A Private Eye’s Legacy
Pellicano's conviction and the future of snooping
As the dust settles in the aftermath of the conviction of Anthony Pellicano, self-styled "Private Eye to the Stars," some are wondering: How many of his kind are out there? How many rogue private detectives are moving about the country intimidating people, eavesdropping and deceiving others into providing them with off-limits information? And what impact, if any, will his conviction have on the shadowy world of high-end surveillance he inhabited?
Private investigation in America is almost as old as public law enforcement, and it has long been associated with the unsavory and the underhanded. In 1850, Allen Pinkerton founded the Pinkerton detective agency, whose motto was "We Never Sleep." He received notoriety when he uncovered a plot to kill President Abraham Lincoln; his agency was later asked by Lincoln to provide for his protection. From its founding, employees of the Pinkerton agency were summoned to break strikes, spy on union organizers, commit acts of sabotage and espionage and lift sensitive information for clients from industrial competitors.
For an investigator, then and now, information is king, and today's sleuths have to reinvent themselves on a regular basis to stay current as to where information is stored and how it is accessed. The Dumpster diving of yesterday—literally climbing into the trash to ferret out information—continues. But as information is stored and exchanged in more sophisticated ways, private investigators—even the ethical ones—are under enormous pressure to keep up with ever-changing technology.
The median income of a PI is $33,750, and the field is expected to grow by about 18 percent in the next decade, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. At the highest end of the business, there are several multi-million-dollar conglomerates which offer risk management, due diligence, computer forensics and "intelligence" services for corporate clients. Former law-enforcement officers are frequently found on the rosters of these companies, leading to concerns that current law-enforcement officers may be tempted to release information in exchange for a soft postretirement landing in the PI ranks.
In the Pellicano case, law-enforcement officers from the Los Angeles and the Beverly Hills police departments were not, apparently, leaking information in hopes of a better tomorrow. Instead, they tapped into confidential law-enforcement databases and turned over confidential information for a more immediate benefit: cash bribes. This was a remarkably foolish thing for them to do, since most law-enforcement agencies have rigorous in-house audits that reveal hanky-panky when cops play around with motor-vehicle and criminal-records information. Cops in America are fired every day for extracurricular accessing of such information; even if their own departments are lax or corrupt, guardians of state criminal records and motor-vehicles files and federal criminal-history checks regularly red-flag suspicious patterns and follow up on why license plate or criminal data information was requested. (Pellicano also had a rogue telephone-company mole who helped him break into phone wires.)
Was Pellicano a one-off? Disturbingly, a number of Hollywood celebrities, untroubled by his inoperative moral compass, hired him to spy on and intimidate others—raising legitimate questions about whether or not some of them should have been in the dock themselves. Pellicano paid to develop a technology, Telesleuth, which allowed for intercepting conversations of others, a major federal no-no, and one that will never, ever be overlooked by prosecutors.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »


Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: Self Styled Sleuth @ 05/27/2008 8:51:35 PM
Comment: I stand corrected. Thanks for getting back. I apologize for the remark. It was in bad form. Won't happen again.
Posted By: confident2 @ 05/25/2008 10:31:00 AM
Comment: I, for one, am a PI with a different perspective. People like this guy just adds to the "shady" name that PI's incur in this industry. I like to work in the child custody arena, legally. Drugs are everywhere and couples split everyday. And always, there's one parent taking small children into bad environments, now placing them in harm's way just so 1 person can hold control over the other using these small children. Then as these children age, they teach them to lie to protect their selfish, immoral acts. I try to always remember that most situations are immoral, not illegal. The children can't choose, so that's what I try to do. Offer them a voice so they can be heard. The adults are usually about themselves & just a moments pleasure. What this guy has done, he will be punished for. Shame on his tactics, but sadly, there are those PI's out there
that will stoop to some pretty low levels to get that info. I have found that the laws are so strict, that it just pretty much shuts us (PI) out of gaining most information legally. This guy has just made my job harder. I'm not proud of that. BUT....I am proud of the fact that if I can just get 1 child out of a bad situation, then I'll take all the bad names most sling out there with the profession. BTW where I'm from, most folks can't afford that $125.00 fee mentioned earlier. And for the most part, Attorney's, once paid their blood money, see their clients just as clean as the driven snow. I'm not a fan of them. I, at least have the PREROGATIVE to choose to take on a client's situation or not. To me it's clearly about the situation & not the money. But yes, the money is an added bonus to help a child.
Posted By: sickofit08 @ 05/23/2008 4:03:02 PM
Comment: Yes, SSS, there is one run on sentence and I did use an ellipsis. The use of an ellipsis actually indicates missing words or phrases which seem uneccessary to include. I admit, I did use the puctuation improperly in this context. I was going for more of a dramatic pause. Did you actually notice some of the other comments in this thread? I can actually take criticism when it comes to correcting my grammar. If you had an opinion about the topic, you should have also included it. THATTHATTHATTHATTHISANDTHAT.