International Crime Rings, FBI Legal Attaches, INTERPOL, Proactive Investigations, and Transnational RICO Cases

 I'm Adam Richardson, and this is the Writer's Detective Bureau. Welcome to episode 136 of the Writer's Detective Bureau, the podcast dedicated to helping authors and screenwriters write professional quality crime related fiction. This week I'm answering questions about investigating international crime rings, FBI legal attachés, Interpol, The difference between reactive and proactive investigations and where prosecutions might happen for transnational RICO cases.

This week's questions all come from Anna Larson, who writes, Hi, Adam. Thanks for a great podcast and for sharing your knowledge. I only recently found your podcast, but find the information very useful. I'm glad to hear it. Thanks, Anna. I have a few questions for you all related to international crime rings.

Agencies working on preventing and solving these crimes, providing security measures, and the difference between crime locations in the U. S. and abroad. Question 1. What agencies are working on cases involving international crime rings? The CIA, FBI, local police, other agencies? What about the military and the Coast Guard?

How do they divide the work? Would the CIA work the case abroad and the FBI the domestic side, together with local police and other agencies? Is there a difference between who is working on preventing a crime versus working on a crime that's actually committed? Question two. How do they go about preventing crimes?

Do they warn museums, owners of valuable artifacts, archaeological digs, etc., that an international crime ring may target them? Would they give advice on additional security measures? Question 3. What if a crime by an international crime ring is expected to take place abroad, somewhere in Europe, the EU?

Would the CIA, FBI, others still be involved in preventing this as well as solving the crime once committed? Question 4. Where would suspects be prosecuted? In their respective home countries, in the country where the crime was committed, or where the crime ring is based? In question five, are there law enforcement and intelligence professionals in the various agencies specializing in certain types of crimes?

For example, those involving historic artifacts and cultural goods or providing security for these items. Thank you so much for your help. I'll keep my fingers crossed that my questions will make their way into your podcast. Wishing you continued success and creativity. Anna Larson. Thank you so much for the questions, Anna.

We're glad to have you here in the Bureau, and let's see if I can answer all of your questions in this episode. So let me summarize each of them before we do our deep dive down the rabbit hole. Okay, so for your first question, uh, what agencies are working on cases involving international crime rings?

And you mentioned the CIA, FBI, local police, military, Coast Guard. How do they divide the work? And would the CIA work the case abroad and the FBI, the domestic side? Um, and then is there a difference between preventing a crime versus working on the crime that's actually committed? Okay, so let's start with two key points.

Point number one, the role of the CIA, and point number two, crime prevention. Number one, the CIA or the United States Central Intelligence Agency is not a law enforcement agency. They do not investigate crimes per se. While it certainly may seem that way when we think about the global war on terror, uh, but their function is not to investigate anything via criminal investigation procedures.

By that, I mean they generally do not turn over evidence to a prosecutor for a judicial proceeding, like a jury trial. That's the job of the FBI and a handful of other federal agencies when it comes to the investigation. The CIA's job is to figure out what is going to happen in the future. That's the rawest definition of intelligence that I can come up with.

And what's going to happen, quote unquote, can be an awfully broad job description. In the wake of 9 11, the mission of the intelligence community and federal law enforcement started to overlap in ways that we never really saw before. The intel agencies, like the CIA and a bunch of others, and the criminal investigation agencies, like the FBI, had a common target.

Back then it was the Taliban or Al Qaeda, now we're moving on to ISIS. But that overlap did not include the CIA becoming a law enforcement agency. That's a whole topic for another podcast episode. But the CIA's job might be to determine what's going on with, let's say, ISIS in the Maghreb. Or it might also be to find out Russia's battle plans as they continue to attack Ukraine and to know what's happening with the military coup and ouster of the democratically elected leader of Niger that happened this week.

The CIA's work is used to inform our leaders as to what's happening in the world and to help shape public policy or even influence whether there's a military response, especially when it comes to figuring out who the bad guys might be and where the U. S. should stand. on the issue at hand. Okay, so that was point number one.

Point number two is crime prevention. Law enforcement agencies, by and large, do not do much crime prevention other than perhaps outreach. The overwhelming majority of our work is to investigate and catch suspects that have committed or are committing crimes. Now, there's a subtle distinction there, have committed or are committing, present tense.

Crimes, which leads into your next question. So before I continue on about the crime prevention stuff, let me wrap up the last bit from your first question about which agencies would get involved. The FBI does have some limited powers when it comes to investigations overseas, but that really depends on who the suspects are and if there's a nexus to the United States.

I'll touch on that more when we get to question number four, but for the most part, the military would not get involved. The exception might be. The US Coast Guard and as it says on their website, technically, the Coast Guard is both the federal law enforcement agency and military branch within the Department of Homeland Security.

But honestly, the only way the Coast Guard would be involved in the type of story I think you're leaning toward would be some sort of waterborne interdiction. And even then, their involvement might come as the ones making the stop on a boat, but at the request of the actual investigating agency. Other agencies that work international crime rings would really depend on the nature of the crime itself.

If it's drug trafficking, I would expect the DEA or the U. S. Drug Enforcement Administration to be involved. For weapons, the ATF, or technically B A T F E, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Money laundering, that could be I R S C I D, which is the Internal Revenue Services Criminal Investigations Division, or it could also be the FBI.

The FBI does tend to overlap a bit on cases, as they can be the catch all agency for things, so if we're talking stolen archaeological artifacts, that would very likely be an FBI case. As for the Division of Work, it's usually that fisherman's rule of, if you caught it, you clean it. Contrary to what Hollywood will have you believe, Most law enforcement agencies, regardless of state, federal, or local, do not demand that they take control of a case.

Everyone already has enough work of their own to do, especially if they are understaffed, and they aren't out trying to poach cases away from other agencies. The exception to that... would be if one agency is already invested in a case, and if a new agency catches a lead that ties into the first agency's case, there will be a discussion between those two agencies.

So basically, the argument would be, we were here first, uh, that kind of thing, especially when we're talking about the kinds of investment in resources a full blown federal investigation would cost. Now, the type of crime, or crimes, plural, may also dictate How the cases run. So if you're an I. R. S. C. I. D.

Agent working a money laundering case on a crime family and the F. B. I. Ends up getting involved in a murder investigation where that crime family has a member that is their prime suspect in the murder. That murder case is very likely going to be treated as the most pressing investigation, no matter how long the I.

R. S. Money laundering case has been going on. Now, that said, the two agencies could work together on their cases, especially as the investigative efforts of the two cases might produce evidence that helps both cases simultaneously. But that's a whole other rabbit hole to go down another day. Okay, let's move on to your second question, Anna.

How do they go about preventing crimes? Do they warn museums, owners of valuable artifacts, archaeological digs, etc. that an international crime ring may target them, and would they give advice on? additional security measures. Like I briefly mentioned a minute ago, crime prevention is not a primary concern.

The investigating agency might send out an informational bulletin if there's no actionable intelligence on the crime series. And by that, I mean, if they think this group plans to hit a museum somewhere in the greater EU, the investigating agency might send out a bulletin to all of the other law enforcement agencies in those countries.

Um, but if the FBI learns of something. Actionable. Like, this group is going to hit the Louvre in the next two weeks, I would expect the FBI to alert the French authorities in an attempt to catch those crooks in the act. As for security measures, that's really the job of the site itself, or private security, and I'd expect most museums or any noteworthy places like a UNESCO World Heritage Site to have someone in charge of security.

Even if they don't have a force of uniformed security guards. There should be someone in upper management that's responsible for deciding what lengths they will go to for security issues. That may not be the case for an active archaeological dig associated with a university research team or something like that.

But I will leave that up to you as the storyteller as to what seems reasonable. I would guess that a research team in a remote area would be a pretty soft target for your bad guys. If the FBI, let's say, had info that a crime ring was targeting archaeology teams, they'd certainly let the universities know.

But there's not much the FBI can do if they don't know anything about it beforehand. As for owners of valuable artifacts, security has to be top of mind for anyone intentionally owning something that valuable. So, they should be expecting the need for security regardless of whether there's a known active threat.

Okay, let's move on to question three. What if a crime by an international crime ring is expected to take place EU? Would the CIA, FBI, others still be involved in preventing this thing as well as solving the crime once committed? Okay, we already talked about the CIA stuff. For starters, in the vast majority of cases where the FBI might have a lead on a case happening in the EU, uh, so the FBI agent here in the United States gets some sort of information, they would likely reach out to their counterpart in the local nation's police force to pass along the information.

It's also possible that this domestic FBI agent with the lead would contact the FBI LEGAT in that country. So, a LEGAT is the FBI slang for legal attache, which is a special agent, an FBI special agent, working in that country whose job is to liaise with the host nation's law enforcement agencies. In reality, the FBI LEGAT for France, or France, as you, um, as the non Americans would pronounce it, uh, might actually be a supervisory special agent of some sort and have several FBI special agents working under her or him.

According to the FBI's webpage for the Paris LEGAT office, quote, today, LEGAT Paris is staffed with a French speaking LEGAT. Three assistant LEGATs, a linguist, and two office administrators, unquote. So, that means that we have one LEGAT with three subordinates. So, the three subordinate LEGATs would be, uh, special agents of the FBI.

The main LEGAT would most likely be, um, somewhat more higher in rank or have more tenure within the FBI, I would guess. I should mention that not every embassy or country even has a LEGAT in country. For instance, the Paris LEGAT office handles all FBI requests relating to France, France, And Monaco. So, if you're going to be checking out, um, a story and want to use a LEGAT, definitely go to the FBI's website, which I will provide a link to with the LEGAT stuff in the show notes, which you can find at writersdetective.com/136 to check that out to see the list of all the different LEGAT offices around the world. So, uh, like I said, the Paris LEGAT has, um, FBI requests relating to France and Monaco, but the FBI also does have staffing in Lyon, France, as part of its involvement with Interpol. And before you start thinking about creating an Interpol investigator as a character, Interpol does not have its own law enforcement agents, contrary to what 70s and 80s movies will have you believe.

If Interpol provides investigative support. and secure communications between law enforcement authorities and their counterparts in 195 Interpol member countries, as well as administering their access to Interpol databases, resources, and services. And I'm reading that directly from the justice. gov website on Interpol, which I will link to in the show notes as well.

So it's also possible that the FBI might rely on Interpol. to get their message about the crime ring out to those effective nations. But let's move on to actually catching the bad guys in the act. Remember when I said there's a subtle distinction between crimes that have been committed and crimes that are being committed in the present tense?

This is the difference between a reactive investigation and a proactive investigation. Reactive is like a homicide, or let's say the Mona Lisa was stolen last week, and we are looking at evidence that points back in time as to what happened. Who did it? Why? All of those questions. A proactive case, on the other hand, is where we are proactively investigating a known criminal suspect or suspects as they are committing their crimes.

This is very much more of a surveillance based kind of investigation, rather than interviewing witnesses and looking for DNA and fingerprints and looking to the past in a reactive investigation. But to have a proactive investigation, we need to know who we are looking at for this series of crimes. And only once we figure out the who, can we catch them in the act.

This is exactly how drug dealing cases are investigated, or any other organized crime type RICO case. Rico being the racketeer influenced and corrupt organizations act body of federal laws. So think mafia crime families in New York or outlaw motorcycle gang investigations. And of course, as I just mentioned, drug trafficking organizations like El Chapo's DTO, the Sinaloa cartel.

Speaking of El Chapo, that brings us to a nice segue into question number four, which was where would suspects be prosecuted in their respective home countries, in the country where the crime was committed, or where the crime ring is based? For the most part, the crime would be prosecuted in the country slash geographic jurisdiction where the crime was committed.

So let's say if some high end art burglars hit the Louvre, they'd be arrested and almost certainly prosecuted. If the investigators could show a conspiracy across international borders to other co conspirators, they might be arrested in their home countries and either prosecuted locally or potentially extradited to the country where the crime originated.

For your story uniquely, Anna, it's worth noting that the International Criminal Court or ICC. which is in The Hague, Netherlands, does handle cases involving, quote, attacks on cultural heritage. So you might do a research dive on the ICC and its handling of attacks on cultural heritage cases. But back to the issue of nexus.

There are certain cases where the FBI might get involved if the crime involves a United States citizen abroad, whether as a victim or as a suspect. For example, if an American sexually exploits a child overseas, The U. S. has the legal authority to prosecute them in U. S. federal court, even if the exploitation happened abroad.

The nexus is the citizenship of the offender, and specifically the law that is written into the federal code. So in that instance, the crime happened internationally, but the suspect was a U. S. citizen. The reverse can also be true, like it was for the El Chapo prosecution, where Guzman El Chapo Loera was a Mexican national. Well, he still is a Mexican national, but he was a conspirator in the drug trafficking crimes, the drug trafficking conspiracy occurring in the United States. So the crime was domestic, but the suspect was outside of the U S and he was then successfully extradited to the U S and then prosecuted.

And he's now in federal prison here in the United States. And moving on to question five, are there law enforcement and intelligence professionals in the various agencies specializing in certain types of crimes? For example, those involving historic artifacts and cultural goods or providing security for these items?

Yes, there are definitely experts in certain types of crimes in all manner of agencies now, specific to historic artifacts and cultural goods or artwork or anything like that. There is actually, the FBI has ACT, the Art Crime Team, and according to a press release from March, 2005, the ACT is a group of eight special agents, FBI special agents, working in major art markets around the country, New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Indianapolis, St.

Louis, in Salt Lake City. The team is supported by two assistant U. S. attorneys and several FBI analysts, and they investigate the trafficking of stolen works of art and priceless national treasures. Now keep in mind this was 2005, so things could have shifted with their manpower or woman power significantly since then.

Um, and then on a local level, I do know So, that LAPD, the local police department for the Los Angeles area, has its own art theft detail as well. I will link to both of these niche investigative units in the show notes. Again, you can find that at writersdetective. com forward slash 136. But for the most part.

I would expect the agents assigned to work criminal investigations to work this case like any other. They don't have to be a specialist to investigate what is ultimately a theft case. They'd likely consult with or bring on one of these ACT agents to their team, if possible. But from an investigator's perspective, and certainly a boss's perspective, a theft is a theft regardless of what was stolen.

So, it's up to you as the storyteller to show us why your character's expertise matters. But your readers might also be surprised to learn just how similar high end artifact thieves are to their home and commercial burglar counterparts. Thank you so much, Anna, for taking the time to send me your questions.

So for everyone else, what are your questions? Send them to me, no matter how small the question, by going to writersdetective.com/ask.

I'd also like to thank my Patreon patrons for sponsoring this episode, especially my Gold Shield patrons, Debra Dunbar from debradunbar.com. CC Jameson from ccjameson.com,

Larry Darter, Natalie Barelli. Craig Kingsman of craigkingsman.com, Marco Carocari of marcocarocari.com, Rob Kerns of knightsfallpress.com, Robert Mendenhall of robertjmendenhall.com, and Kayleigh for their support along with my Silver Cufflink and Coffee Club patrons. You can find links to all of the patrons supporting this episode in the show notes at writersdetective.com/136. Thanks again for listening, have a great week, and write well.