This paper explores the role of informants in criminal investigations and their importance in obtaining search warrants and securing convictions. It discusses different types of informants, their varying motivations, and the legal standards that govern their use. The paper emphasizes that informant credibility and reliability are critical factors in determining admissibility in court, particularly when corroborating evidence is limited. It examines how judges evaluate informant testimony and the precautions law enforcement must take to strengthen an informant's claims through affidavits and corroborating evidence.
Informants are a useful tool for law enforcement for a number of reasons. Technically, "anyone who discloses investigative information can be considered an informant" (Osterburg & Ward, 2013, p. 183). There are open or closed informants that have different motivations, ranging from wanting to protect the community to attempting to achieve immunity or a deal for their own participation in criminal activity. Informants can help prevent crimes from occurring, initiate the investigation process by prompting inquiry and the acquisition of a search warrant, and help solidify a conviction. They can provide information already in their possession or help acquire new information by seeking it out for law enforcement.
In cases where informants are criminals themselves, added complications arise that can affect an informant's role in an investigation or in obtaining a search warrant. Often, judges and juries are less likely to wholly believe a criminal testifying against another in order to save themselves from potential prosecution in a court of law. Thus, law enforcement should take certain precautions and follow specific steps when working with informants to acquire information for investigations or search warrant applications.
Based on legal precedent, the status of informants must be understood and used correctly in order to make them useful in obtaining search warrants and convictions. According to the 1981 Attorney General Guidelines for using informants, "the courts have recognized that the government's use of informants and confidential sources is lawful and often essential to the effectiveness of properly authorized law enforcement investigations" (Osterburg & Ward, 2013, p. 193). However, "use of informants and confidential sources to assist in the investigation of criminal activity may involve an element of deception, intrusion into the privacy of individuals, or cooperation with persons whose reliability and motivation can be open to question" (Osterburg & Ward, 2013, p. 193).
Thus, there must be special care in choosing and working with informants so that their testimony can stand in court despite open questions regarding their motivations. Informants operate within a complex legal framework designed to balance law enforcement effectiveness with constitutional protections and the reliability requirements of the courts.
The admissibility of informant information in a court of law differs depending on various factors, and thus there are different considerations when determining how much weight should be given to an informant's information. Typically, informants who are considered insiders—those close to the suspect and involved in the criminal activity—tend to have more weight than other types of informants, as seen in the case of Maine v. Moulton (Osterburg & Ward, 2013, p. 185). Their information can also be strengthened dramatically when corroborated with other physical or tangible evidence, such as recorded conversations from a wiretap.
This is when an informant's information holds the most weight and is most useful when obtaining a search warrant or securing a suspect conviction in a court of law. Ultimately, tangible evidence serves to strengthen the informant's claims. Corroborating evidence acts as an independent verification of the informant's narrative, significantly enhancing judicial confidence in the testimony.
"Demonstrating informant reliability through affidavits and evidence"
You’re 69% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.