Criminal Intelligence Activity and Criminology: A New Empirical

Field for Crime Research

Grigoriy Alexandrovich Maystrenko

and Aleksey Dmitrievich Denisov

Federal State Institution Research Institute of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, Moscow, Russia

Keywords: Criminal intelligence activity, criminology, intelligence criminology, criminal intelligence prevention,

criminological intelligence research, methodology, methods.

Abstract: The need for widespread use of criminological knowledge in the development of the theory and practice of

criminal intelligence activity was noted in the first fundamental works by the founders of the modern theory

of criminal intelligence activity in the 70s of the last century. Along with this, the specificity of the use of

criminal intelligence tools and methods were noted in in-depth knowledge of crime, its causes and conditions,

and the characteristics of the criminal’s personality. At the same time, the beginning of the development of

such an important form of criminal intelligence activity as criminal intelligence crime prevention was made.

An attempt to justify the objective need for criminological intelligence researches as an interdisciplinary area

of studies on general crime has already been made earlier. The initial provisions of intelligence criminology

were used in a number of dissertations to substantiate the theoretical and applied problems of criminal

intelligence prevention of common crimes in general and certain types of crimes in relation to the sphere of

activity of the internal affairs bodies. Currently, intelligence criminology is recognized by both representatives

of the theory of criminal intelligence activity and by criminologists. The aim of the work is to study the

possibilities of criminal intelligence activities as a potential empirical field for conducting a criminological

research, and the tasks are to clarify such opportunities using the example of certain types of criminal

intelligence measures, in the form of which, in fact, all this activity takes place. The methodological basis of

the work was both general scientific (analysis, synthesis, generalization, modelling, experiment, etc.) and

specific scientific (observation, survey, questionnaire survey, content analysis, etc.) methods of scientific

research. Based on the results of previously conducted and modern scientific developments, the article

substantiates the objective necessity and possibility of implementing a new direction in the study of crime at

the junction of criminology and the theory of criminal intelligence activity, a theoretical model of using, on

the one hand, criminological knowledge in the theory and practice of criminal intelligence activity, and on

the other hand, its means and methods in the criminological research of crime is proposed.

1 INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, in the development of domestic and

foreign criminology, there has been a strongly

pronounced tendency to isolate the studies of certain

aspects, in particular, the types and spheres of

manifestation of crime, which are characterized by

significant specificity (Presser, Sandberg, 2019). In

this regard, the emergence of such concepts as

«military», «political», «penitentiary» and the other

«criminology» are natural. However, because of the

tautology («criminology ... of crime»), they can

hardly be acceptable, but the fact of the selection of

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5658-615X

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3139-9299

branches of criminology, proceeding from the need to

take into account the specifics of the various

manifestations of crime, is important (Yakovlev,

2017).

Among the «criminology» branches there is still

no proper place for the direction of research, which

we call intelligence criminology, although the

specifics of the study of crimes, their causes and

conditions, the identity of potential and real criminals,

problems of crime prevention in the field of criminal

intelligence activities can hardly raise doubts. Until

recently, criminological problems were considered

mainly, if not exclusively, by the theory of criminal

Maystrenko, G. and Denisov, A.

Criminal Intelligence Activity and Criminology: A New Empirical Field for Crime Research.

DOI: 10.5220/0010629100003152

In Proceedings of the VII International Scientiﬁc-Practical Conference “Criminal Law and Operative Search Activities: Problems of Legislation, Science and Practice” (CLOSA 2021), pages

75-80

ISBN: 978-989-758-532-6; ISSN: 2184-9854

intelligence activities. At the same time, it is noted

that many categories and concepts of criminology,

such as the causes and conditions of crime, the

criminological doctrine about the personality of a

criminal are fundamental for this theory (Bykov,

Zenin, Kudryashov, 2018), and many scientific

conclusions and achievements of criminological

science have become the foundation for the formation

of the principles and theoretical concepts of criminal

intelligence activities (Isichenko, Egorova, Fumm,

2011).

For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that in

recent years, marked by the intensive development of

not only criminology, but also the theory of criminal

intelligence activity, the researchers of the last

science are paying more and more attention to the

criminological problems of the criminal intelligence

activity. Thus, V.S. Ovchinsky, noting the organic

connection of the theory of criminal intelligence

activity with criminological science and,

summarizing the previous researches, emphasizes:

«All categories of criminology, reflecting in-depth

knowledge of the numerous phenomena generated by

crime, have a direct impact on the organization and

tactics of criminal intelligence activities»

(Goryainov, Ovchinskij, 2020).

The foregoing information undoubtedly testifies

to the importance of scientific researches aimed at

identifying, suppressing, detecting and preventing

penitentiary crimes, not only from the point of view

of criminal intelligence activities, but also taking into

account criminological achievements.

There are sufficient prerequisites for the

deployment of systematic criminological intelligence

researches. From an epistemological (theoretical and

cognitive) point of view, it is an objective possibility

of deeper, than until now, knowledge of crime in all

its manifestations. From the standpoint of social

significance – the intrinsic need of society for the

most complete scientific and practical knowledge

about the actual state of crime. From the point of view

of the practical attainability of this knowledge – the

presence of potentially inexhaustible and almost

unclaimed criminological intelligence information

circulating in society and only partially concentrated

in disparate data sets for criminal intelligence and

preventive purposes (Shkabin, 2020). In this aspect,

we should agree with the opinion that criminology

contributes to the sustainable development of society

(Blaustein., Pino, Fitz-Gibbon, White, 2018). The

presence of these prerequisites makes it possible to

discuss the problems of methodology and methods of

conducting criminological intelligence researches.

2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

The methodological basis of criminology is the

dialectical materialist method. As a general method of

cognition, it sets worldview guidelines for the

researcher and it is detailed in general scientific

(analysis, synthesis, generalization, modelling,

experiment, etc.), specific scientific (observation,

survey, questionnaire survey, content analysis, etc.)

methods, which together make up the general and

private research methods.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The gradual reorientation of criminology towards a

closer relationship with the theory and practice of

criminal intelligence activity is remarkable in two

aspects. First, it is an indicator of the sufficient

maturity of domestic criminology, from which

society expects a more objective, substantiated and

effective explanation of the processes occurring in the

state and dynamics of crime during the period of

market reforms. Secondly, such an interaction of

criminological and criminal intelligence knowledge

will make it possible to predict the trends in the

development of crime in a timely manner, and to

carry out preventive activities at early stages. It

should be immediately noted that although the

legislator considers crime prevention as one of the

tasks of the criminal intelligence activities, in

practice, the use of criminal intelligence measures

occurs mainly in order to identify and expose the

perpetrators. But even with this state of affairs, the

information capabilities of criminal intelligence

measures in the knowledge of hidden manifestations

of crime remain quite significant.

The results of the conducted researches give

grounds to conclude that deep, specially conducted,

long-term (ideally permanent) criminal intelligence

measures (mainly observation, an undercover

operation and a sting operation) are most suitable for

the purposes of criminological research (Antonyan,

Grishko, Fil'chenko, 2009). But it does not mean that

other criminal intelligence measures do not have any

criminological intelligence potential.

On the one hand, even during a one-time event,

you can get interesting information for criminology,

including penitentiary. On the other hand, while

carrying out purely criminal intelligence activities,

employees of law enforcement units receive a

significant amount of so-called incidental

information. Special studies show that in criminal

CLOSA 2021 - VII INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC-PRACTICAL CONFERENCE “CRIMINAL LAW AND OPERATIVE SEARCH

ACTIVITIES: PROBLEMS OF LEGISLATION, SCIENCE AND PRACTICE”

records of investigation units, such information is

found in almost half of the files (45.4%), and more

often in cases of divisions for combating economic

crime (60.7%). Even more revealing is the data

obtained during the survey of employees of the penal

system. About 80% of the criminal intelligence

information of a preventive nature obtained during

criminal intelligence measures remains unclaimed

and becomes archived due to the fact that field

officers do not pass it to employees who directly work

with convicts (Yakovets, 2009). Moreover, all

information was not revealed, since the secret

assistants of law enforcement officers were relatively

rarely guided by its receipt. Meanwhile, the

possibilities of confidential persons in collecting such

information are quite significant, as it is indicated by

the absolute majority of respondents.

And yet, the most interesting in terms of the

criminological intelligence study of crime are the

varieties of the above mentioned criminal intelligence

measures – an undercover operation, a manned

surveillance and an extend sting operation. We

consider how it relates to methods of observation,

polling and study of documents.

If the undercover operation is assessed only from

the methodological point of view, omitting its

organizational and tactical aspects that deserve a

separate analysis, then it is easy to see that it opens up

the possibility for the widespread use of survey

methods, observation, and depending on the

implementation object and its specific area (for

example, accounting of a commercial enterprise) –

and for studying documents. In other words, the

undercover operation presupposes the use of these

methods and creates favourable conditions for it

(Hadjimatheou, 2018).

The manned surveillance implies the presence of

a subject of the criminal intelligence activity in a

criminal or criminogenic environment, which turned

out to be the result of the introduction or natural

circumstances, and also allows the active use of

interrogation and observation, and if there are

documents and the possibility of access to them, their

study. In this case, the subject of the application of

these methods in specific conditions of place and time

can be both regular (public and private) employees of

law enforcement units, and their confidential

assistants.

As for the study (analysis) of documents, this

method in the «field» conditions of the criminal

intelligence activity, obviously, can be used mainly

within the framework of the indicated and other

criminal intelligence measures, since its autonomous

use requires special, laboratory conditions. The only

exceptions are cases when the subject of the criminal

intelligence activity, who is also a research

participant, by the nature of his occupation, works

with documents of investigative as well as scientific

interest. At the same time, as a method of

criminological intelligence research, document

analysis can be applied in the laboratory, when the

objects of study are, for example, criminal records

cases, individual current or analytical materials.

While meeting the certain conditions and

requirements related to ensuring secrecy and

conspiracy, the subjects of the application of this

research method can be both scientific and specially

trained field officers.

Observation, interrogation and study of

documents, although perhaps in a relatively limited

volume, can in principle also be used in conducting

such a criminal intelligence measure as a sting

operation, especially if it is carried out for a long time

or regularly, in particular, under the cover of the so-

called legendary objects. The domestic experience of

using the sting operation is still insignificant and even

hidden for unenlightened people. According to the

information about foreign experience (Gevorgyan,

2019), the task of front organizations and firms is to

create the appearance of interest in illegal trade and

other operations, that implies the establishment of

trusting relationships with suspects, which means

their encrypted interviews, monitoring them,

studying the relevant documents about the proposed

transactions. Generally speaking, the sting operation

as a criminal intelligence measure involves the

creation of secretly controlled conditions or objects to

identify possible criminal encroachments, prevent,

suppress or solve crimes of average gravity, grave and

especially grave crimes. Carrying out the sting

operation excludes the provocation of a crime,

requires special professional skills, one might say,

criminal intelligence art and therefore cannot be put

on stream. The criminological intelligence potential

of this measure becomes more valuable.

If we generalize the possibilities and methods of

obtaining criminological intelligence information in

relation to the three considered sociological methods,

then the options for collecting it can be quite diverse.

They are, in particular: a formalized study (for

example, with a questionnaire) of criminal

intelligence files and materials in the proceedings of

law enforcement units by the field officers

themselves; a programmed or free, meaningful and

semantic study of realized (archival) cases by

researchers; a joint study of these cases and materials

by scientific and practical workers; the mentioned

interviews of the employees of law enforcement units

Criminal Intelligence Activity and Criminology: A New Empirical Field for Crime Research

and their covert assistants; direct observation of

confidants and field officers over events, phenomena

and processes taking place in a criminogenic or

criminal environment; analysis of materials of

targeted criminal intelligence-search and criminal

intelligence-preventive measures to identify the

causes and conditions of the commission of crimes,

their prevention and suppression, etc. (Lapin, 2017).

The observation, interrogation and analysis

(study) of documents as methods of obtaining

criminological intelligence information are “present”

not only in the considered, but also in other criminal

intelligence activities.

In sociology and criminology, the observation is

classified on various grounds. In particular, it can be

controlled and uncontrolled, included and non-

included, systematic and random, direct and indirect

(Osipov, 2009).

The controlled observation is characterized by a

preliminary determination of elements of the studied

object, drawing up a plan of observation records and

meticulous writing of its results. During the

uncontrolled observation only the immediate object is

outlined in advance, and in the course of the study the

social or socio-psychological atmosphere of the

phenomenon or event is clarified, the boundaries and

the most significant elements of the object are

determined, and initial information about them is

collected.

During the non-included (external) observation

the researcher or his assistants are outside of the

studied object. The included observation means the

obligatory presence of the researcher in the studied

environment as a direct participant in the examined

processes. At the same time, the degree of his

involvement can vary from active to externally

passive participation, from open to hidden, from

partial to full inclusion in the working process. For

the purposes of intelligence criminology, of course,

the complete and covert included observation is the

most preferable, because with its help it is possible to

obtain information, access to which is unreal during

external and difficult during other types of included

(internal) observation.

The random (irregular) observation is

characterized by a short-term study of a previously

unforeseen situation. During the systematic

observation, on the contrary, planned and regular

recording of actions, phenomena, processes over a

certain period of time is common.

Finally, the direct observation means the

perception of the manifestations of the studied objects

with the help of the natural sense organs of the

observer, and indirect – with the help of instruments,

other technical equipment or other people. The last

classification differs from the traditional concepts of

observation as a sociological method, but it can be

adopted by intelligence criminology.

It should be noted that criminologists point at the

complexities of the included observations applying.

At the same time, the attention is drawn to its ethical

aspect, ensuring the safety of researchers, the

difficulties and specifics of infiltration into the

criminal environment, the “crisis of patience” of the

observed objects, etc. (Nathan, 2017). Of course,

there are problems associated with criminal

intelligence infiltration and the included observation,

but they are not considered in this study, since they

relate to the organization and tactics of the criminal

intelligence activity and constitute a state secret

according to law.

Speaking about the survey as a method of

criminological intelligence research, the following

information must be added to the above mentioned

data. The polling as a scientific method has been

known for a long time and consists in collecting

primary empirical information about objective and

(or) subjective facts from the words of interviewees,

otherwise referred to as respondents. In

criminological intelligence researches, as well as in

criminology or penitentiary criminology, any type

and variety of surveys can be used: written and oral,

free and formalized (standardized), questionnaire and

in the form of an interview. The questionnaire survey

(questioning), in turn, can be periodical (via

newspapers and magazines), postal and handout, and

interviews – personal and telephone, individual and

group, in-depth and directed, with open and closed

questions (as in the questionnaire), etc. Each of the

types (varieties) of the survey is selected taking into

account the specific conditions of the study and,

except for situations of hidden survey, does not entail

any special restrictions. As for the survey, the goals

of which are hidden from the respondents, the need

for it most often arises during the criminal

intelligence infiltration into the criminal environment

and manned surveillance for its participants

(Alekseev, 2018). At the same time, the requirements

for conspiracy objectively dictate the need for the

exclusive or predominant use of free, personal,

individual, in-depth or directed survey in the form of

an interview. It means that such a survey should be

carried out in this way: without a previously prepared

written plan of the conversation (questionnaire),

although on a given topic; personally by a researcher

or a well-trained interviewer, as a rule, a full-time

unofficial collaborator, and only in exceptional cases

CLOSA 2021 - VII INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC-PRACTICAL CONFERENCE “CRIMINAL LAW AND OPERATIVE SEARCH

ACTIVITIES: PROBLEMS OF LEGISLATION, SCIENCE AND PRACTICE”

– by an experienced confidant; separately with each

respondent.

Characterizing the cognitive possibilities of the

analysis (study) of documents, also known as the

documentary method, it is necessary first of all to note

that for the sciences of the criminal law cycle, in

particular criminology and the theory of criminal

intelligence, broader sociological understanding of

the document as any material object containing

information in a fixed form is acceptable and

specially designed for its transmission in time and

space (Weisburd, 2015). This definition covers

official and unofficial documents intended for public

or only personal use (for example, diaries or other

secret records about the connections of criminals,

their illegal incomes, etc.).

Sociology distinguishes written (handwritten and

printed, documents of permanent and temporary

storage, scientific and periodical publications,

statistical reporting and personal documents),

iconographic (film, video and photographic

documents), phonetic (technical carriers of sound

information – magnetic tapes, cassettes, disks, etc.)

documents.

The rapid development of electronics and the

practical use of its achievements in all spheres of

public and private life gave rise to a new type of

documentation – electronic (programs, files, floppy

disks, etc.) (Suharev, Gir'ko, 2017).

All of these types of documents have a certain

value for the purposes of criminological intelligence

researches. According to the nature and content of

documents, the conditions for their study (field or

laboratory), the degree of access to them, etc. specific

methods of analysis are selected. During the

documentary method applying it is important, first of

all, to be guided by an elementary rule: this method is

especially valuable when the document is the only or

main source of the necessary information. After

clarifying this circumstance and making a decision to

use the documentary method, we can select one of the

two main types of analysis for the documents research

– traditional (classical) and formalized (content

analysis).

The traditional (classical) analysis is understood

as the use of the whole variety of mental operations

aimed at interpreting the information contained in the

document from a certain point of view adopted by the

researcher in a particular case. With the help of

classical analysis, a qualitative definition,

understanding and interpretation of the content of

documents is achieved. It is designed to reveal the

deep, hidden sides of the document. At the same time,

an inevitable drawback of such an analysis is its

subjectivity.

The content analysis or formalized qualitative and

quantitative analysis of documents involves the

translation of textual or other documentary

information into the language of quantitative

indicators to avoid subjective assessments. However,

it is necessary to find such features of the document

that would be easily perceived and at the same time

objectively reflect the essential aspects of its content.

If we take into account the peculiarities of

criminological intelligence research and the above

mentioned data about the limits of the use of the

considered method studying documents in the process

of criminal intelligence activity, then it should be

recognized that the application of this method in

intelligence criminology is rather restricted and will

mainly be reduced to laboratory study of documents

in criminal records. At the same time, however, it is

possible to analyse not only the internal documents of

law enforcement units, but also documents specially

obtained for study from an external, controlled

environment.

Finally, we want to add a few words about the

scientific and methodological potential of the

criminological intelligence experiment. According to

the opinions of scientists, the issue about experiment

in criminology has always been sharply controversial

and it was solved, as a rule, from the standpoint of

either complete rejection or limited use, in particular,

in the field of crime prevention. Only a

comprehensive study of the experiment in

criminology made it possible to draw a conclusion not

only about the possibility, but also the necessity of its

application – keeping certain rules. This conclusion

belongs to N.P. Kosoplechev, who notes in one of his

works: «A criminological experiment is a social

activity, predetermined within certain limits, within

the framework of law and in compliance with moral

norms in order to test hypotheses about the causes and

conditions of committing offenses and about optimal

measures to prevent them in order to develop

effective forms and methods of crime prevention and

its legal regulation» (Kosoplechev, 1983). From the

above mentioned statements, we can conclude that

the criminological intelligence experiment is hardly

real in its pure form. That is why, as shown above, it

can probably only be combined with the sting

operation as the criminal intelligence measure.

Theoretically, it is possible, but the criterion of truth,

as you know, is practice (Efimenko, Skomorohov,

Shihanov, 2010).

Criminal Intelligence Activity and Criminology: A New Empirical Field for Crime Research

4 CONCLUSIONS

It becomes obvious that no large-scale criminal

intelligence and preventive measures are currently

performed without the involvement of criminological

knowledge and skills at both the federal and regional

levels. The natural result of such «interaction» is the

crime solution, the search and detention of

perpetrators, the suppression of the activities of

criminal groups, the seizure of weapons, ammunition

and explosives, the prevention and suppression of the

smuggling of strategically important raw materials

and metals outside Russia, illegal import, movement

within the country and transit transfer of weapons,

drugs, illegal migrants, prevention of terrorist acts,

kidnapping and hostage-taking, detection of stolen

vehicles, identification and registration of new

individuals and groups having keen interest for law

enforcement officers.

Thus, the possibilities of intelligence criminology

as an interdisciplinary area of crime research with the

involvement of forces, means, methods of

criminology, and theory and practice of criminal

intelligence activity seem to be very promising,

actually not used, but potentially inexhaustible. The

proposed combination of two scientific disciplines

can enrich both the theory of criminal intelligence

activity and criminology. Of course, the formation of

intelligence criminology is fraught with significant

theoretical and practical difficulties, but it seems to be

an inevitable process.

REFERENCES

Alekseev, A.I., 2018. Criminology. «Shchit-M». p. 340.

Antonyan, Yu.M., Grishko, A.Ya., Filchenko, A.P., 2009.

Penitentiary criminology. Ryazan. Academy of Law

and Management of the Federal Penitentiary Service of

Russia. p. 567.

Blaustein, J., Pino, N.W., Fitz-Gibbon, K., White, R., 2018.

Criminology and the UN Sustainable Development

Goals: The Need for Support and Critique. In the British

Journal of Criminology. 58(4). pp. 767-786.

Bykov, A.V., 2018. Personality as an object of intelligence

criminology. In the All-Russian criminological journal.

12(2). pp. 157-164.

Efimenko, M.O., 2010. Criminological theory and practice

in the organization of departmental control over the

reliability of criminal statistics. Walters Kluver. p. 288.

Gevorgyan, V.M., 2019. Organized Crime in the USA.

Moscow. Science. p. 168.

Goryainov, K.K., Ovchinsky, V.S., 2020. Theory of

criminal intelligence activity. Moscow. INFRA-M. p.

772.

Hadjimatheou, K., 2017. Neither Confirm nor Deny:

Secrecy and Disclosure in Undercover Policing. In

Criminal Justice Ethics. 36(3).

Isichenko, A.P., 2011. Intelligence criminology: the

penitentiary aspect. Moscow. Research Institute of the

Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia. p. 122.

Kosoplechev, N.P., 1983. Methods of criminological

research. Moscow. p. 67.

Lapin, A.A., 2017. Strategy for ensuring the criminological

security of the individual, society, state and its

implementation by the internal affairs bodies. Moscow.

Unity-Dana. 264 p.

Nathan, C., 2017. Liability to Deception and Manipulation:

The Ethics of Undercover Policing. In Journal of

Applied Philosophy. 34(3).

Presser, L., Sandberg, S., 2019. Narrative Criminology as

Critical Criminology. In Critical criminology. 27(2).

Shkabin, G.S., 2020. Criminal and criminal intelligence

legislation: problems of intersectoral relations and

prospects for improvement. In State and Law. 7. pp.

144-150.

Sukharev, A.Ya., 2017. State and trends of crime in the

Russian Federation. Criminological and criminal law

reference book. Moscow. Exam. p. 384.

Yakovets, E.N., 2018. Fundamentals of information

support of criminal intelligence activity. Moscow.

«Shchit-M». p. 463.

Yakovlev, A.M., 2017. Theory of criminology and social

practice. Moscow. Mechanical engineering. p. 248.

Weisburd, D., 2015. The law of crime concentration and the

criminology of place. In Criminology and Sociology.

53(2).

CLOSA 2021 - VII INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC-PRACTICAL CONFERENCE “CRIMINAL LAW AND OPERATIVE SEARCH

ACTIVITIES: PROBLEMS OF LEGISLATION, SCIENCE AND PRACTICE”