Becoming an Informant

Though widely acknowledged as vital to law enforcement, social scientists have largely ignored the practice of confidential informing. The extant literature on the topic is primarily comprised of experientially based practical guides to informant management and a handful of field studies drawing information from informants in the study of other undercover practices. This study features data obtained from in‐depth interviews with eighty‐four former informants drawn from five southern states identified through a purposive‐snowball sampling strategy. Informant accounts suggest that the practice of confidential informing is an institutionalized component of a general narcotics enforcement pattern characterized by duplicity and social control irony. Confidential informant work is observed as a moral career entailing deviant identity maintenance through neutralizations and insider perspective. Narratives confirmed a motivational typology accounting for role assumption and informant–agent dynamics and orient discussion around practice and research implications.     

公司内部举报制度研究

公司内部举报制度是公司内部控制制度的重要部分,其本质是一种信息披露行为,激励公司员工作为社会公众的代表监管公司行为,以有效保护股东利益,防范公司经营风险,提高内部控制制度的有效性.因此,应重视公司内部控制制度中员工举报的重要作用,对私营部门举报的立法应聚集于公司内部员工,鼓励公司建立内部举报制度,加大对举报人的外部激励...     

美国线人制度：运用与规制的双重分析

在美国，线人有不同的界定与分类，线人使用的法律依据有成文法、判例法与内部规范，线人的物建、线人的使用与管理、线人使用情况通报和线人的停止使用等，都由司法部的内部规范加以规定，成文法较少提及，判例法主要涉及到线人使用中的法律问题。在美国的侦查实践中，线人作用虽然十分重要，但线人的使用也存在着巨大风险，还需要解决一系列的证据运用问题。     

狱侦特情：监狱秘密侦查制度的理性回归

监狱秘密侦查的情报源头不畅，主要源于耳目制度设计、刑事立法与监狱警务模式的固有缺陷。监狱应以犯罪防控与侦破案件的功能价值为导向，对现有耳目制度做“狱政耳目”与“狱侦特情”的分类模式迁移，并以侦查行为与侦查措施的运行规则为依据，重构新型实用的狱侦特情制度及其原则体系，为监狱提高情报侦查效能、实现秘密侦查制度的理性回归提供理论支持。     

论监所线人与刑事冤案:域外经验与本土建构

监所线人制度乃现代社会中的必要之恶。监所线人证言与一般证人证言相比具有内在的不可靠性,故需谨慎采用,否则容易造成冤狱。美国和加拿大均有类似的惨痛经历,因此近些年进行了司法改革。我国也面临类似问题,有必要借鉴域外经验改革完善:一方面要高度重视监所线人证言,不与普通证人证言等同视之;另一方面须完善审查机制,确立假定不可信规则与补强规则。此外,还应重视跨部门相关知识的培训。     

Shifts in police–informant negotiations

This paper examines the impact of increasing criminal cooperation programmes for police handler–informant relationships. Over the last two decades, many countries have introduced policies to regulate the use of criminal informants and defendants who agree to provide information or testimony in exchange for financial incentives, protection, and leniency. Many researchers assume this trend has no bearing on the relationship between the handler and the informant. Following this assumption, they maintain that agreements made with criminal trade participants are still informally negotiated and unsupervised. I investigate this oversight, drawing on data obtained from in-depth interviews with handlers and informants. Findings from this fieldwork illustrate that, in order to compensate for weakening of their discretionary power, police officers are developing new deceptive tactics in dealing with informants. Furthermore, the increasingly institutionalised use of informants has given handlers a false sense of security. Informants gain skills and knowledge from their relationship with handlers, which they can use to undermine the handler's authority.     

对深入开展刑事特情工作的思考

近年来,公安机关刑事侦查部门大力开展刑侦基础业务建设,刑事特情工作在侦查破案、打击刑事犯罪斗争中发挥了重要作用。为进一步加强基层基础业务建设,推动刑事特情工作深入、持久地开展,文章在对刑侦部门开展刑事特情工作的调查研究基础上,针对当前刑事特情工作中存在的问题,结合打击刑事犯罪的现实需要,对今后一个时期内如何深入开展刑事特情工作进行了探讨,并提出了建设性的意见。     

比较法视野下的线人制度研究简

线人作为秘密侦查的一种重要手段,在犯罪侦查中发挥着非常重要的作用。从各国的立法来看,大多涉及线人的概念、分类与性质,线人使用的程序性控制机制,线人的功能、风险与证据问题。我国刑事立法应当借鉴国外有关立法经验,结合我国的刑事侦查实践,建立具有中国特色的线人制度,以服务于我国刑事侦查实践的需要。     

Compromising the public good? Civil society as beneficiary of gambling revenue

Profits from legal gambling are often channelled to good causes. This system embeds the predicament of whether citizens’ potentially problematic gambling activities should be a source of funding for the public good. In this article, this dilemma is unfolded by the receivers of public grants that stem from gambling revenues. A total of twenty-three representatives of Civil Society Organizations were interviewed as beneficiaries of the Finnish state-owned gambling monopolies. The article illustrates explicit dependencies and hidden ethical dilemmas, suggesting that CSOs may have limited possibilities of making ethically consistent decisions in view of the origin of their funding.