Investigator - or Instigator - you decide!

I think it is fair to say that I am a trained investigator. The key word is trained. Ontario Police College is one of the best police training centers in North America.

​I not only attended basic training there and graduated at the top of my class - but I also attended advanced training there as well. Add to that other related training in Canada and the USA (Virginia Homicide Investigators Training x 3) and I think you might agree that I have a little more training in investigating and collecting of evidence than most lay people.

That being said - I would not consider myself a 'top' investigator. There are many courses I did not take and there are thousands (I would think) of police officers with more training and experience than I have.

Over time there have been hundreds of television shows and movies based on investigating crime. From produced shows as early as "Dragnet" to more current shows like "Forensic Files" - they have progressed from showing the dramatized day to day policing to showing the behind the scenes progression of investigations - start to finish.

There is fabulous entertainment value and interest in these shows - or the production companies would stop creating both the fictional and 'real life' versions of investigating crimes.

The danger here - is that occasionally there are those who feel that not only have they learned enough from these shows to 'investigate' perceived 'crimes' or wrong doings, but some of these same people also begin 'connecting dots' of things that they believe are related to perceived wrong doings - and create much bigger stories that they think they have evidence of.  When they are simply critics - we call them 'armchair quarterbacks'.  When they decide - 'hey I can do that" - without any understanding of how to investigate and collect evidence, and then rely on their imaginations, suppositions or opinions of what has happened - we call these people conspiracy theorists and their stories conspiracy theories.  They simply connect dots that do not exist. They weave detailed, fantastical stories with 'facts' they derive from their own imagination.

A rational person asks questions - looks for the factual answers and forms an opinion. If they think something illegal is happening or a crime has been committed - they call a 'trained investigator' to investigate further and collect the evidence to either prove or refute the legality of the event(s).

A conspiracy theorist sees something they think is wrong or that they do not like or agree with and begin looking for evidence to support their ideas or claims. When they cannot find real evidence they use wishful thinking to tie things all together.

Example: A taxpayer does not like a municipal employee - and disagrees with how they do their job. When their complaints are not addressed in the manner they would like or their complaints go unanswered because they cannot be substantiated - they begin looking for evidence of a cover up.  After all - if someone does not see what they see - or agree with what they see, that someone MUST be wrong or worse, covering up!

Surely that employee was a bad hire!  There mustn't have been a job posting and they suppose the employee was hand selected and parachuted into the position. Were they interviewed? They couldn't have been!  How were they hired? Did they provide a police background check? Were references called? Did they get hired because the 'knew' the right person?

One step at a time - they begin to put a story together. They begin to tell others that the municipality must not have done their job! By the time they have 'connected the dots' - every piece of the story they have connected together is incorrect and there are no facts to support their claims.

Investigator - or Instigator?

I have experienced this kind of 'story telling' personally by someone who insists that they have evidence that improper hiring practices took place when I was hired.

The conspiracy theorist insists that I was neither qualified nor hired properly for a municipal job I held by saying:  (facts are in brackets)

1. There was no job posting. (It was posted in several places nationally including "Municipal World" and "Municipal Information Network" as well as internally.)
2. I did not 'apply' for the job. ( I applied with both resume and application with references attached)
3. There was no interview. ( I was interviewed twice by a 3 person panel - and flew 3,000 km for the final interview)
4. There was no qualifying process ( I took a 60 minute 'qualifying' test through an independent agency and results were submitted to the HR dept.)
5. I was parachuted in ( I knew no one at the municipality before I applied)
6. The HR manager was S.M. (The HR manager was D.L. up to 2 years after my hire. S.M. had not yet been hired)
7. There was no police background check (I completed a police background check that turned up no negative results in the jurisdiction I resided - which is HOW and WHERE a police background check should be done.)

Instigator

Instigator is most commonly used in a negative way to refer to a person who provokes other people or incites trouble—often by instigating arguments or encouraging dangerous actions.

​Synonyms include agitator, antagonizer, provocateur, troublemaker, incendiary, and firebrand.

With permission from Thesaurus.com 

There are more claims that this conspiracy theorist has that in their mind 'proves' I was improperly hired - however similarly to the incorrect claims above - there is no evidence of the claims and the actual 'facts' point to normal and proper hiring practices and policies. But that did not stp them from spreading their theory - trying to incite anger towards the municipality.  Yes - these are the actions of an instigator.

The undoing of a conspiracy theorist's 'story' is simply one thing.  Facts. When one weaves a story with information they hope is true and they do not collect factual evidence - they create a 'theory' that can not be supported with evidence. 

No matter how loudly or how often someone SHOUTS about something of which they have no evidence - without true investigation and collecting of factual evidence - their shouting is simply A LOT OF NOISE.

And the person who makes a lot of noise about nothing my friends, is simpy an INSTIGATOR.