Confidential Informant Classification - Rats Used in Law Enforcement

What could be worse than somebody willing to betray his friends, family, and country for the sake of money? Many juries will respond “nobody” and may even ignore information provided by a rat, or informant in court.

Known to the crooks on the street as rats, confidential informants or plainly informants are a valuable asset to police and law enforcement. His value as a witness in court is inversely proportional to his value as a member of society. That is, the deeper an informant is involved in crime, the more valuable his testimony becomes.

Using police informants is an integral part of many law enforcement agencies in America. It would be difficult to conduct an investigation if law enforcement authorities did not make use of such shady individuals. For the confidential informant, doing his job as such is a double edged sword. To police, an informant’s intimate knowledge of criminal activities makes him a valuable insider. However, his involvement in criminal activity undermines his credibility. The informant’s reliability is in direct relation to his involvement in criminal activities. In court, his knowledge of the criminal activities taking place makes him a reliable witness. On the other hand, his credibility is affected due to his previous involvement in criminal activity.

How do criminal investigators amplify an informant’s reliability while minimizing the damage to his credibility? Investigators circumvent this problem by using what is known as the totality of circumstances test. The totality of circumstances test refers to a collection of facts and circumstances relative to a case and is used to assess and support any information provided by an informant. If all the facts and circumstances are considered as a whole and support the information provided by the informant, it can be concluded that the informant’s information is highly reliable. The criminal investigator may also corroborate the credibility of the informant by stating on the witness stand that he has used the informant’s services in the past to get information that led to arrests and/or convictions.

For the informant, his safety will always be on the line. For law enforcement, field officers do not have to put their lives in jeopardy by working undercover when they have an insider to do the work for them. The officer’s safety is not at risk unless he works undercover. For that reason, informants are an invaluable asset.