Intelligence cycle

There are various phases in the intelligence cycle that can be identified. According to Peterson (2005:6-7), the intelligence cycle consists of six phases, which are summarised as follows:

 Planning and Direction

- Effective planning assesses existing data and ensures that additional data collected will fill any gaps in the information already on file.

- To be effective, intelligence collection must be planned and focused; its methods must be coordinated, and its guidelines must prohibit illegal methods of obtaining information.

- Planning requires an agency to identify the outcomes it wants to achieve from its collection efforts.

 Collection

- Intelligence analysis requires collecting and processing large amounts of information.

- Data collection is the most labour-intensive aspect of the intelligence process.

- New technology such as new or updated laws supports this emphasis.

- Historically, intelligence operatives use physical surveillance, electronic surveillance, informants, undercover agents, newspaper reports and public records as the most common sources for data collection.

 Processing/collation

- Processing/collating involves sifting through available data to eliminate useless, irrelevant or incorrect information, and to arrange the data in a logical order.

- Collation is performed by using sophisticated databases with text-mining capabilities.

- Database design is critical for retrieving and comparing data. Many computer software companies offer database products, but most require fine-tuning to tailor them to law enforcement agencies’ needs.

- Processing and collation also involve evaluating the data being entered.

- Information placed into an intelligence file is evaluated for the validity of the

 Analysis

- Analysis converts information into intelligence.

- Analysis is quite simply a process of deriving meaning from data.

- The analytic process tells us what information is present or missing from the facts or evidence.

- In law enforcement intelligence operations, data are analysed to provide further leads in investigations, to present hypotheses about who committed a crime or how it was committed, to predict future crime patterns, and to assess threats facing a jurisdiction.

- The process, along with investigative experience, also points out what has been done and what operational steps have to be taken.

 Dissemination

- Dissemination requires getting intelligence to those who have the need and the right to use it in whatever form is deemed most appropriate.

- Intelligence reports kept in the intelligence unit fail to fulfil their mission.

 Re-evaluation

- Re-evaluation is the task of examining intelligence products to determine their effectiveness.

- Part of this assessment comes from the consumers of intelligence; that is, the managers, investigators, and officers to whom the intelligence is directed.

In sharp contrast with Peterson (2005:6-7), SAPS (2008:477-478) lists the following eleven phases of the intelligence cycle applied in the SAPS investigative environment:

 Problem/task;

 Planning and direction;

 Collection;

 Evaluation;

 Collation;

 Analysis;

 Interpretation;

 Production;

 Action; and

 Feedback/closure.

On the other hand, the Center for Policing Terrorism in United States of America (CPT) (2006:6) differs from both Peterson (2005:6-7) and SAPS (2008:477-479), and holds the view that there are five phases in the intelligence cycle. These five phases are illustrated in Figure 3.7 below:

Planning and Direction

Collection

Analysis and Production Dissemination

Evaluation

Figure 3.7: Five phases of the intelligence cycle

(Source: CPT, 2006:6)

The submissions of Peterson (2005:6-7), SAPS (2008:477-478) and CPT (2006:6) clearly indicate that there is a discrepancy with regard to the number of phases in the intelligence cycle. Besides these discrepancies, there are four main phases, namely: Planning and Direction, Collection, Analysis and Dissemination that can be found in these submissions. Looking at the first main phase (Planning and Direction), it is important that ‘good’ information should be collected for analysis. To collect the information, one has to identify the reliable source. Identification of the source of information would include planning and directing how the information

information, the investigator must consider the type of information required and its relevancy.

Pretoria Technikon (2003:76-78) provides the following summary of factors that the investigator may use to make the decision of selecting the source of information:

 Capability

- Instructions and requests for information must be issued only to sources that are capable of providing the required information.

 Availability

- Sources must be used only when they are available to collect information.

 Accuracy

- To be of value, information should be confirmed, otherwise it will be difficult to evaluate and interpret it properly.

 Timeliness

- For information to be of value, the client must receive it in time to act on it accordingly.

 Risk

- The collection of information often involves considerable risks, civil and criminal.

 Reliability

- The most directly acquired information is often the most reliable.

 Security

- There is always a need to protect sources, particularly those who are covertly collecting information.

 Directness

- Collection must be considered in the light of evidence likely to be supplied, whether it is direct or circumstantial.

 Cost

- Information is an expensive commodity, therefore the investigator must have a budget to work with.

While the factors described by Pretoria Technikon (2003:76-78) above are important, the researcher contends that the time of the incident and the time in which

the information was obtained is critically important. The timeliness factor therefore influences the other factors and can be used to consider whether the information can be collected or not.

The participants in Sample A were asked: “How would you define the intelligence-led investigation model?” This was an open-ended question and the participants could provide their own answers to the question. No choices were provided from which they could choose. Some of the participants provided more than one answer and their respective responses are indicated in brackets and presented in Table 3.12 below:

Table 3.12: Participants’ definition of the intelligence-led Investigation model Sample A

 Following up information and collecting evidence (four).

 Acting on the information provided by Crime Intelligence (four).

 Clues and leads followed by Crime Intelligence during investigation (three).

 Crime Intelligence informs police about crimes being planned for a particular area (two).

 Crime Intelligence assists with tracing of suspects (one).

 Investigation driven by Crime Intelligence to solve the case (one).

 Investigation prior to arrest (one).

(Source: Feedback from participants)

In defining the intelligence-led investigation model, four participants stated that it is following up information and collecting evidence. Another four participants stated that it relates to acting on the information provided by Crime Intelligence. Three participants were of the view that the intelligence-led investigation model is about the clues and leads followed by Crime Intelligence during investigation. Notably, only one participant clearly stated that Crime Intelligence assists with tracing of suspects. One participant, who appeared to be contradicting the response that Crime Intelligence assists with tracing of suspects, stated that the intelligence-led investigation model is an investigation driven by Crime Intelligence to solve the case. Clearly, it is not the responsibility of Crime Intelligence to solve the cases but rather that of the criminal investigation component. Another participant stated that it

When comparing the responses of the participants and the literature, it is evident that the participants did not have a comprehensive understanding of what an intelligence-led investigation model is. This is understandable because these participants do not form part of the intelligence structure of the SAPS, and due to the nature of the intelligence operations, they are not exposed to the Crime Intelligence processes. In view of this reason, the researcher had expected this limitation from the participants. The responses of the participants should therefore be understood in the context of Crime Intelligence having a role to play in the collection of intelligence, which is then disseminated to the police investigators for further action. Accordingly, these responses are inconsistent with the submissions of Gunter and Hertig (2005:17) and ISS (2015:50) in respect of the definition of an intelligence-led investigation model.

3.12.4 Importance and relevance of intelligence in murder investigation