Sir - In relation to Simon Janes' Letter To The Editor (‘Don't take on any ex-hackers!', SMT, January 2005, p24), it's no wonder the police service sometimes encounters great difficulties whenever the task of crime detection is mentioned.

‘Reconfiguring' those who have flouted the law or breached security is a time-honoured practice that should not be rejected. It was successfully used during World War II by the British and German counter-intelligence divisions to undermine espionage and resistance operations. Since then, it has been a tactic deployed by the military in counter-insurgency and terrorism, by car companies to combat auto crimes and by the FBI in countering fraud. The key issue is to establish a working relationship which places the onus on the individual to remain on the right side of the tracks.

While security may well be all about integrity and ethics, it is also concerned with gathering intelligence on the opposition and their practices. What better way to do that than through an opponent? I would seriously consider employing a local person with a relatively recent criminal past simply because of the lack of information on local criminal practices made available by the police service. Interestingly, it is the largely police-led Security Industry Authority that is preventing this information from being made available. However, advantageous loyalty can be nurtured.

If Simon's views are typical of most police officers - and it's my experience that they are - then it is no surprise there are gaps in their knowledge on sophisticated crime and local communities. There needs to be a benchmark defined by the police outside of police services.

Rather than being selective by pragmatism when we are looking to hire security staff, managers should select to their advantage.

Nick van der Bijl BEM, Security Manager, North Bristol NHS Trust

Source

SMT