Here is an interesting article from Akron Ohio about a sexual relationship between a female officer and her informant. What is interesting about this case is that by the account given the agency seem to have had in place policy that would have mitigated the risk of this occurring. ALL contacts had to be reported and two handlers always present.
This would be an interesting case to audit to identify what went wrong. Of concern would be the fact that issues had been raised about both the officer’s performance and her mental health both which would raise risks as to her suitability to manage human sources (confidential informants) Other potential questions I would be raising are where were her supervisor and what was the co-handler doing? I would expect both to have picked up on some sort of indication.
An other starting point would be her cell phone - did the supervisor have access to it and did they check her contacts? Intrusive supervision is a must when it comes to human source management.
Another point I would be raising is around her training and that of others involved. Had they been trained in how officers become corrupt and had their vulnerabilities been identified.
While most Chiefs would think that because the officer resigned their problems have gone away, that is just wishful thinking. Cases like this need analysed so the agency learns from and corrects their mistake and then shares that knowledge with other agencies.
AT HSM Training we regularly look at cases like this and identify what went wrong. This helps the Chief put their house in order. AND it also helps other agencies because we share the knowledge with others. When something like this goes wrong in one agency chances are it can go wrong in other agencies.
There is no point in covering these issues up learn form them and share the learning.
And train your officers properly.