Personnel Record

[ROCCO7]

During the background investigation what is the investigator looking for when he/she contacts or reviews previous law enforcment employment. Reason being is I was a subject of an I.A. in 2003 (not sustained) but I am curious to how deep into the personell record they will check or even if they check it at all other than to verify employment. I listed the I.A. on the supplemental but per record retentions schedules here in florida I was wondering if agency ever remove these files in accordance.

[Kimble]

During the background investigation what is the investigator looking for when he/she contacts or reviews previous law enforcment employment. Reason being is I was a subject of an I.A. in 2003 (not sustained) but I am curious to how deep into the personell record they will check or even if they check it at all other than to verify employment. I listed the I.A. on the supplemental but per record retentions schedules here in florida I was wondering if agency ever remove these files in accordance.

One has to wonder why you're interested in how deep the background investigation will probe. Is there something you are afraid of being uncovered, or that you have not been forthcoming with prior to the background investigation?

If you were a prior cop, you should already be familiar with what the background investigation entails. Something doesn't smell right here...

[ROCCO7]

Been through the background before, not alot of fun. Although not sustained the I.A. is what scares me. The reason for this post is not to be investigated by the respondants. Id just like to get some insight on the background investigation process, indicators that something needs to be looked at further, and what they are looking for based on previous police employment. When I went through it the first time I met with the background investigator once and never heard from him again, a couple of weeks later I was offered a job.

[deputywave]

A BI will look for anything that should keep you from being hired. Your past IA issue would be a red flag. Any BI would dig very deep into this. If there is nothing to it, you have nothing to worry about.

The reason for this post is not to be investigated by the respondants.

It's an RP bonus. If you don't like the answers, don't ask the questions.

[Kimble]

The reason for this post is not to be investigated by the respondants.

You should consider the fact that if an anonymous cop on the internet (like me) who doesn't know you or the details surrounding your IA investigation senses some holes in your story, maybe (or more likely, probably) a background investigator for a department you apply to will have the same reaction. Do you expect them to take you on your word that it was an unfounded complaint without further digging (if so, you're kidding yourself)?

[kels]

You only have ONE complaint in your history?
Yeah, that would worry me also

[Piggy]

I would think if someone is going to go through the effort to look through your personnel file, they will certainly go through the extra effort to see what the investigation was all about. If not, what would be the point in looking through your record?

[DeltaV]

Of course they're going to get details on the IA. "Not sustained" is different from "exonerated." While the latter means that you were cleared of any wrongdoing because you did not violate the law or policy, the former simply means that there was not enough evidence to sustain the complaint. There are a multitude of reasons why the complaint was not sustained, and you can bet that the department will look into the circumstances surrounding the complaint to draw their own conclusions. For all we know, the complaint could have not been sustained because the person who witnessed your alleged misconduct disappeared suddenly and was no longer available to provide testimony. Obviously there is more to the story or else you wouldn't be concerned about it.