In this presentation, you'll learn about:
-Prevention and early intervention
-Attack-related behaviors
-Assessing potential threats
-Creating a workplace violence prevention policy
Following the Navy Yard shooting in Washington DC, the victims’ families sued the Navy and the Department of Veteran Affairs, alleging they overlooked red flags that should have alerted them to the troubled history of the shooter. This could inspire the families of victims killed in similar active shooter incidents to seek legal advice and file lawsuits.
The 33-page administrative claim also criticizes the security-clearance process. The suit on behalf of the family of Mary DeLorenzo Knight was filed in April in federal court in Tampa. The lawsuit named the Navy, the Department of Veterans Affairs and two defense contractors as defendants. It's seeking at least $37.5 million in damages
Was it preventable?
Alexis was previously cited by the Navy on at least eight occasions for misconduct.
In 2004, he was arrested in Seattle, Washington for malicious mischief, after shooting out the tires of another man's vehicle in what he later described as the result of an anger-fueled "blackout.”
In 2008, he was arrested in DeKalb County, Georgia for disorderly conduct.
In 2010, he was arrested in Fort Worth for discharging a weapon within city limits.
August 4, 2013 - Naval police were called to Alexis' hotel at Naval Station Newport and found that he had "taken apart his bed, believing someone was hiding under it, and observed that Alexis had taped a microphone to the ceiling to record the voices of people that were following him." At the time of the incident, he was working for the contractor at the base.
August 23, 2013 - Alexis presented himself at a Providence, Rhode
Island VA emergency room complaining of insomnia.
August 28, 2013 - He sought treatment for insomnia in the emergency
room of a VA medical center in Washington, D.C.
September 14, 2013 -
Two days before the massacre, Alexis visited a small arms range in
Lorton, Virginia, and tested an AR-15 semiautomatic.
Purchased a 12-gauge shotgun and two boxes of shells, after
TRANSITION TO NEXT SECTION:
We know WPV is one of your top priorities – and a growing one.
There are many things we can do prevent and mitigate targeted violence in your organization.
This includes:
Dispelling prevailing beliefs about attackers.
Understanding the pre-attack process.
Learning the processes involved in behavioral threat assessment and protective intelligence.
Understanding the difference between an active shooter and terrorism.
To understand the legal risks and issues and ultimately create change and develop solutions to problems, one must first gain an understanding of targeted violence and the factors that may indicate potential threats.
Companies must understand the value of conducting behavioral threat assessments and how this can help identify a potential attacker’s intentions before an incident occurs.
What we have learned about attackers
An attacker may target an individual, group, or symbol, over a perceived injury, injustice, or loss.
An attacker may “shift” targets.
Events and circumstances in others’ lives that can increase the likelihood of their acting out violently or can strengthen their commitment to their plans to commit violence.
An attacker may target an individual, group, or symbol, over a perceived injury, injustice, or loss.
An attacker may “shift” targets.
Events and circumstances in others’ lives that can increase the likelihood of their acting out violently or can strengthen their commitment to their plans to commit violence.
An attacker may target an individual, group, or symbol, over a perceived injury, injustice, or loss.
An attacker may “shift” targets.
Events and circumstances in others’ lives that can increase the likelihood of their acting out violently or can strengthen their commitment to their plans to commit violence.
Applying Experience and Best Practices in Managing a Stalker Incident
Industry: Real Estate
Client: Diversified Real Estate Investment Trust
Service: Threat Assessment and Workplace Violence Prevention
Client’s Challenge: When an anonymous caller reported that one of the company’s receptionists was slandering its management team, the company prepared to take action. But it quickly learned that the caller was an individual known to their employee who had been stalking her for over a year. While calls to local law enforcement resulted in an initial flurry of incident reports and administrative filings, progress in the case quickly stalled.
The Hillard Heintze Solution: In these circumstances, Hillard Heintze’s protective intelligence experts, behavioral threat assessment specialists and retired law enforcement executives collaborate very closely with the company, its security and legal departments, mental health professionals if necessary and the employee – as well as appropriate local, state and federal authorities – to undertake a relatively wide range of potential responses. Every case is different – and the most appropriate courses of action depend on factors such as the urgency of the threat-related circumstances, case history, information known and available about the alleged stalker, and to what extent the parties involved seek protection, intervention and prosecution, among many other tactics, strategies and outcomes.
In this particular case, Hillard Heintze’s first order of business was obtaining a photo of the subject for dissemination to employees and facility staff. Next, the firm conducted an investigation of the alleged stalker, analyzed his “dangerousness” and potential to inflict harm, and advised the company and employee on key findings, options, recommendations and next steps. Hillard Heintze’s experts also contacted former colleagues at a major federal agency, determined their primary points of contact with local law enforcement and mounted a multi-jurisdictional team of both internal and external experts that began responding quickly, professionally and effectively.
Impact on the Client’s Business: This case is ongoing. But the actions already taken – and the steps currently underway – have brought the company, the victim, and her family a strong level of assurance and confidence that (1) the employee’s personal safety has markedly improved and (2) that the matter will be resolved shortly – to their satisfaction.
Case Study: #116
Assessing a Former Employee’s Potential for Violence
Industry: Software & IT Services
Client: A Market Leader with more than 3,000 Employees
Service: Threat Assessment and Workplace Violence Prevention
Client’s Challenge: Stalking is one issue. Inappropriate behavior or mental illness – while sometimes though not always related – are others. Understanding the difference – and being prepared to change tactics quickly if rapidly changing circumstances threaten the safety of an individual – can be a delicate task. When a disgruntled former employee began sending inappropriate email communications to current employees, a healthcare company asked Hillard Heintze to assess the individual’s potential for violence.
The Hillard Heintze Solution: Hillard Heintze began its assessment by gathering relevant information on the individual, including his mental history, current life situation, behavioral history, motivation, attack-related behavior, criminal history, organizational interests and affiliations and ownership of weapons or ability to acquire them, among many other factors. The firm also undertook detailed interviews of the individual’s known associates, neighbors, family members and others with a direct perspective on the events occurring in his life. With this information at hand, Hillard Heintze then evaluated the subject’s organizational ability, fixation, focus, communications, actions and time imperative in order to establish an expert perspective on his potential for targeted violence.
Impact on the Client’s Business: Based on this evidence, Hillard Heintze concluded that, although challenged by mental health factors, the subject did not represent an imminent danger to the company or its employees. The company accepted this finding and began implementing Hillard Heintze’s recommendations for action – including distributing the subject’s photo to appropriate personnel, preparing to document any future correspondence with him, making provisions to obtain a court restraining order against him and developing a company-wide behavioral threat capability that informs and raises awareness among managers and employees about how they can prevent possible acts of violence in the future. It also authorized Hillard Heintze to conduct continuous monitoring of the situation for 6 to 12 months, including periodic checks with family members and others with timely information on the subject’s location and behavior.
Investigating an Anonymous Tip that an Employee Had Just Posted a Threat of Violence to the Company on Facebook
Industry: Professional Business Services
Client: Major Provider of Outsourced Business Solutions
Service: Behavioral Threat Assessment and Investigation
Client’s Challenge: Predicting an individual's dangerousness is one thing. Doing so in time to prevent harm to others requires real-time – or near real-time – access to information and an informed ability to interpret this information, ideally in the context of an extensive understanding of the subject's background, history and life circumstances.
For one company, the trigger that set off alarms in the company's Security Department – common now among an increasing number of employers – occurred when an employee in an East Coast branch office posted threatening statements about company personnel on his Facebook wall along with several pictures of himself posing with weapons.
The Hillard Heintze Solution: Within hours, Hillard Heintze threat assessment experts were on site, reviewing internal HR files and reports and conducting a battery of discreet interviews with the subject's known associates and others with a direct perspective on the events occurring in his life. Hillard Heintze leveraged its nationwide network of contacts to facilitate a meeting with the chief of the local police department who assigned one of their top investigators as liaison to the team. Other analysts began an immediate background investigation of the subject and started assessing emerging information – in real-time – using a highly structured, multi-perspective threat assessment methodology based on the one used to protect the U.S. President and visiting foreign dignitaries.
Impact on the Client's Business: In short, Hillard Heintze helped the company identify, understand and think through a range of countermeasures, select one with a high probability of success, and implement it – with care. One employee, who had been a target of the subject's anger, was temporarily reassigned to offices in another state. No violence occurred. The individual no longer works for the company. And through a carefully orchestrated series of recommendations outlined by Hillard Heintze, the company is managing the threat on an ongoing basis – in part, by supporting the individual's access to mental health treatment and the opportunity to move his life forward in a healthier and more positive way.
The United States has a long history of violence against colleagues, family and prominent individuals
Presidential assassinations
School violence
Violence against judges and public officials
Celebrities
Domestic violence
Bias-motivated crimes
DATA SOURCES
“Between 1992 and 2010, there were over 13,800 workplace homicide victims,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/violence/
“In 2010 alone, there were 4,690 workplace fatalities.” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Current Population Survey, Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, and U.S. Census Bureau, 2012.
“1.7 million people annually, on average, are victims of violent crime in the U.S. while working, including an average of 700 homicides per year.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI). http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/violence/
An Active Shooter is an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area.
Prevent & Mitigate
Workplace Violence Prevention
Pre-Employment Screening and EAP
Emergency Action Plan
Threat Assessment
Active Shooter Training
Emergency Management Committee
Prepare
Take a leadership role in the pre-planning and training process with:
First Responders: including police, fire and medical
All departments
Key stakeholders: including management, human resources and leadership
Respond
Follow DHS Guidelines
RUN > HIDE > FIGHT
Implementation of internal and external emergency management plans
Recover
Restoration of normal operations – internal and external
Debriefings
Post-incident press conferences
Multi-disciplinary debriefings
On-site counseling
After-action report
And in a worst-case scenario, they may entirely fail to respond in any meaningful way.