, John Does, body parts of said Jane and John Does, and the MO for the attack.
Being able to say that we keep getting murders where it's a 45 handgun but the murderer also cuts off the hands and feet. That's the kind of thing that goes into ViCAP, and that's the kind of analysis that they're looking for, to be able to link up with other MOs in a crime scene. Even though the ViCAP description seems pretty broad and also somewhat limiting as far as why certain crimes aren't included in there, it's really because it's for specific usage. It's not quite as widespread. It's widely used by police agencies, but it's only used in very specific kinds of cases. That's the reason why it's not quite as robust as a typical author might expect it to be.
Even in 2018, we are still behind the times when it comes to technology interoperability and even the ability to get reports from other agencies. There are a few databases that essentially link record management systems between different agencies. For me to be able to see whether they have a report on somebody across the country, if that agency participates in one of those databases, I might be able to see that they have a record. I may not be able to read the report, but it's a good way to see if that person has police reports or citations elsewhere in the country. That's a relatively new technology, and a lot of that has to do with the fact that we deal with Legacy systems. Our records management has been going on since computers were brought into law enforcement, and those records have to still be maintained. We deal with a lot of IBM PC-based infrastructure that may go back as far as the 1980s, so it can be pretty clunky with trying to get all of that data working with modern software infrastructure or hardware or firmware.
The other thing is is that when we're talking about a homicide investigation or a murder investigation, those files will be kept confidential. That's not something- that's not a report that another agency will be able to see just by clicking into a database. They will not get the murder book. They will not get the narratives of these reports. I should explain that I'm not going to see pictures in this. I might see a booking photo of a person, but I'm not going to see any kind of crime scene photos or anything like that. It is strictly text based. We still have to do things the old fashioned way, and that's get on the phone or even send a teletype to authenticate that this is an official request, but we have to get ahold of that original agency to make the request to see any of those documents.
Then, to touch on Caro's last question about whether detectives can access police databases from mobile devices. The only mobile device that I would be able to use would be one of those in-car MDTs that are generally in patrol cars, not detective vehicles. I would for the most part have to go back to the station unless I had a laptop that had the security infrastructure. For the most part, we have to be on a department network. There are a lot of security requirements for us to access these databases. For instance, I cannot have any kind of network, like confidential law enforcement network access, and have any kind of remote working capability. I can't login remotely to the same workstation that has any kind of database access, and that's a stopgap to prevent hacking. There are certainly some databases that we use that are online, using the internet, but any of the real critical ones are going to be on a network workstation with all of the security protocols that will not be able to access in the field. It's not really an inconvenience because we have always done it this way.
I'm going to take these questions in stages. First is the understanding of what is immediately available to a patrol officer. Now, if the patrol officer does have a computer in the car, that could be called an MDT or MDC for various different abbreviations for the idea of a mobile data console, mobile data terminal, mobile data computer, whatever they want to abbreviate it as. Those generally have a connection to the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, which is abbreviated as NLETS or N-L-E-T-S, but NLETS is how we call it. NLETS is broken down by state. Here in California, we have access to the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, which is called CLETS. CLETS is our gateway if you will to NLETS. CLETS includes access to several different databases such as the DMV for running a license plate or driver's license.
Normally when a search is done for a person or a vehicle, it's done on a single query page on that computer screen, but that search actually goes across a dozen or more databases. It will check against the Stolen Vehicle System if we're talking about a license plate. It will check against wanted persons where there's a license plate associated with a wanted person. It will check against the Terrorist Screening Center. The same thing for names. If I run a person's name and date of birth, it will check for a driver's license, but it will also check for warrants. It will also show if the person is on formal probation or on parole. Now, a quick aside. Parole means that the person has been released early from prison, whereas probation usually means that they have averted going to jail and are simply being monitored by a probation officer.
California is a bit different. After our big realignment that happened in the state where a lot of the community supervision, which is the overall term for parole or probation, has been shifted to the probation departments across the state, so they're now handling cases that used to be handled by handled by parole, so it's all screwed up now. The point is that there's a difference between probation and parole, but either one of those databases will pop up in that search. It will check for restraining orders, whether that person is a narcotic registrant, an arson registrant, a sex registrant, whether that person has a restraining order against them, or if they're a protected person with a restraining order, whether their name is on the Terrorists Screening Center's watch list. Whether that person has dealer records of sale for firearms indicating that this person may have a gun.
Those are the kind of databases that will not only be checked if the officer makes those queries on the computer that's in the car, but also and more traditionally when they radio in that information to their dispatch center, the dispatcher is the one who runs that database check. It depends on the agency, but from an officer safety standpoint, it's far safer for me to read off a name and date of birth into my radio and let the dispatcher do the computer work than it is for me to be fighting with a computer screen when that means I'm not watching what that person is doing, assuming I'm on a traffic stop. Some larger agencies that are much busier will require the officers to do that on their own, but a lot of times those are the same cities that will have two officer cars.
Now, as Caro alluded to with the mention of ViCAP, there are some databases that detectives may have access to that your typical patrol officers will not. ViCAP, V-I-C-A-P, is the acronym for the FBI's Violent Criminal Apprehension Program. Ironically, I actually see more about ViCAP when I'm talking with writers than I did when I was working in our Detective Bureau. (Link to an article in The Atlantic about ViCAP's actual usage by local law enforcement.) The Wiki page for ViCAP says that the Violent Crime Apprehension Program is a unit of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation, responsible for the analysis of serial, violent, and sexual crimes, and then it goes on to say where it's located. With Caro's original question of, "Are there a lot of crimes that are not included in ViCAP?" The answer is yes. While that might sound surprising, I think it's key to understand what ViCAP was actually created for.
ViCAP was originally designed as a database to primarily do two things. One, try to do some sort of analysis between crime scenes or MOs of violent crime. More gruesomely, and this is probably the reason why I always click explicit for content on my podcast, is because this was the first database and probably the only database for us to identify body parts that were located that didn't have the rest of the body. ViCAP was the way where if an arm or a leg or a head turned up in my jurisdiction, I could put that into ViCAP and another agency might have put in something about a torso or that missing leg. It's kind of a lost and found of body parts, which sounds pretty gruesome, between the Jane Does, John Does, body parts of said Jane and John Does, and the MO for the attack.
Being able to say that we keep getting murders where it's a 45 handgun but the murderer also cuts off the hands and feet. That's the kind of thing that goes into ViCAP, and that's the kind of analysis that they're looking for, to be able to link up with other MOs in a crime scene. Even though the ViCAP description seems pretty broad and also somewhat limiting as far as why certain crimes aren't included in there, it's really because it's for specific usage. It's not quite as widespread. It's widely used by police agencies, but it's only used in very specific kinds of cases. That's the reason why it's not quite as robust as a typical author might expect it to be.
Even in 2018, we are still behind the times when it comes to technology interoperability and even the ability to get reports from other agencies. There are a few databases that essentially link record management systems between different agencies. For me to be able to see whether they have a report on somebody across the country, if that agency participates in one of those databases, I might be able to see that they have a record. I may not be able to read the report, but it's a good way to see if that person has police reports or citations elsewhere in the country. That's a relatively new technology, and a lot of that has to do with the fact that we deal with Legacy systems. Our records management has been going on since computers were brought into law enforcement, and those records have to still be maintained. We deal with a lot of IBM PC-based infrastructure that may go back as far as the 1980s, so it can be pretty clunky with trying to get all of that data working with modern software infrastructure or hardware or firmware.
The other thing is is that when we're talking about a homicide investigation or a murder investigation, those files will be kept confidential. That's not something- that's not a report that another agency will be able to see just by clicking into a database. They will not get the murder book. They will not get the narratives of these reports. I should explain that I'm not going to see pictures in this. I might see a booking photo of a person, but I'm not going to see any kind of crime scene photos or anything like that. It is strictly text based. We still have to do things the old fashioned way, and that's get on the phone or even send a teletype to authenticate that this is an official request, but we have to get ahold of that original agency to make the request to see any of those documents.
Then, to touch on Caro's last question about whether detectives can access police databases from mobile devices. The only mobile device that I would be able to use would be one of those in-car MDTs that are generally in patrol cars, not detective vehicles. I would for the most part have to go back to the station unless I had a laptop that had the security infrastructure. For the most part, we have to be on a department network. There are a lot of security requirements for us to access these databases. For instance, I cannot have any kind of network, like confidential law enforcement network access, and have any kind of remote working capability. I can't login remotely to the same workstation that has any kind of database access, and that's a stopgap to prevent hacking. There are certainly some databases that we use that are online, using the internet, but any of the real critical ones are going to be on a network workstation with all of the security protocols that will not be able to access in the field. It's not really an inconvenience because we have always done it this way.
This next one comes from RJ Beam, and you can find RJ at premeditatedfiction.com. I know that RJ is also a veteran cop and also active in that Facebook group I mentioned earlier.
RJ writes, "Adam, thanks for the Facebook group and podcast. Even with just over 19 years on the job, I learn stuff about how law enforcement officers in other parts of the USA handle work. Do you mind talking about second jobs? Wondering if and how cops out West are allowed to have part-time gig. For example, I teach part-time at a local community college doing classes like Introductions to Criminal Justice and Basic CSI. Before starting this, I had to get permission from the Deputy Chief. Part of the permission was an assurance should I get called into the PD, I will cancel class. The main job takes precedence over part-time work. Likewise, we have guy with a brother that owns a local bar. That officer wanted to help his brother by working as a bartender, but was not allowed to, due to a possible conflict of interest issues. You know, like a well tipping bar customer is a DUI suspect the next night. Be safe out there. RJ."
Thanks, RJ. Yes, we are allowed to work at least with my agency, we're allowed to have outside employment, but like you mentioned, we do have to get approval from the top, from somebody in our command staff. There are definitely restrictions on what we can do for outside employment. My agency doesn't allow for any kind of private security jobs. If somebody wants to hire an off-duty cop for some sort of security thing, they actually have to enter into a contract with our department to have our officers work contract overtime for that even. Our local high schools actually do this for football games. As for your working for the bar scenario, in California we are actually as a peace officer, we are also sworn to enforce ABC or Alcoholic Beverage Control laws.
California law prohibits any peace officer from having any kind of affiliation or ownership interest in any business that holds an alcohol license. Our officers would definitely not be able to work at a bar, and historically it was even so far as to not have the families be allowed to. A husband could not have a wife that owned a bar or a restaurant with a liquor license. They've since relaxed those laws to only have it apply to the peace officer, but that peace officer cannot do any kind of moonlighting when it comes to that. In case you were wondering, I actually had to get outside employment approval in order to run the business that I'm using for the podcast and the upcoming book that I'm working on. This is one of those areas where it's actually easier to ask for permission rather than forgiveness. You don't want to risk losing your job.
Thanks again for the question, RJ. You can find him at premeditatedfiction.com.
RJ writes, "Adam, thanks for the Facebook group and podcast. Even with just over 19 years on the job, I learn stuff about how law enforcement officers in other parts of the USA handle work. Do you mind talking about second jobs? Wondering if and how cops out West are allowed to have part-time gig. For example, I teach part-time at a local community college doing classes like Introductions to Criminal Justice and Basic CSI. Before starting this, I had to get permission from the Deputy Chief. Part of the permission was an assurance should I get called into the PD, I will cancel class. The main job takes precedence over part-time work. Likewise, we have guy with a brother that owns a local bar. That officer wanted to help his brother by working as a bartender, but was not allowed to, due to a possible conflict of interest issues. You know, like a well tipping bar customer is a DUI suspect the next night. Be safe out there. RJ."
Thanks, RJ. Yes, we are allowed to work at least with my agency, we're allowed to have outside employment, but like you mentioned, we do have to get approval from the top, from somebody in our command staff. There are definitely restrictions on what we can do for outside employment. My agency doesn't allow for any kind of private security jobs. If somebody wants to hire an off-duty cop for some sort of security thing, they actually have to enter into a contract with our department to have our officers work contract overtime for that even. Our local high schools actually do this for football games. As for your working for the bar scenario, in California we are actually as a peace officer, we are also sworn to enforce ABC or Alcoholic Beverage Control laws.
California law prohibits any peace officer from having any kind of affiliation or ownership interest in any business that holds an alcohol license. Our officers would definitely not be able to work at a bar, and historically it was even so far as to not have the families be allowed to. A husband could not have a wife that owned a bar or a restaurant with a liquor license. They've since relaxed those laws to only have it apply to the peace officer, but that peace officer cannot do any kind of moonlighting when it comes to that. In case you were wondering, I actually had to get outside employment approval in order to run the business that I'm using for the podcast and the upcoming book that I'm working on. This is one of those areas where it's actually easier to ask for permission rather than forgiveness. You don't want to risk losing your job.
Thanks again for the question, RJ. You can find him at premeditatedfiction.com.
Our familiar friend and supporter, Guy Alton was kind enough to ask about an LA Times article dated August 9, 2018. The title of the article was An L.A. County deputy faked evidence. Here's how his misconduct was kept secret in court for years.
Specifically, Guy asked, "Adam, I'd like your thoughts about the LA Times story here. What do sworn officers think about officers like the one in this story? The cliché is that the blue wall protects its own, but is that real life? Obviously, the vast majority of officers would never falsify evidence, but how would they treat colleagues known to break the law trying to enforce it?"
This is an excellent question, Guy. I know I say that a lot on this podcast, but this really is a great question. Much like RJ in the previous question, I also have outside employment teaching at the community college level. One of the courses I've taught is an ethics class. Nothing pisses me off more than dirty cops. From examining agencies that have corruption problems, it tends to be the larger agencies where the span of control, where the top brass is so many steps away from the officers working the street that that's where you start to get problems, where there's no longer a personal accountability. Where the Chief doesn't know the names of everybody that works for him or her. In the agency I work for, lying is not tolerated. That's enough to get you fired. Honestly, I wouldn't want to work for an agency where the internal atmosphere is one where lying is not only accepted but rewarded. That's not what law enforcement is about.
I'll put a link to this LA Times article in the show notes at writersdetective.com/8. One of the key parts of this article is that Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell wanted to disclose this co-called Brady list of about 300 officers to prosecutors, but the Deputies Union went to court to stop him. The Brady list that they're referring to actually stems from case law that says that prosecutors must disclose, it's called the Brady Rule (from Brady v. Maryland), when an officer has some sort of character issue that will bring the veracity of that officer or deputy's testimony into question as far as whether they will be truthful on the stand. In this LA Times article, there's actually a link to an older article titled State Supreme Court to Decide if L.A. County sheriff can give names of problem deputies to prosecutors. That article was on October 11, 2017. It mentions the fact that there are at least 22 counties in California that regularly give local prosecutors the names of officers found in internal investigations to have committed certain types of misconduct.
I actually work for an agency that does this, so it was surprising to me almost to hear that agencies are not providing the courts with the outcome of Internal Affairs investigations that are found to be justified. It will be interesting to see what happens with the court case as far as what ends up happening. California surprisingly actually has some pretty protective laws when it comes to police personnel files. My biggest fear is that we are going to have these bad actors, when it comes to the dirty cops, erode the protections that should really be left in place to protect the cops that are going about doing their jobs. I don't want to have my personnel file brought before every single jury that I go before just as part of its regular course of doing business. I have absolutely no complaints in my 20-plus year history, but it should not be part of the regular way of doing business when it comes to court cases. It will be interesting to see what kind of balance, if there is a balance, comes out of this.
Specifically, Guy asked, "Adam, I'd like your thoughts about the LA Times story here. What do sworn officers think about officers like the one in this story? The cliché is that the blue wall protects its own, but is that real life? Obviously, the vast majority of officers would never falsify evidence, but how would they treat colleagues known to break the law trying to enforce it?"
This is an excellent question, Guy. I know I say that a lot on this podcast, but this really is a great question. Much like RJ in the previous question, I also have outside employment teaching at the community college level. One of the courses I've taught is an ethics class. Nothing pisses me off more than dirty cops. From examining agencies that have corruption problems, it tends to be the larger agencies where the span of control, where the top brass is so many steps away from the officers working the street that that's where you start to get problems, where there's no longer a personal accountability. Where the Chief doesn't know the names of everybody that works for him or her. In the agency I work for, lying is not tolerated. That's enough to get you fired. Honestly, I wouldn't want to work for an agency where the internal atmosphere is one where lying is not only accepted but rewarded. That's not what law enforcement is about.
I'll put a link to this LA Times article in the show notes at writersdetective.com/8. One of the key parts of this article is that Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell wanted to disclose this co-called Brady list of about 300 officers to prosecutors, but the Deputies Union went to court to stop him. The Brady list that they're referring to actually stems from case law that says that prosecutors must disclose, it's called the Brady Rule (from Brady v. Maryland), when an officer has some sort of character issue that will bring the veracity of that officer or deputy's testimony into question as far as whether they will be truthful on the stand. In this LA Times article, there's actually a link to an older article titled State Supreme Court to Decide if L.A. County sheriff can give names of problem deputies to prosecutors. That article was on October 11, 2017. It mentions the fact that there are at least 22 counties in California that regularly give local prosecutors the names of officers found in internal investigations to have committed certain types of misconduct.
I actually work for an agency that does this, so it was surprising to me almost to hear that agencies are not providing the courts with the outcome of Internal Affairs investigations that are found to be justified. It will be interesting to see what happens with the court case as far as what ends up happening. California surprisingly actually has some pretty protective laws when it comes to police personnel files. My biggest fear is that we are going to have these bad actors, when it comes to the dirty cops, erode the protections that should really be left in place to protect the cops that are going about doing their jobs. I don't want to have my personnel file brought before every single jury that I go before just as part of its regular course of doing business. I have absolutely no complaints in my 20-plus year history, but it should not be part of the regular way of doing business when it comes to court cases. It will be interesting to see what kind of balance, if there is a balance, comes out of this.
I started helping writers back in 2015, and that was when I was introduced to the concept of having a platform AKA a blog and having a list. More precisely, what I mean by that is a mailing list of fans that I could email. Most importantly, it was a list that I could own and not be beholden to the social media platform du jour that held the keys to my social circle. Fast-forward several years and about 1,100 mailing list members later, thank you, guys for listening to this. They, the they that offered this advice were right about needing to create a mailing list that you can own. Back then, I did what everyone else fumbling through this process did. I joined a mailing list service that offered a free option. You know, I had my mom sign up, so I had more than just me on there. I just fumbled my way through convincing people that they should sign up one at a time, and that I was offering some sort of value to them.
Eventually, I got to a point where my list had a few hundred people on it, and I was getting frustrated with the mailing list service that I was using at the time. The one I was on was really designed for businesses that were selling a product to consumers, and definitely not set up for writers or blogging trying to foster growing a community with fans. That was when I discovered ConvertKit. If you listen to other podcasts, you may have heard this name before. The key thing about ConvertKit is that is was designed for creatives, writers, bloggers, artists, podcasters. I loved how easy it was to use, and that it was really created for people like you and me. I really love the software, but to be honest, deciding to pay for a mailing list service rather than using the clunky free one of a different company, was really a big decision. Was it going to be worth it? How am I actually going to grow and monetize this list? Am I really committed to turning this question and answer mailing list blog thing into something worth paying for month after month?
It's seemed daunting, but I made the leap. I imagine if you haven't made this leap yet and haven't already built some big mailing list of your own, you're probably feeling the same way about transitioning from a free mailing list service that works just okay, to a service like ConvertKit that is designed precisely for creatives, like fiction writers that want to build buzz for their self-published books. Well, ConvertKit had now made making that leap a lot less scary. ConvertKit has introduced Creator Pass*. Creator Pass is four courses: Build. Launch, Grow, and Thrive. Plus, it includes a full year of ConvertKit mailing list service and an awesome online community of coaching and support. Now, a lot of companies claim that they have community and support, but I have never seen a company more committed to that than ConvertKit.
The ConvertKit Beginners Group on Facebook is a perfect example of that. Matt Ragland is the ConvertKit employee that runs the beginners group, and he is always online to help. Well, it seems like he's always online, even with the most basic things. Now, I have to admit. I've never had to ask for his help, because ConvertKit is really intuitive and visual, and they offer a ton of how-to videos on their support website. I literally joined the group because I wanted to be involved in the community. I can't say enough how awesome and supportive ConvertKit is as a company. My wife and I attended the ConvertKit Craft and Commerce Conference they held earlier this year in Boise, Idaho. You're probably wondering what the heck would go on at a conference for a mailing list service, but it was seriously awesome. It was several days worth of learning from people who make their living online through podcasts, YouTube, writing, even hosting Lego meetups.
The event was really inspiring, and it demonstrated how invested ConvertKit is in helping their customers succeed. We even held our own writers meetup during the conference, and I got to meet some amazing writers that I know I'm going to keep in touch with for years. Hey, guys, thanks for listening. Anyway, if you want to join the ConvertKit family and make the leap a lot less daunting, you can't beat Creator Pass*. To learn more about the Build, Launch, Grow and Thrive courses plus the full year of ConvertKit service and the online support community, visit writersdetectivebureau.com/creatorpass. If you're driving right now, the link will be in the show notes.
Eventually, I got to a point where my list had a few hundred people on it, and I was getting frustrated with the mailing list service that I was using at the time. The one I was on was really designed for businesses that were selling a product to consumers, and definitely not set up for writers or blogging trying to foster growing a community with fans. That was when I discovered ConvertKit. If you listen to other podcasts, you may have heard this name before. The key thing about ConvertKit is that is was designed for creatives, writers, bloggers, artists, podcasters. I loved how easy it was to use, and that it was really created for people like you and me. I really love the software, but to be honest, deciding to pay for a mailing list service rather than using the clunky free one of a different company, was really a big decision. Was it going to be worth it? How am I actually going to grow and monetize this list? Am I really committed to turning this question and answer mailing list blog thing into something worth paying for month after month?
It's seemed daunting, but I made the leap. I imagine if you haven't made this leap yet and haven't already built some big mailing list of your own, you're probably feeling the same way about transitioning from a free mailing list service that works just okay, to a service like ConvertKit that is designed precisely for creatives, like fiction writers that want to build buzz for their self-published books. Well, ConvertKit had now made making that leap a lot less scary. ConvertKit has introduced Creator Pass*. Creator Pass is four courses: Build. Launch, Grow, and Thrive. Plus, it includes a full year of ConvertKit mailing list service and an awesome online community of coaching and support. Now, a lot of companies claim that they have community and support, but I have never seen a company more committed to that than ConvertKit.
The ConvertKit Beginners Group on Facebook is a perfect example of that. Matt Ragland is the ConvertKit employee that runs the beginners group, and he is always online to help. Well, it seems like he's always online, even with the most basic things. Now, I have to admit. I've never had to ask for his help, because ConvertKit is really intuitive and visual, and they offer a ton of how-to videos on their support website. I literally joined the group because I wanted to be involved in the community. I can't say enough how awesome and supportive ConvertKit is as a company. My wife and I attended the ConvertKit Craft and Commerce Conference they held earlier this year in Boise, Idaho. You're probably wondering what the heck would go on at a conference for a mailing list service, but it was seriously awesome. It was several days worth of learning from people who make their living online through podcasts, YouTube, writing, even hosting Lego meetups.
The event was really inspiring, and it demonstrated how invested ConvertKit is in helping their customers succeed. We even held our own writers meetup during the conference, and I got to meet some amazing writers that I know I'm going to keep in touch with for years. Hey, guys, thanks for listening. Anyway, if you want to join the ConvertKit family and make the leap a lot less daunting, you can't beat Creator Pass*. To learn more about the Build, Launch, Grow and Thrive courses plus the full year of ConvertKit service and the online support community, visit writersdetectivebureau.com/creatorpass. If you're driving right now, the link will be in the show notes.
Thanks for listening to this episode of the Writer's Detective Bureau podcast. If you enjoyed this episode, please be sure to subscribe. If you belong to a writer's group in person or online, I would love it if you'd share this podcast. This podcast is created for you so don't be shy and submit your crime fiction questions or just say "Hello" at writersdetective.com/podcast.
Thanks again for listening. Write well.
Thanks again for listening. Write well.
EPISODE LINKS:
- Author: RJ Beam - premediatedfiction.com
- Resource: U.S. Attorney's Criminal Resource Manual (CRM)
- Resource: National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (NLETS)
- Resource: FBI's Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP)
- Article: The Atlantic Why Can't the FBI Identify Serial Rapists? (ViCAP remains largely unused)
- Article: Washington Post (re: Brady v. Maryland case law) Prosecutors' duty to disclose impeachment evidence in police personnel files
- Patreon* - Create your own Patreon page to let your supporters give you money for your creations.
- Support the Writer's Detective Bureau through Patreon for as little as $2/month.
- Grammarly* - The free spelling and grammar checker. (I use the free Google Chrome extension.)
- Writer's Detective Facebook Group - Join us!
- ConvertKit's Creator Pass* - Four online courses for building your mailing list plus one full year of ConvertKit service!
- Submit your own questions to the Writer's Detective Bureau podcast.
PATREON PATRONS THAT MADE THIS EPISODE POSSIBLE
- Joan Raymond Writing and Design - joanraymondwriting.com
- Guy Alton
- Anonymous (you may not want your name shown, but I truly appreciate your support!)
- Natasha Bajema - natashabajema.com
- Natalie Barelli - nataliebarelli.com
- Joe Trent
- Siobhan Pope
- Leah Cutter - leahcutter.com
Be sure to subscribe to the Writer's Detective Bureau podcast on your favorite listening app to get the next episode automatically.
[Links marked with an asterisk * are affiliate links. This means I make a commission if you click on the link and make a purchase.]
(c) writersdetective.com 2019
The fine print: If you're reading this, you're a detail person (like me) looking for what this really costs. The answer: It's free.
I only charge for manuscript review and traditional technical advising services. Contact me for inquiries of this nature. Terms & Conditions
I only charge for manuscript review and traditional technical advising services. Contact me for inquiries of this nature. Terms & Conditions